View Full Version : Does BCCI "own" ICC?

April 9, 2005, 02:49 PM
This thread is about how many times, India's captain has been excused for poor over-rates and escaped with little/or no punishment at all.
Like in the 3rd ODI against Pakistan, Ganguly reduced the lunch break to 18 mins. Why do the other team also have to suffer for Ganguly's stupidity? Why can't he be severaly reprimanded if ICC is to speed the game up?
I also think that cutting a percentage of the match hurts any Indian players. They are the richest cricketers in the world, and the match fee is like loose change to them.
Even a few months back, when Clive Lloyd reprimanded Ganguly for something- it was overturned. That actually was an insult to the great Clive Lloyd more than anything.

I want some input from the cricket thinkers in this forum.

P.S- i thought there are some bright ppl int his forum- but my thread titled "Top Sledges and Jokes" really didn't receive much feedback!

April 9, 2005, 08:58 PM
Indian media likes to think so. But that is not borne out by facts. Players of India suffer the most at the hands of the ICC match referees. Examples:

1.People like Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid have been hauled up for minor offences in the past ( excessive appealing) whereas none of the Australians and South African players have ever been punished for abusing Indian batsmen ( example- Donald abusing Dravid, McGrath abusing more than one Indian batsmen).

2.Ganguly routinely gets hauled for many offences including slow over rate whereas English captain goes scot free despite similar over rates.

3.Harbhajan has been reported for suspect bowling action immediately after his action was cleared by non other than ICC itself. On the other hand, the most blatant chucker in the world, Andre Nel of South Africa chucks away merrily and no one even questions his action.

4. Match referee Clive Lloyd leaves no opportunity go waste when it comes to maligning Indian cricketers. On the other hand, he goes out of his way to defend brett Lee when he deliberately bowls beamers at Pakistan and New Zealand batsmen.

In conclusion, it can be said that BCCI, despite its so called clout is treated no better than how it was treated 30 years ago, when it was an impoverished organisation. Even today, BCCI is not bothered how shabbily Indian players are treated at the hands of ICC. BCCI is happy as long as money is coming i to their coffers. Minor irritants like its players being treated unfairly does not bother them much.

April 12, 2005, 02:01 PM
Jumping the gun alert: :)

<A href="http://plus.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2005/APR/229553_INDPAK2004-05_12APR2005.html">Ganguly banned for six matches</a>

April 12, 2005, 05:01 PM
Yes, I do admit that this thread is now useless because ICC has come down hard on him. 6 matches is too much I agree but some sort of reprimand was neccessary. But its a lucky break for him and the team.

April 13, 2005, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by chyicarus
Why do the other team also have to suffer for Ganguly's stupidity? Why can't he be severaly reprimanded if ICC is to speed the game up?

This is for you!

Men whom Dada will never forget

In his five-year stint as captain, Ganguly been involved in several hearings with match referees.

December 2000: Australian match referee Jarman handed Ganguly a one match ban for attempting to intimidate the umpires during an ODI clash against Zimbabwe.

July 2001: West Indian Smith charged Ganguly of dissent when given out in the one-day series in Sri Lanka. Ganguly was also seen abusing Lankan batsman Russel Arnold.

November 2001: Ganguly was banned for one-Test during the South Africa tour for not controlling his players. India fielded the skipper and others in the next Test which was declared as an unofficial Test.

November 2004: Clive Lloyd suspended Ganguly for two Tests against South Africa following a slow over-rate in an ODI against Pakistan. Following an appeal, Ganguly was allowed to play the Tests.

December 2004: Kiwi match referee Jeff Crowe fined Ganguly 30 % of his match fee for showing dissent on being declared out during the Kolkata Test against South Africa.

Chris Broad
April 2005: Match referee Chris Broad suspended Ganguly for 6 ODIs.

source: Midday-Mumbai

April 13, 2005, 11:30 AM
can you shed some light on that please? how did they play him in the next game although he was banned? declaring the test unofficial? quoting chyicarus:"Why does the other team also have to suffer for Ganguly's stupidity?" i'd ban the whole team for a while...

>>November 2001: Ganguly was banned for one-Test >>during the South Africa tour for not controlling his >>players. India fielded the skipper and others in the >>next Test which was declared as an unofficial Test.

April 13, 2005, 11:53 AM
In fact Denness banned four Indian players including Dada during that second Test against South Africa at Port Elizabeth.
The players were:

Sachin Tendulkar: One-match ban (suspended), fined 75% of match fee

Virender Sehwag: Immediate one-match ban, fined 75% of match fee

Harbhajan Singh, Deep Dasgupta and Shiv Sunder Das: Same punishment as Tendulkar

Sourav Ganguly: One-Test, two ODI ban (both suspended), assuming he remains as captain

The controversy began when Sachin Tendulkar received a suspended ban for ball-tampering based on television evidence.

Television pictures show Tendulkar with the ball and the ban was imposed based on this TV evidence

Captain Sourav Ganguly was also found guilty of failing to control his players, and other mentioned players were punished for excessive appealing.

source: Internet:)

Edited on, April 13, 2005, 5:19 PM GMT, by reverse_swing.

April 13, 2005, 11:56 AM
and yet they played the same team in the next match and got away with it? doesn't the BCCI really own the ICC? :)

April 13, 2005, 12:05 PM
about that unofficial test I think you will get something here >> (************************/cricket/2001/nov/21tamper.htm)

April 13, 2005, 12:16 PM
ok. so south africa was involved too. hmm...maybe the BCCI doesn't own the ICC after all.

April 13, 2005, 01:19 PM
Well BCCI are appealing again, which is normal. But i don't think they will appeal as strongly as they did before. They know that Ganguly is not in form and his absence from the team will actually be a blessing for the rest of the series. They can select a better batsmen, a bowler and a better fielder than Ganguly for sure.
So i think they're going to challenge the size of the ban(6 matches) but not the actual ban.

April 13, 2005, 01:49 PM
I would like to see the ban size reduced to 2 matches.

Instead of Ganguly, they should select a bowler. I would pick either Agarkar or Kumble for this spot.

April 14, 2005, 12:40 PM
sorry to disappint you Spitfire, but the Indians are not an attacking team. They went for Dinesh Mongia rather than a bowler.
They're packed with batting with Mohd. Kaif coming in at no.8 or something, thats just ridiculous.

April 14, 2005, 03:22 PM
It's ridiculous! Dinesh Mongia is totally useless. Scored 1 century in one match, except that never did any siginificant contribution.

I don't understand why Indian selectors like Dinesh Mongia and Sridharan Sriram so much. The secord one is even worse than Mongia.

April 14, 2005, 03:44 PM
You have to look at the Board history. They have always been "play it safe" type of decision makers. If you look at the selection, new players are hardly seen. Nowadays the pool has increased but still now, promising players don't get a chance. India is doing well nowadays only because they have a couple of genius of a batsmen in the likes of Rahul, Sachin and even Sehwag, who is known to play in a cavalier fashion.
But their bowling is not something to write home about.
I do see a huge huge impact in Indian cricket after the retirement of Sachin & Dravid in about 5-6 yrs from now.

April 14, 2005, 10:29 PM
The main problem is the pool of players is very less less. If any 3 indian bastman get fever then gone is Indian cricket because they dont have enough backup or players who have played International level with high quality.

Indian sticks on the same team so after 5 years most probably we will see 5 to 6 players retiring from cricket and so the team will be in trouble with no backup players

Hope some guys with good quality will come to team

Dinesh Mongia was the best in county cricket. He has substance but he doesnt got enough oppurtunity. Also he has been batting no 7 or 8. Place where no enough opportunity is given or got.

He is a good spin bowler. He gets good wickets in spinning track

April 15, 2005, 11:07 AM
Well I think Indians players should be picked based on their performance is specified position.
Like they need to see who opens regularly for their domestic team and use them in the National Squad accordingly.
If Dinesh Mongia bats at no.4 regularly in club/domestic cricket and put in as no.7/no.8 in the national squad- he will do squat!!!!
So it is absolutely neccessary that he's groomed in the domestic league in the position(can 1 position up or down) he will play for the national side!

April 20, 2005, 06:55 AM
I cannot understand why the Indian cricket stick with 15 players through out the years and not giving chances to new players. After 4 to 5 years about 4 to 5 players are going to retire and what will Indian cricket do at that time. Try all the new faces at that time.

I think they should play more cricket against Zimbabwe and other teams and play youngesters during these matches