Now thats a thought.... :-)

Entertainment Cricket and Other Sports
1

Australia prepared to ‘forfeit’ NatWest Series final

LONDON: Australia are prepared to forfeit Saturday’s (tomorrow’s) NatWest Series final against Pakistan at Lord’s if there is a pitch invasion or fireworks are thrown on to the field.

“If there is a serious pitch invasion or missiles or fireworks are thrown on to the ground, in the best of situations both teams would leave the field until it was resolved,” said Australia Cricket Board Chief Executive Malcolm Speed. “If that doesn’t happen, the direction the Australian team has received is that if they leave the field they will be fully supported. If that means we lose the game well then, we lose the game. Technically that’s a matter for the umpires and the referees.”

Australia captain Steve Waugh led his team from the field during Tuesday’s day-night match with Pakistan after a firework landed near fast bowler Brett Lee. Two earlier matches between Pakistan and England ended in chaos after pitch invasions.

Pakistan coach Richard Pybus said he would be “dumbstruck” if plastic fencing was not erected at Lord’s. “I would be dumbstruck if they do not repeat the security measures used at Trent Bridge,” he said on Thursday. “It would be ridiculous. If they don’t, they’re setting themselves up for a disaster. Security for players is paramount.” The ECB will announce what measures they intend to take at a news conference scheduled for 10am (0900) on Friday
http://jang-group.com/thenews/jun2001-daily/22-06-2001/sports/s4.htm

Pakistan not to forfeit final in case of crowd trouble at Lord’s

We are confident there will be no problems in Saturday’s match and we are doing our best to help the organisers: Yawar

By Waheed Khan

KARACHI: The Pakistan team management in England has made it clear to the English and Wales Cricket Board and the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) that they had no intentions of forfeiting the Natwest Triangular one-day series final at Lord’s on Saturday in case of crowd problems.

Manager Yawar Saeed said from London that he and captain Waqar Younis were due to have a meeting with ECB and MCC officials and police, security personnel on Friday to discuss measures to prevent the crowd from pouring onto the ground, as has been witnessed, in earlier matches, leading to strong criticism from the Australian and England teams and also concern from the ECB for greater security measures.

Yawar said while Pakistan was willing to cooperate all the way with the organisers to ensure there was no crowd problem during the final, it had no intentions of forfeiting the final, as has been threatened by the Australians and their cricket board.

“There is no question of us forfeiting the match. We are confident there will be no problems during the final and we are doing our best to help the organisers. We have also made an appeal through the media to the Pakistani supporters in the crowd to behave but it is the responsibility of the organisers to see the final is held without any problems.”

Yawar stated that Pakistan’s cooperation towards the organisers after the problems in Birmingham were to the extent that Waqar Younis’ appeal to the Pakistani supporters to keep calm had been played constantly on the video screens inside the venues since then.
…

Yawar had also refused to forfeit the match at Birmingham when there was some crowd problems and had also made it clear to the organisers and match officials then that it was not the job of his team to provide guarantee for security on the ground to anyone and they were keen to play on.
http://jang-group.com/thenews/jun2001-daily/22-06-2001/sports/s3.htm

2

Pakistani captain and team should have the guts to forfeit if crowd pours in. I feel they should have been the ones forfeiting that match against england as well, rather than the other way around. This, despite the fact that england had all but lost the match. But we all know, a match is not over till its over. And Pakistan should have at least refused Englands forfeiture, and taken a draw instead.

Pak team cannot, and should not benefit in any way from the misadventures of 20% thrill seeking idiots who degrade not only themselves, but the whole country.

I would never accept Pakistans win tomorrow if Australia forfeited. It just wouldnt be ethical, wouldnt be right.

3

The Australians are self-ritious b******s. This is the same set of arrogant, racists who refused to play world cup matches in Sri Lanka because of supposed dangers to their team believed to be arising from the Tamil tigers. They of course over looked any IRA threat when they played in England. I find it curious how bombs in England could be any more discriminate in who they harm than the ones in Sri Lanka.

It's about time they got of their high horse and got brought crashing back to earth. I hope Pakistan hammer them tomorrow.

[This message has been edited by The Godfather (edited June 22, 2001).]

4

Yes pitch invasions are stupid and they spoil the fun. And victory is not the same in an un-finished game than in a finished game. It does spoil the taste.
However to me saying that Pakistan should have forfieted the game against England is extremely stupid. Pakistan all but won that game and decisions about a game that suffers from such disruption are always made in consultation with the match referee.
Nobody but England should have forfieted that game. It was absolutely the right decision to make. Why should pakistan have forfieted a match it was winning?
Pakistan should make the same decision if it is in a similar situation in the final. If on the other hand there is reasonable uncertainty about the result then a match should be declared a draw.
Though I don't know if a Final can be declared as a draw. But in case of an early pitch invasion it might have to be.

5

Pakistan cricket team is NOT responsible for the actions of its so-called supporters. Period.

More later

6

Do any gal come in this forum??? ...Ever???

7

We do have a few. And you are most welcome too.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

8

Abandoning, conceding and forefitting matches doesn't do any team any favours and sets a dangerous precedent.

Effective crowd control must be employed and thats it - matches must be played in full.

9

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Ahmed:
However to me saying that Pakistan should have forfieted the game against England is extremely stupid. Pakistan all but won that game and decisions about a game that suffers from such disruption are always made in consultation with the match referee.

Referees do not recommend forfeiture. Whats stupid is a team being granted a win just because their supporters poured in. If the idea of Pakistans forfeiture sounds stupid to u, then so should England's, regardless of what the status of the game was at that time. Cricket is a game of bloody chance anyway. Whats to say their last pair wouldnt have scored the required runs? DOnt tell me it hasnt happened before.

Nobody but England should have forfieted that game. It was absolutely the right decision to make. Why should pakistan have forfieted a match it was winning?

The right decision to make, now that Pakistan got the game. In ur own words, 'a match that Pakistan was winning', but had NOT won yet.

Peacemaker said
Pakistan cricket team is NOT responsible for the actions of its so-called supporters.

And the opposing team is?
This is as stuck up and selfish as we can get, where we endorse the forfeiture of our opponents, yet refuse to critique the extremely tainted win by Pakistan.

Whether they are real supporters, or so-called ones, they are representing the Pakistani team nonetheless, whether we like it/approve it/acknowledge it, or not. We've gotten into this wonderful habit of shunning responsibility when it is due of us...whether it concerns our rowdy crowds, or our gambling players.

[This message has been edited by Akif (edited June 26, 2001).]

10

That is an extremely dicey argument, Akif. The responsibility of controlling the crowd does not lie with either of the team. It lies with the security forces. Surely, you don't expect 11 players to play the game, to bat and bowl and field and at the same time be going around the stadium calming their supporters. Pakistan captain did record an appeal to the crowd to stay patient, which was broadcast on the screens around the ground. What else do you expect?

Do we suppose that Abdur Razzak and Saqlain actually asked people to pour into the ground so that England forfeits the match? Thats bull. The match got disrupted is neithr the fault of Pakistan cricket team or the English cricket team. It was utter ineffective, dismal, rubbish security around the ground and the goras on seeing their own failure needed a scapegoat.I refuse to put the blame on either cricket teams. If at all, the blame on pouring into the ground belongs to those people (whether they are Pakistanis supporters or English supporters is not important) and to the security forces for allowing it to happen. This was not the first cricket match in the world and this was not the first cricket match in the world where emotions were running high. If Brit security staff was ill-prepared they should accept the blame.

You should also read Alec Steward's column on Cricinfo to read the factors behind the forfeiture. At no stage any blame is placed on Pakistani cricketers. To do so will abosultely make no sense.

11

When anyone starts allocating blame on someone who is not involved, the spirit of fairness is taken away.

Lets assume we go by your logic that team will be blamed if their supporters cause any trouble. India is playing Australia and some Pakistani supporters want India to lose. They wear some orange clothes, paint their face in "taranga" and start chanting Indian slogans and at the fag end of the match start a pitch invasion. There will be just a few culprits, but because they are Indian "supporters", Indian cricket team will be forced to forfeit the match. Now, how dumb can it get? This is what will happen if the teams are asked to take the blame for their "supporters" pitch invasions.

Its only when the actual culprits are apprehended and fined/jailed according to the law, that this will be curbed. If they are Pakistani supporter or Indian supporter or English supporter, the law should be applied equally to all. Secuirty around the ground needs to be improved. And security forces should take responsibility for this. The captains of the team are always ready to provide any help in the form of recorded messages for their supporters. But they should not be expected to do the work for security forces as well.

I don't know how this stand-point is considered as stuck-up and selfish. Every single Pakistani on this forum has criticized those ppl who ran into the pitch. But there is no one here, sans one, who blames the Pakistani cricket team for this pitch invasion or thinks that the cricket team should be made to suffer (to forfeit the match) as a result of the actions of anyone who had green spray paint on their face or are wearing a green bandana and T-shirt.

12

Akif, you are wrong that referees have no say. I said the decion is made in consultation with the referee as to what should be done. They do have a say.

[quote]
Originally posted by Akif:
Whats stupid is a team being granted a win just because their supporters poured in.
[/quote]

It wasn't because of that. It was because pakistan had done all the hard work in the game. Kind of you to ignore that. The crowd's invasion was not only robbing england of it's (wafer-thin)chance to win but also Pakistan of its far-greater chance to proper victory. Kind of you to ignore that too.
**

[quote]

If the idea of Pakistans forfeiture sounds stupid to u, then so should England's, regardless of what the status of the game was at that time. Cricket is a game of bloody chance anyway. Whats to say their last pair wouldnt have scored the required runs? DOnt tell me it hasnt happened before.**
[/quote]

Please don't forget that I said that after you said pakistan should have forfieted that game. You have no grounds on which to ask pakistan to do that! There is no beef in 'their supporters' arguments.
**

[quote]

The right decision to make, now that Pakistan got the game. In ur own words, 'a match that Pakistan was winning', but had NOT won yet. **
[/quote]

Unfortunate, and I did say that it was not good and did spoil our victory since it wasn't complete. But there was no better decision to make. Certainly not your solution.

[quote]
Originally posted by Akif: *
Peacemaker said: Pakistan cricket team is NOT responsible for the actions of its so-called supporters.*
And the opposing team is?
This is as stuck up and selfish as we can get, where we endorse the forfeiture of our opponents, yet refuse to critique the extremely tainted win by Pakistan.
**
[/quote]

The opposing team was NOT punished because crowd poured in. They were the ones to forfeit because they were the ones who were comprehensively loosing. Pakistan should have made the same decision under similar circumstances. As I said above the invasion wasn't only robbing england of it's chance.
How do you justify asking pakistan to forfeit it's far greater chance of winning? You have problems with england accepting the inevitable but no problems with pakistan accepting the unlikely.
**

[quote]

Whether they are real supporters, or so-called ones, they are representing the Pakistani team nonetheless, whether we like it/approve it/acknowledge it, or not. We've gotten into this wonderful habit of shunning responsibility when it is due of us...whether it concerns our rowdy crowds, or our gambling players.
**
[/quote]

WRONG!! they do NOT represent the pakistani team. They represent the pakistani community.
We shouldn't shun responsibility but we sure as hell shouldn't take blame for what is in no way imaginable, our fault.
I absolutely don't see how you can ask someone who is not responisble for something, to take responisibility for it!!
The pakistani community however should accept some responsibility perhaps for rowdy crowds and co-operate with authorities if required.

[This message has been edited by Ahmed (edited June 26, 2001).]

13

**"When anyone starts allocating blame on someone who is not involved, the spirit of fairness is taken away.

Lets assume we go by your logic that team will be blamed if their supporters cause any trouble. India is playing Australia and some Pakistani supporters want India to lose. They wear some orange clothes, paint their face in "taranga" and start chanting Indian slogans and at the fag end of the match start a pitch invasion. There will be just a few culprits, but because they are Indian "supporters", Indian cricket team will be forced to forfeit the match. Now, how dumb can it get? This is what will happen if the teams are asked to take the blame for their "supporters" pitch invasions."**

Interesting point peacemaker, I don't know how relevant this is, but a freind who went to watch Pak Vs Aus game where fireworks were thrown said that he saw they were thrown by englishmen.
Can't personally vouch for it but I think the point remains.

[This message has been edited by Ahmed (edited June 26, 2001).]