Another move by S Rajesh, Cricinfo stats editor

[Mohiul]

In finding out the best odi bowler at the death he excludes odis in between BD and Zim as well as odis played against these two teams by other teams. This is simply unacceptable. I have no language to describe it but using [ edited] move.

I think we should go against this move by notifying crapinfo about this feeling of ours.

[RazabQ]

S Rajesh has now been doing it on a consistent basis and he's totally unapologetic about it. He wants to be open with his biases (under the guise of "normalization") - that's his prerogative. Ours is to reflect out displeasure in the form of Letters to the Editor, or stronger still, patronage of the website itself. However do recall, for every S. Rajesh, you'll have a Martin Williams or Andrew Miller.

[RazabQ]

As Mod: BTW, I think racist is too strong a word and would urge you to edit your post. At worst S Rajesh is guilty blind patriotism and the kind of snoot factor that the British themselves visited on the likes of him back in the days.

[Miraz]

I wrote some strong e-mails to S Rajesh about his biasness when he wrote an article about SLA's excluding Mohammad Rafiq.

He has got some agenda against BD, which was clear in the e-mail he sent as a reply.

I think it's quite obvious that he will try to exclude BD finding different excuses in his articles.

[akabir77]

what do u expect from an indian. these stuff doesn't bother me.. waiting for the day when we will move to the next round they will go back home and write some more article....

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by RazabQ
However do recall, for every S. Rajesh, you'll have a Martin Williams or Andrew Miller.

Well said

The problem is, CricInfo being one of the leading venues for cricket receives a lot of attention. Their quality of materials should also match their name. If at all, we could email the Chief Editor and explain our dissatisfaction with the attitude of a few of their editors. The worst we can do is generalize one editor's biases as the bias for the overall organization.

[Mohiul]

Originally Posted by RazabQ
As Mod: BTW, I think racist is too strong a word and would urge you to edit your post. At worst S Rajesh is guilty blind patriotism and the kind of snoot factor that the British themselves visited on the likes of him back in the days.

I've reported the article in cricinfo website using the same language. I'm waiting for their response. So, I don't have any intent to edit my post. If you think it's too strong a word, then you can do it yourself. Thanks.

[khalifa]

Originally Posted by Miraz
I wrote some strong e-mails to S Rajesh about his biasness when he wrote an article about SLA's excluding Mohammad Rafiq.

He has got some agenda against BD, which was clear in the e-mail he sent as a reply.

I think it's quite obvious that he will try to exclude BD finding different excuses in his articles.

That's outragious...could you share those email replies with us Miraz Bhai?
As a community, can we write a collective letter to the chief editor regarding this?

[al Furqaan]

rajesh is known to exclude BD and ZIM all the time, but lets face it...we've been trying to analyze razzak's bowling ablitly or SN's batting and subtractign performaces against kenay and ZIM, so i actually can't side against rajesh. at least not just because of his articles and leaving us out of them. but i wills say leaving rafique out was a travesty and i DO NOT doubt his animous towards BD cricket. who cares about the *bleep* anyways?

[Miraz]

Originally Posted by khalifa
That's outragious...could you share those email replies with us Miraz Bhai?
As a community, can we write a collective letter to the chief editor regarding this?

I should not make that e-mail public.

I am posting the first line of the mail -

Originally Posted by S Rajesh
Clearly you are getting swayed by regional and nationalistic sentiments.

[Tigers_eye]

Originally Posted by RazabQ
As Mod: BTW, I think racist is too strong a word and would urge you to edit your post. ...

You have to edit the title, he can't.

As for the article, ignore and move on.

There nothing that surprizes me. His shallowness or the half-stats he craves. According to his Stats SL should replace Vass in the death over and let Murali bowl, lol. Stupid Analogy.

[Miraz]

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
You have to edit the title, he can't.

As for the article, ignore and move on.

There nothing that surprizes me. His shallowness or the half-stats he craves. According to his Stats SL should replace Vass in the death over and let Murali bowl, lol. Stupid Analogy.

He always tailors the stat to serve some quarter.

In the article he left out Rafiq, he portrayed Panesar as the best SLA by assigning 90 balls bowled in a test match and some 30 odd wickets as the qualification. (at that time panesar had 31 wickets )

[Mridul]

I dont know much about his previous articles. But this current analysis is completly fine. He has done a nice analysis excluding performance against Ban and Zim. All other 8 teams are lot better than BD and Zim. Remember one thing, all those 8 teams are there to Win the World Cup.

If we start winning every other match against the top 8 teams, we will surly be considered in all kinds of analysis.

[kalpurush]

Originally Posted by Mridul
I dont know much about his previous articles. But this current analysis is completly fine. He has done a nice analysis excluding performance against Ban and Zim. All other 8 teams are lot better than BD and Zim. Remember one thing, all those 8 teams are there to Win the World Cup.

If we start winning every other match against the top 8 teams, we will surly be considered in all kinds of analysis.

very funny!

[kalpurush]

200 bosorer dasotto mojjagoto hoye giyeche! Tai..sada provuder tuwaj chara bodmasta er kichu jane-na. Shame on you- Ekjon nichu storer nordomer kit kuthaker.

[Hatebreed]

Originally Posted by Miraz

Huh funny, I got the same reply when I protested to one of his past articles.

[layperson]

Excluding rafique in an article where he is evaluating SLA's is discriminatory but when he leaves out the stats against BD and ZIM it is perfectly ok as far as I am concerned because there is a gulf in quality between the top 8 and us. As and when we get rid off that he will be forced to include bangladesh in his articles. We should let our performances take care of critics like this. Victory is more sweet if people like him have to eat their words in a year or two rather than apologizing now for discriminating against us.

[roc]

this [edit] will write about us when we beat his beloved india's ***.

[kalpurush]

Originally Posted by shahriyar
Excluding rafique in an article where he is evaluating SLA's is discriminatory but when he leaves out the stats against BD and ZIM it is perfectly ok as far as I am concerned because there is a gulf in quality between the top 8 and us. As and when we get rid off that he will be forced to include bangladesh in his articles. We should let our performances take care of critics like this. Victory is more sweet if people like him have to eat their words in a year or two rather than apologizing now for discriminating against us.

How could you exclude two Test playing nations I don't get it regardless of quality!?!
Some day this so called 8 nations might shrink into only 4 nations...then what?
This is just...class system Mr. S. Rajesh trying to creat...like he used to in his social life? Or, what else?

[layperson]

Originally Posted by kalpurush
How could you exclude two Test playing nations I don't get it regardless of quality!?!
Some day this so called 8 nations might shrink into only 4 nations...then what?
This is just...class system Mr. S. Rajesh trying to creat...like he used to in his social life? Or, what else?

This is because when oppositions score or take wickets against us and Zim it has lesser weight than other teams. When making a comparison between bowlers if you omit these two teams then you will get a better picture of the players because one player might have played more against the two weak teams so obviously his stats would be more impressive. However I said that omitting Rafique's name from the SLA article was discriminatory. I know where you are coming from and your anger is fully justified. But I think if we answer these critics with performance then they will be shut up for good and have to eat their own words which would be more embaraasing for them and make victory all the more sweeter to us. Unfortunately this is the way the world works, people always tend to look down upon the weak and the only way to get noticed is to rise up in the hierarchy. I know this might come off as an arrogant statement but this is true in all facets of life.

[cricket_king]

Originally Posted by bdcricmad
I've reported the article in cricinfo website using the same language. I'm waiting for their response. So, I don't have any intent to edit my post. If you think it's too strong a word, then you can do it yourself. Thanks.

LOL......relax mate. I agree that he's a jerk but i wouldnt say he's racist. And plus he's an indian What else would u expect?

[Morpheous]

Originally Posted by bdcricmad
In finding out the best odi bowler at the death he excludes odis in between BD and Zim as well as odis played against these two teams by other teams. This is simply unacceptable. I have no language to describe it but using [ edited] move.

I think we should go against this move by notifying crapinfo about this feeling of ours.

There are always some Desi [] who deny Bangladeshi Cricket Success

[cricket_pagol]

I am not willing to waste my time on some crazy statistician who is biased against Bangladesh... I think our performance on field will shut him up.

[Niceman70]

16 more days and he will get his answer.

[israr]

On 17th March, S Rajesh will be forced to .............