Out and about in the Corvette today in Fitzroy.

I want to add some colour and class to revitalise this thread that seems to be losing its chutzpah dare I say! 

Its amazing how the homeless Street people are energised when I drive past in the Vette

It is just part of how I am giving back to society now that I am retired but back contracting part time, the new retired system it seems these days! 

 

1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

Somehow I pictured you looking like that in your very distant youth Daisy. But in black 'n white, of course

now no need to be disrespectful, moonie. and in my childhood sepia was all the rage.

 

49 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

 

Out and about in the Corvette today in Fitzroy.

I want to add some colour and class to revitalise this thread that seems to be losing its chutzpah dare I say! 

Its amazing how the homeless Street people are energised when I drive past in the Vette

It is just part of how I am giving back to society now that I am retired but back contracting part time, the new retired system it seems these days! 

 

just as long as you don't leave it parked on the street overnight in hipsroy, earl.  spraypaint, vomit and latte dregs can be difficult  to clean off.  thought you'd be more a bentley man than a yank muscle car jock

22 hours ago, daisycutter said:

now no need to be disrespectful, moonie. and in my childhood sepia was all the rage.

 

just as long as you don't leave it parked on the street overnight in hipsroy, earl.  spraypaint, vomit and latte dregs can be difficult  to clean off.  thought you'd be more a bentley man than a yank muscle car jock

This is what can happen if you leave the car out in Fitzroy. Yes Daisy you have a point. But the Corvette is parked securely with the Bentley, no need to worry. 

Not condoning what Smith and co did, but they aren't the first, in a game full of cheating.

Just look at the doctored pitches, you need go no further.

7 hours ago, Redleg said:

Not condoning what Smith and co did, but they aren't the first, in a game full of cheating.

Just look at the doctored pitches, you need go no further.

I think what has happened dc is they have paid the price for all the sins of the Aussie team over the last decade. All the bulling and bad sportsmanship of the last decade has come out in these penalities. For a decade or more the cricket board have been trying for better behaviour and now was their chance to drive home the fact better behaviour is needed. Why else would you take out the two best batsman for potentially ever? Warner will never play for Australia again, Smith may but after a year off and in his mental state will he ever be as good?  All three will carry the cheating label till the day they die and they will carry it for all the cricket cheats internationally who got away with wet tram ticket penalities. The up side? Perhaps players in the future will consider what happened here and refrain from cheating I cannot see any other as we are going to be the easy beats internationally for the next few years. I am not happy about that but cheating and bulling by the Australian team must stop. 

1 hour ago, old dee said:

I think what has happened dc is they have paid the price for all the sins of the Aussie team over the last decade. All the bulling and bad sportsmanship of the last decade has come out in these penalities. For a decade or more the cricket board have been trying for better behaviour and now was their chance to drive home the fact better behaviour is needed. Why else would you take out the two best batsman for potentially ever? Warner will never play for Australia again, Smith may but after a year off and in his mental state will he ever be as good?  All three will carry the cheating label till the day they die and they will carry it for all the cricket cheats internationally who got away with wet tram ticket penalities. The up side? Perhaps players in the future will consider what happened here and refrain from cheating I cannot see any other as we are going to be the easy beats internationally for the next few years. I am not happy about that but cheating and bulling by the Australian team must stop. 

rather appropriate for easter, od

being crucified for the sins of others, that is...............

28 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

rather appropriate for easter, od

being crucified for the sins of others, that is...............

Yep Good Friday and all dc.

if you can't do the time don't do the crime.

Although Jesus was known as a carpenter, he never actually sang on any of their albums

2 hours ago, old dee said:

Yep Good Friday and all dc.

if you can't do the time don't do the crime.

Even that is interesting, as the ICC handed out their penalty of one match as others have got over the years. The time should fit the crime, that is my point.

It was all the hysteria in Oz that landed these guys the heavy penalties, not to mention the shame and money lost. 

I am not excusing cheating as that is what it was, but penalties should be the same for everyone.

Remind me again what the South African Captain the mint sucker, got for putting a zipper on his cricket pants and rubbing the ball on the steel zipper, which would have impacted far more than the sandpaper. Don't recall him showing remorse and  crying and being shamed in front of the world.

"Current South African captain Faf du Plessis has been found guilty of ball tampering multiple times. The first time was in 2013, when cameras caught him scuffing the ball with his trouser zip during a Test against Pakistan in Dubai. Three years later against Australia, he used mint saliva on the ball and was fined his match fee."

Read the full article: 

Bizarre ways of ball tampering: Mint, zipper, teeth and now sandpaper

Ball tampering has been around for decades in cricket and is back in the limelight after Australia’s Cameron Bancroft used a yellow strip of sandpaper to alter the shape of the red cherry during the Australia vs South Africa Test

Last Published: Mon, Mar 26 2018. 05 57 PM IST

Bharat Sharma

 

 

New Delhi: Teeth, zipper, mint and add sandpaper to it now, the desperation to extract reverse swing in unfavourable conditions has driven international teams to find bizarre ways to tamper the ball. Cameron Bancroft hiding a yellow strip of sandpaper in his pants easily fits into one of the many bizarre ball tampering tactics but perhaps more sillier in execution when hawks like ‘Oscar-The Cameraman’ are in operation.

The phenomenon of ball tampering has been around for decades in the gentleman’s game and the infamous incident in the third Test between Australia and South Africa has only put spotlight back into the ‘illegal yet almost unavoidable’ tactic.

In the mid-70’s, one of the earliest allegations of ball tampering was levelled against England seamer John Lever, whom the Indian captain Bishan Singh Bedi had accused of using vaseline to aid pronounced swing during MCC’s tour of India in 1976. Bedi was then targeted by the British media for trying to malign an England player.

 

The rule allows the use of sweat and saliva to shine the ball but it becomes an offence the moment you do that with an “artificial substance”, leaving a grey area in between. The fielding sides has been found working on the ball for decades but it was not until 2000 when Waqar Younis became the first cricketer to be suspended for ball tampering.

However during Pakistan’s tour of 1992, the two W’s Wasim and Waqar were accused of getting excessive reverse swing with allegation that they used bottle opener to scruff up the seam of the Dukes ball. Repeatedly bouncing one side on the ground and scratching the seam are common ways of getting the seam scruffed up on abrasive surfaces but some players suddenly become more “creative” than required.

Bottle openers, zippers of trousers, lip balm, hair gel, or in Bancroft’s case, a sandpaper then come into use. Back in 1994, England captain Michael Atherton was accused of ball-tampering after cameras caught him rubbing the ball with the hidden dirt in his trousers’ pocket.

 

Atherton later claimed that he had dirt in his pocket to dry his hands but was still fined £2,000 for not disclosing the substance. The then England skipper’s case will never be proved but sometimes confession by players make the job much easier for the match referee, like it happened with under-fire Australian Steve Smith and Bancroft in the recently concluded third Test.

Some choose to confess after they retire, like what former England opener Marcus Trescothick did. The stylish batsman has revealed in his book that he used mint-induced saliva to shine the ball during the 2005 Ashes. “Murray Mints worked really well,” wrote Trescothick.

In 2010, former Pakistan captain Shahid Afridi found a new way to prepare the ball as he was caught on television biting the seam during a T20 International against Australia. It resulted in a two-match ban though Afridi claimed that he was only trying to smell the ball.

 

Current South African captain Faf du Plessis has been found guilty of ball tampering multiple times. The first time was in 2013, when cameras caught him scuffing the ball with his trouser zip during a Test against Pakistan in Dubai. Three years later against Australia, he used mint saliva on the ball and was fined his match fee.

Commenting on the controversial subject, former India pacer Ashish Nehra said that there is nothing new about ball tampering. “Yes, it’s an art but then stealing is also an art. Would you put a thief in jail or praise him. Reverse swing is an art but ball tampering is dishonesty. And there are ways to prepare a ball for reverse swing without tampering,” said Nehra, who is one of India’s finest exponents of swing bowling.

“Also this is a phenomena, you will find mainly in Test cricket as in T20 and ODIs, it’s difficult to reverse the white ball. In ODIs, two new white balls are used, so chances are really less. It’s only in Test cricket which is played for a considerable amount of time that teams want their bowlers to try reverse swing,” he added. PTI

 

First Published: Mon, Mar 26 2018. 05 56 PM IST

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Even that is interesting, as the ICC handed out their penalty of one match as others have got over the years. The time should fit the crime, that is my point.

It was all the hysteria in Oz that landed these guys the heavy penalties, not to mention the shame and money lost. 

I am not excusing cheating as that is what it was, but penalties should be the same for everyone.

Remind me again what the South African Captain the mint sucker, got for putting a zipper on his cricket pants and rubbing the ball on the steel zipper, which would have impacted far more than the sandpaper. Don't recall him showing remorse and  crying and being shamed in front of the world.

"Current South African captain Faf du Plessis has been found guilty of ball tampering multiple times. The first time was in 2013, when cameras caught him scuffing the ball with his trouser zip during a Test against Pakistan in Dubai. Three years later against Australia, he used mint saliva on the ball and was fined his match fee."

Read the full article: 

Bizarre ways of ball tampering: Mint, zipper, teeth and now sandpaper

Ball tampering has been around for decades in cricket and is back in the limelight after Australia’s Cameron Bancroft used a yellow strip of sandpaper to alter the shape of the red cherry during the Australia vs South Africa Test

Last Published: Mon, Mar 26 2018. 05 57 PM IST

Bharat Sharma

 

 

New Delhi: Teeth, zipper, mint and add sandpaper to it now, the desperation to extract reverse swing in unfavourable conditions has driven international teams to find bizarre ways to tamper the ball. Cameron Bancroft hiding a yellow strip of sandpaper in his pants easily fits into one of the many bizarre ball tampering tactics but perhaps more sillier in execution when hawks like ‘Oscar-The Cameraman’ are in operation.

The phenomenon of ball tampering has been around for decades in the gentleman’s game and the infamous incident in the third Test between Australia and South Africa has only put spotlight back into the ‘illegal yet almost unavoidable’ tactic.

In the mid-70’s, one of the earliest allegations of ball tampering was levelled against England seamer John Lever, whom the Indian captain Bishan Singh Bedi had accused of using vaseline to aid pronounced swing during MCC’s tour of India in 1976. Bedi was then targeted by the British media for trying to malign an England player.

 

The rule allows the use of sweat and saliva to shine the ball but it becomes an offence the moment you do that with an “artificial substance”, leaving a grey area in between. The fielding sides has been found working on the ball for decades but it was not until 2000 when Waqar Younis became the first cricketer to be suspended for ball tampering.

However during Pakistan’s tour of 1992, the two W’s Wasim and Waqar were accused of getting excessive reverse swing with allegation that they used bottle opener to scruff up the seam of the Dukes ball. Repeatedly bouncing one side on the ground and scratching the seam are common ways of getting the seam scruffed up on abrasive surfaces but some players suddenly become more “creative” than required.

Bottle openers, zippers of trousers, lip balm, hair gel, or in Bancroft’s case, a sandpaper then come into use. Back in 1994, England captain Michael Atherton was accused of ball-tampering after cameras caught him rubbing the ball with the hidden dirt in his trousers’ pocket.

 

Atherton later claimed that he had dirt in his pocket to dry his hands but was still fined £2,000 for not disclosing the substance. The then England skipper’s case will never be proved but sometimes confession by players make the job much easier for the match referee, like it happened with under-fire Australian Steve Smith and Bancroft in the recently concluded third Test.

Some choose to confess after they retire, like what former England opener Marcus Trescothick did. The stylish batsman has revealed in his book that he used mint-induced saliva to shine the ball during the 2005 Ashes. “Murray Mints worked really well,” wrote Trescothick.

In 2010, former Pakistan captain Shahid Afridi found a new way to prepare the ball as he was caught on television biting the seam during a T20 International against Australia. It resulted in a two-match ban though Afridi claimed that he was only trying to smell the ball.

 

Current South African captain Faf du Plessis has been found guilty of ball tampering multiple times. The first time was in 2013, when cameras caught him scuffing the ball with his trouser zip during a Test against Pakistan in Dubai. Three years later against Australia, he used mint saliva on the ball and was fined his match fee.

Commenting on the controversial subject, former India pacer Ashish Nehra said that there is nothing new about ball tampering. “Yes, it’s an art but then stealing is also an art. Would you put a thief in jail or praise him. Reverse swing is an art but ball tampering is dishonesty. And there are ways to prepare a ball for reverse swing without tampering,” said Nehra, who is one of India’s finest exponents of swing bowling.

“Also this is a phenomena, you will find mainly in Test cricket as in T20 and ODIs, it’s difficult to reverse the white ball. In ODIs, two new white balls are used, so chances are really less. It’s only in Test cricket which is played for a considerable amount of time that teams want their bowlers to try reverse swing,” he added. PTI

 

First Published: Mon, Mar 26 2018. 05 56 PM IST

 

 

 

Hmm seems you are fired up about this Mr. Leg. Cannot share your enthusiasm for the poor hardly done by boys. Cheats belong in other places not the Aussie teams. If the penalties were a bit high so be it others might think more in the future. 

3 minutes ago, old dee said:

Hmm seems you are fired up about this Mr. Leg. Cannot share your enthusiasm for the poor hardly done by boys. Cheats belong in other places not the Aussie teams. If the penalties were a bit high so be it others might think more in the future. 

Not fired up, just bemused by the hypocrisy of so many.

Edited March 30, 20187 yr by Redleg

15 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Not fired up, just bemused by the hypocrisy of so many.

I agree with you Red     The vision of Smith being escorted through Cape Town airport was not much different to watching a well known drug dealer being escorted thought an airprt in Bali.    Paki players banned for match fixing?   All back playing for their country.     Sth Africa's captain twice cited for ball tampering.   Still captain of his country.

This reaction is way over the top.

1 minute ago, Bossdog said:

I agree with you Red     The vision of Smith being escorted through Cape Town airport was not much different to watching a well known drug dealer being escorted thought an airprt in Bali.    Paki players banned for match fixing?   All back playing for their country.     Sth Africa's captain twice cited for ball tampering.   Still captain of his country.

This reaction is way over the top.

Depends where you judge it bossdog. The countries mentioned are hardly the peak of the justice system. What it points out is how poor the previous penalties were. 

Ball tampering is endemic to test playing nations  the pitch manipulation in The UK the lollies, the mint etc etc the best way to stop it is to have a new ball every 40 overs 

3 minutes ago, deesrule said:

Ball tampering is endemic to test playing nations  the pitch manipulation in The UK the lollies, the mint etc etc the best way to stop it is to have a new ball every 40 overs 

I don't agree the best way is to have meaningful penalties. Players like AFL footballers only understand one thing. Not playing the rest is a slap with a wet tram ticket.

5 minutes ago, deesrule said:

Ball tampering is endemic to test playing nations  the pitch manipulation in The UK the lollies, the mint etc etc the best way to stop it is to have a new ball every 40 overs 

Yep, new ball more often and no 'manipulation' of the ball at all. No shining one side, no sweat or saliva, no returns on the bounce, only umpire to adjust ball. Min penalty 10 runs and match fee. Just because shining one side has happened for 100 years doesn't mean it's not unaturally manipulating the ball to advantage. 

16 minutes ago, old dee said:

I don't agree the best way is to have meaningful penalties. Players like AFL footballers only understand one thing. Not playing the rest is a slap with a wet tram ticket.

Realistically only Australia seems to take it seriously the ICC gave Smith a one match ban. Other countries will continue to rort . The English doctor pitches to be abrasive  replacing the ball more often would reduce this , the spinners would still improve as the pitch wears

19 minutes ago, deesrule said:

Realistically only Australia seems to take it seriously the ICC gave Smith a one match ban. Other countries will continue to rort . The English doctor pitches to be abrasive  replacing the ball more often would reduce this , the spinners would still improve as the pitch wears

maybe we just need teflon-coated carbon-fibre balls

1994      Mike Atherton         GUILTY   Ball tampering      Fined $3700

2010      Shahid Afridi           GUILTY             "                     Sus  2 20/20 games

2013     Faf du Plessis          Guilty                "                     Fined 50% match fee

2014     Veron Philander          "                     "                      Fined 75% match fee

2016      Faf du Plessis            "                     "                      3 demerit points on record

Edited March 30, 20187 yr by Bossdog

2 hours ago, old dee said:

I don't agree the best way is to have meaningful penalties. Players like AFL footballers only understand one thing. Not playing the rest is a slap with a wet tram ticket.

i see your point but also mr legs.

whilst the icc standard ball tampering penalty of 1 match (+ some points and match fee) is manifestly inadequate, there is one hell of a big difference from 1 game for 1 person to nearly three years across 3 people (plus all the attendant $ costs that result)

I think too that this is the first case that the offenders have actually owned up. In the other cases all sorts of stupid claims of innocence were made and du plessis even appealed one of his charges.

some say that this instance was worse because  of premeditation and complicity. You can't tell me all the other ones weren't premeditated and as for complicity we just wouldn't know because they all claimed innocence. to me they were all just the same - a blatant breaking of the rules and cheating, full stop

bottom line, i think the final penalties were excessive and the players effectively punished also for all the perceived recent sins of the team

i don't doubt the public outrage was increased due to the general bad sportsmanlike behaviour of the team in recent years and that this was a major factor in determining the sentence (fairly or not). this makes ca all the more hypocritical as they have had adequate opportunity over the years to do something about this bad behaviour but chose to ignore it and therefore tacitly give it approval

Edited March 30, 20187 yr by daisycutter

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i see your point but also mr legs.

whilst the icc standard ball tampering penalty of 1 match (+ some points and match fee) is manifestly inadequate, there is one hell of a big difference from 1 game for 1 person to nearly three years across 3 people (plus all the attendant $ costs that result)

I think too that this is the first case that the offenders have actually owned up. In the other cases all sorts of stupid claims of innocence were made and du plessis even appealed his charge.

some say that this instance was worse because  of premeditation and complicity. You can't tell me all the other ones weren't premeditated and as for complicity we just wouldn't know because they all claimed innocence. to me they were all just the same - a blatant breaking of the rules and cheating, full stop

bottom line, i think the final penalties were excessive and the players effectively punished also for all the perceived recent sins of the team

i don't doubt the public outrage was increased due to the general bad sportsmanlike behaviour of the team in recent years and that this was a major factor in determining the sentence (fairly or not). this makes ca or the more hypocritical as they have had adequate opportunity over the years to do something about this bad behaviour but chose to ignore it and therefore tacitly give it approval

Well apparently a zipper just appeared on Du Plessis' cricket pants.

He tried to remove the zipper with the ball. 

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

maybe we just need teflon-coated carbon-fibre balls

Bancroft would have benefited from this considering where he put his sandpaper 

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

i see your point but also mr legs.

whilst the icc standard ball tampering penalty of 1 match (+ some points and match fee) is manifestly inadequate, there is one hell of a big difference from 1 game for 1 person to nearly three years across 3 people (plus all the attendant $ costs that result)

I think too that this is the first case that the offenders have actually owned up. In the other cases all sorts of stupid claims of innocence were made and du plessis even appealed one of his charges.

some say that this instance was worse because  of premeditation and complicity. You can't tell me all the other ones weren't premeditated and as for complicity we just wouldn't know because they all claimed innocence. to me they were all just the same - a blatant breaking of the rules and cheating, full stop

bottom line, i think the final penalties were excessive and the players effectively punished also for all the perceived recent sins of the team

i don't doubt the public outrage was increased due to the general bad sportsmanlike behaviour of the team in recent years and that this was a major factor in determining the sentence (fairly or not). this makes ca all the more hypocritical as they have had adequate opportunity over the years to do something about this bad behaviour but chose to ignore it and therefore tacitly give it approval

I never said the board were not hypocritical DC. Just my feeling of why so big a penalty. You think they are excessive and I am confident the majority of the GP agree. I don't. 

2 hours ago, deesrule said:

Realistically only Australia seems to take it seriously the ICC gave Smith a one match ban. Other countries will continue to rort . The English doctor pitches to be abrasive  replacing the ball more often would reduce this , the spinners would still improve as the pitch wears

God almoighty, as though Australia doesn't doctor pitches. 

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

i see your point but also mr legs.

whilst the icc standard ball tampering penalty of 1 match (+ some points and match fee) is manifestly inadequate, there is one hell of a big difference from 1 game for 1 person to nearly three years across 3 people (plus all the attendant $ costs that result)

I think too that this is the first case that the offenders have actually owned up. In the other cases all sorts of stupid claims of innocence were made and du plessis even appealed one of his charges.

some say that this instance was worse because  of premeditation and complicity. You can't tell me all the other ones weren't premeditated and as for complicity we just wouldn't know because they all claimed innocence. to me they were all just the same - a blatant breaking of the rules and cheating, full stop

bottom line, i think the final penalties were excessive and the players effectively punished also for all the perceived recent sins of the team

i don't doubt the public outrage was increased due to the general bad sportsmanlike behaviour of the team in recent years and that this was a major factor in determining the sentence (fairly or not). this makes ca all the more hypocritical as they have had adequate opportunity over the years to do something about this bad behaviour but chose to ignore it and therefore tacitly give it approval

What you blokes who believe the punishment is 'excessive' seem to want to ignore is that this was the final straw for the Australian Cricket Board. That it's the Australian Cricket Board who imposed the penalty, that the culprits mentioned above were sanctioned by the International Cricket Council

Now I may be right, I may be wrong - but ask my wife, this has never been known to happen - the ball tamper was the straw that broke the camel's back. In other words Cricket Australia have simply had enough of  the arrogant, imprudent, foul-mouthed, abusive, disrespectful bogan behaviour of so-called leaders like Warner, a man who seemingly had Smith under his thumb. It would seem to me that Warner has had an undue influence on this team and the long-suffering Board simply had to do something about it.

I feel sorry for Smith and Bancroft because they seem to be contrite. The real villain has been Warner and I hope he does not play for Australia again. 

Also, I accept Ian Chappell's view that the behaviour of the Australian Cricket team has deteriorated dramatically under Lehmann's Boofhead , head butting coaching style. He was a bad choice because he allowed Warner to believe he was invincible.

We should also keep in mind, that Warner's batting average since the whitewash of the Poms is 24.38. In other words, he's forgotten his bat needs to do the talking, not his contemptible foul mouth