155.6

[Willow]

Bronco: "I seriously doubt this conversation would have taken place if say it was South Africa that were screwed over."
I think I can help with the directions here...
Go down the main street, take the next two wrong turns and then take the right. You can't miss it.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[imported_JoeD]

I've looked up the Lords web site and found the laws of cricket however there is no mention of match fixing, does anyone know where I can find the rules pertaining this aspect of the game? Or if it is in the main laws and I've missed it which section it is in?

 

[El Duque]

bronco, Australia needed the bonus point to get into the finals after the disgraceful Fleming tactics.

South Africa didn't need any points which is what they got.

 

[El Duque]

Joe, check the ICC site out for the rules.

This article also points out what rules he broke http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sports/sportsstorydisplay.cfm?storyID=888236&thesection=sport&thesubsection=cricket&thesecondsubsection=blackcaps

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[El Duque]

I have never hear Pollock admit to throwing the match.

Fleming admitted conceding the bonus point thus throwing the match. That's self confessed cheating IMO and he should go.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[El Duque]

I'd think he was but wouldn't have the proof, but that's not the way it is. He 'fessed up and should be goooooooorn.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[El Duque]

No, it's not obvious.

South Africa had nothing to gain by losing and I never saw them start blocking the ball and trying not to score like N.Z. did.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[El Duque]

You are beingpresumptuousas you have no confession from Pollock.

 

[Willow]

Bronco:
You seem to believe that the omission of Sth Africa from the discussion is in someway a justification for Fleming's actions.

Also you seem to forgotten that this started with the notion that Steve Waugh engineered a win and this was not much different from Fleming engineering a loss.... the debate developed from there.

The reason why Sth Africa were not mentioned was because they were part of the discussion. Unless I've missed something, there are no South African's here, are there? I wish there were so we could hear their point of view.

But now that you have brought it up, regardless of our opinion on Fleming, it still doesnt change a thing about his tactics.

 

[Willow]

"Sth Africa were not mentioned was because they were part of the discussion.."
should have read:
"Sth Africa were not mentioned was because they not were part of the discussion.."

 

[El Duque]

Maybe 3rd time lucky, Willow.

 

[Willow]

I'm having a bad day for typos mate...lol. But you know what I mean.
2 wongs dont make a write.

 

[imported_JoeD]

"The code of conduct also recommends a life ban for any player (or presumably official) who induces or encourages any other player not to perform on his merits." This is an extract for the article El was talking about regarding Fleming and his tactics last year. Text in brackets is mine. Tell me how Waugh, or australian management, doesn't fall under the same category.

 

[Willow]

Show us an incident where Steve Waugh has told his players to lose a match.

 

[imported_JoeD]

Whats losing got to do with it? It has already been agreed that the aussies batted slowly in the game against the WI. For this to occur members of the team would have to be encouraged not to perform to the best of their ability.Those who do the encouraging are supposed to be banned for life.