|
|
Did Australia Cheat its Way to Victory?
Full News Article
Freelancer
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1050
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 07:35:23 GMT Report for Abuse
|
| Cricket Sri lanka or SL team not accusing, they accept Aus victory humbly. On the other hand nobody can say anything against australains, Australians can use any material, technique or any number of players as they wish, because they are Australians and they are awesome. |
Bonggo
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 5142
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 07:57:44 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Folks,
No, Australia did not cheat. They played good cricket.
In fact both teams were equal in performance, only Gilchrist's innings made the difference.
That's how it is, usually an individual performance seals the fate. For example, in our game against New Zealand it was simply Mahela Jayawardene's brilliance that made the difference.
I rate Mahela's innings higher than that of Gilchrist, it was sheer class whereas Gillie went for pure slog.
Even mishits went for a six. So, simply it was not Sri Lanka?s day :( |
zaharan
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 331
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 08:39:44 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Our own Sanath as we all know who almost changed the ODI version with the big hitting in the start.
Gilchrist was one of the first who was doing that for sometime and he did that to perfection in the Finals.
Lokka made a good point here, and if the squash ball is the case, then it's bad sport Gillie. |
BABA
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2091
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 09:07:18 GMT Report for Abuse
|
.
If this was Sana who did that instead of Gillie.......?
There we will see the effect of colour difference in the civilized world!
But for now white is a fair colour that even absorbs blacks into it and wash away short comings!
. |
dumindak
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1712
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 10:20:02 GMT Report for Abuse
|
The result of the match would have been different if Gilchrist not used the tactic. He scored additional 40-50 runs from the squash ball and that was the margin of loss.
If Aus scored less than 230, the game would have been in our favour considering the fact that we batted poorly last 8 overs due to bad light. We batted because overs have to be completed and target was beyond the reach and we had given up the game at that time.
If the target was 230 from the begining our game plan would be different.
Knowingly or unknowingly Gilchrist did something illegal and Sqash ball is the match winner.
Edited By - dumindak - 1 May 2007 10:25:18 GMT |
Berty
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 7655
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 10:48:34 GMT Report for Abuse
|
I think we should get an e-mail across to the Cricket authorities to see whether they will check on it!!
The biggest question is if Sanath has used the same baseball to enhance his grip and got a huge 100..Do you guys really think Australia would have kept quiet!!
take for instance the chucking issue, the 15 deg rule was brought in to protect most of the fast bowlers including Glen Mcgrath . Murlai was not actually bending his arm more than few fast bowlers around the world.
This is not about losing the finals but playing the game within the rules and in the best sprit!! |
Berty
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 7655
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 10:51:10 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Dumindak
the fact that we batted poorly last 8 overs due to bad light.
If the SL team knew the rules of playing the next day if they go out for Bad light, i wonder why they did not take the bad light offer much earlier..They were offered by the umpires and they should have taken , if we had taken it and came back the next day we could made a match out if it..
I am saying this cos that was the problem we had at the end of the match..bad light and playing the next day!! |
dumindak
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1712
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 10:58:29 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Throughout the tournment Gilchrist failed and suddenly he became exceptional.
Cannt anybody guess that without sqush ball he would have failed in final also????
How many sixers would have been catchs?? |
dumindak
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1712
Member Profile
|
1 May 2007 11:17:39 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Berty
when they offered bad light we had given up the win because the target was too high. we could have accepted the bad light offer if the target was around 240.
I believe Mahela, Chamara,Dilshan, Jayasuriya would have batted more sensibly if the target was within reach. But looking at 281, they simply succumbed to pressure. |
|
Search All News and Discussions