Is one of the reasons you like cricket the controversy it sometimes causes?
2009-10-25 10:29:18 UTC
Let's face it, there's always some argument going on. Match fixing, ball tampering, players striking, rebel tours and tournaments, Texan billionaires, blind umpires.....
Does these controversies add to the game, and make it a better talking point?
Also, what is the most controversial question you have ever seen in the Cricket Section?
Thirteen answers:
2009-10-25 23:31:34 UTC
The biggest evidence is here in YA itself where questions on controversial topics get more replies than general cricket Qs.
Q2 - https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20081019084907AAXwply (the question itself was not much controversial but the responses and debate caused the stirring)
вєи
2009-10-25 22:04:59 UTC
No, I don't like cricket for the controversies associated with it. I'm not a sensationalist or a journalist, nor do I enjoy sensationalization by others.
Do they add to the game? I feel yes. Controversies always give rise to heated discussions, and almost everyone will be drawn into it, arguing for or against the various aspects of the controversy. Don't you think Sydney test would have been long forgotten if there were no controversies? Or think of the Bodyline series, the underarm delivery or the oval test fiasco. Why are these matches (or the incidents that took place in these matches) discussed too often even after years?
Controversies stick out like a sore thumb. Easily noticeable and and cannot be ignored. And it will flaot easily on the surface like carcass floats on the surface of water, and the reek will get unbearabale with each passing day.
Most controversial? To select one question from this section (strictly related to cricket only) is a difficult task.
?
2016-05-22 03:49:32 UTC
I honestly didn't get a chance to watch these matches concerned so might not have full insights. Sehwag had no reason to withdraw his appeal, he was within full rights. It was completely in the spirit of the game, what the batsman was trying to do was not. No need for a warning either by the bowler. If the batsman doesn't want to get out then stay in the crease. If it was clear he was running to make a run and then when saw that he might be out. Raises his hands that he has an injury then he should be given out. But there is also benefit of the doubt, he actually might have pulled something or genuine injury. If he is injured not likely he will dive its stupid. Hussey is not the kind of player from his record who would try something funny. He is a trustworthy player. Intentionally or unintentionally bowlers should not stand in the middle. Batsmen need to run to score, so they should be off the pitch immediately. I don't know what the circumstances were, but if bowler is on the pitch a rule should be made batsman shall not be given out. Bowlers should be of the pitch. Its batsman's right not the bowlers. With his hands on the hips what was he doing standing there in the first place? Umpires should admonish such bowlers regardless of who it is. I don't know about the rest of the circumstances, but it is being suggested Tendulkar didn't even bother ground his bat. And with or without Lee standing there he would've been out. This law should be clarified now IMO regardless. That if bowler intentionally or unintentionally stands on the pitch hindering the batsman. The batsman shall not be given out. I always hate that.
2009-10-25 10:39:14 UTC
Controversy sells like hot cake. It's a proven fact now. Be it television shows or movie promotions, if you want to grab eye balls you have to bring in controversy.
Of course I don't think any cricketer tries to do something controversial on purpose.
But the fans enjoy it, whether it's a sacking of the umpire or a war of words between two legend of the game or any other thing.
Oh yea!....to add more I would like to say that controversy keeps this section alive as well.
Be it targeting a user or targeting a country, it does grab eye balls.
The questions which are purely based on cricket get ignored and the questions based on users get a lot of attention.
There have been a lot of controversial questions asked in this section, some are so controversial that I can't even mention them.
rr
2009-10-25 10:36:42 UTC
yh thats part of the parcel i guess, if everything was like say the umpires being replaced by "electronic" shall we say umpires the game would be boring, but when umpires like that steve bucknor i think it was in the aus vs ind tour make shocking decisions u know they need the axe but yh it does make it more "entertaining" but theres controvesy in every sport,
most controversial question "should murali be allowed to throww the ball ?"
?
2009-10-26 13:19:38 UTC
Yes
arsalan_kashi
2009-10-25 12:02:34 UTC
Controversial Q: About Gilchrist, regarding use of squash ball.
I think all these kind of controversies are part of all games.. i dont like controversies at all.
2009-10-25 14:35:46 UTC
I don't like controversies. Why can people just accept facts.
bob
2009-10-25 14:13:55 UTC
Yes but I also like the game itself. It's interesting.
2009-10-25 11:28:44 UTC
sometimes, like bodyline,comments of people(including Prime ministers) on someone's bowling action,Texan billionaires posing with wags,..
Funny that you should point your "crooked" finger our (Aussie) way considering Pakistan has been involved in about 3 million controversies...what a loser.
2009-10-25 13:26:39 UTC
Without those controversies it would be just another sport IMO.
Most controversial Q ? I just saw one a minute ago asking if it was true Australia cheated in last nights match,lol.Was this kid looking at another match?