Cricket - OzChess

**MOZ** · 07-01-2010, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by JaK in the shoutbox

India should be given a more active role in international leadership of the sport. They have the largest market, inexhaustible talent and profound administrational experience... Watch BCCI's way of dealing with media and other complicated matters! They are 100 years ahead! the rest of the world look amateurs in comparison!

I only know what I read in the papers; but this is an interesting topic you raise JaK.

My understanding is that the role is rotational and the next belonged to AUS./N.Z. nominee.
So your India comment may be wide of the mark? Or were you arguing for a break in the rotational policy?

Aus./N.Z. will now have to bite the bullet and

retract JH's nomination, and
probably put fwd the N.Z. nomination instead.

Which means JH misses why...?

lacks cricket experience
lacks admistrational (sic) experience
spoke against Robert Mugabe
would fight corruption in cricket.

I think Eddie would lock in the last.

**JaK** · 07-01-2010, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by MOZ

I only know what I read in the papers; but this is an interesting topic you raise JaK.

My understanding is that the role is rotational and the next belonged to AUS./N.Z. nominee.
So your India comment may be wide of the mark? Or were you arguing for a break in the rotational policy?

I don't believe in rotation and symbolic representation. We are talking about the need of a dynamic style of leadership here!

Originally Posted by MOZ

Aus./N.Z. will now have to bite the bullet and
retract JH's nomination, and

probably put fwd the N.Z. nomination instead.

No, JH will continue with his nomination! He will not withdraw!

Originally Posted by MOZ

Which means JH misses why...?
lacks cricket experience

lacks admistrational (sic) experience

spoke against Robert Mugabe

would fight corruption in cricket.

I think Eddie would lock in the last.

Although his presence there would be widely symbolic, he 'd push ahead conservative ideas in accordance to the interests of the existing Anglo/Aus/NZ bloc. We need a democratic leadership here.

African / Asian nations might rightly or wrongly have different attitudes toward Mugabe than the Anglo / Aus / NZ bloc.

Quoting typo mistakes (such as "admistrational" instead of the correct administrational) made in the SB due to lack of time to re-read and correct won't get you places. At least I acknowledge my mistakes unlike your "thredonic" attempts to exhibit some sophistication.

I am not really impressed by your cricket knowledge as exhibited in other threads. Don't engage if you are not sure what you are talking about!

Please, don't proceed into being more open about naming certain personalities involved in whatever you interpret as "corruption."

PS As homework, re-read my S/B comment about BCCI, do some extra search to learn one or two things about their way of approaching situations and come back with some useful observations. Being clueless is not a crime, but it's certainly not an advantage!

**MOZ** · 07-01-2010, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by JaK

I don't believe in rotation and symbolic representation. We are talking about the need of a dynamic style of leadership here!

hi JaK
Thanks for clarifying. I see you are advocating a change of policy from the rotational system. Fair enough. I don't have a view on this; but now I have opened a thread we may find some will engage.

Originally Posted by JaK

No, JH will continue with his nomination! He will not withdraw!

As we would anticipate no less than this.
Some newspapers indicate the nomination will be withdrawn and a N.Z. sub. put forward.

Originally Posted by JaK

Although his presence there would be widely symbolic, he 'd push ahead conservative ideas in accordance to the interests of the existing Anglo/Aus/NZ bloc. We need a democratic leadership here.

Can't say I would want to argue against this idea of yours.

Originally Posted by JaK

African / Asian nations might rightly or wrongly have different attitudes toward Mugabe than the Anglo / Aus / NZ bloc.

Of course.

Originally Posted by JaK

Quoting typo mistakes (such as "admistrational" instead of the correct administrational) made in the SB due to lack of time to re-read and correct won't get you places. At least I acknowledge my mistakes unlike your "thredonic" attempts to exhibit some sophistication.

I pledge guilty as alleged. I did not even notice the typo.

Originally Posted by JaK

I am not really impressed by your cricket knowledge as exhibited in other threads.

I did admit to it being limited to what I read in the journalistic Press.

Originally Posted by JaK

Don't engage if you are not sure what you are talking about!

Well, that will probably drop my post-count rate.

Originally Posted by JaK

Please, don't proceed into being more open about naming certain personalities involved in whatever you interpret as "corruption."

I was simply quoting Peter Roebuck, the journalist.

PS As homework, re-read my S/B comment about BCCI, do some extra search to learn one or two things about their way of approaching situations and come back with some useful observations.

After the earlier warning JaK I don't think I will even be walking on the grass.

Being clueless is not a crime, but it's certainly not an advantage!

Yes, Bill.

07-01-2010, 11:31 AM	#1 (permalink)
MOZ Volunteer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Ozchess is the marginalised cyber-spot where cc-Mods choose to engage with cc-banned posters. Posts: 3,541	Cricket Originally Posted by JaK in the shoutbox India should be given a more active role in international leadership of the sport. They have the largest market, inexhaustible talent and profound administrational experience... Watch BCCI's way of dealing with media and other complicated matters! They are 100 years ahead! the rest of the world look amateurs in comparison! I only know what I read in the papers; but this is an interesting topic you raise JaK. My understanding is that the role is rotational and the next belonged to AUS./N.Z. nominee. So your India comment may be wide of the mark? Or were you arguing for a break in the rotational policy? Aus./N.Z. will now have to bite the bullet and retract JH's nomination, and probably put fwd the N.Z. nomination instead. Which means JH misses why...? lacks cricket experience lacks admistrational (sic) experience spoke against Robert Mugabe would fight corruption in cricket. I think Eddie would lock in the last. __________________ FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

07-01-2010, 05:09 PM	#2 (permalink)
JaK Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 391	Originally Posted by MOZ I only know what I read in the papers; but this is an interesting topic you raise JaK. My understanding is that the role is rotational and the next belonged to AUS./N.Z. nominee. So your India comment may be wide of the mark? Or were you arguing for a break in the rotational policy? I don't believe in rotation and symbolic representation. We are talking about the need of a dynamic style of leadership here! Originally Posted by MOZ Aus./N.Z. will now have to bite the bullet and retract JH's nomination, and probably put fwd the N.Z. nomination instead. No, JH will continue with his nomination! He will not withdraw! Originally Posted by MOZ Which means JH misses why...? lacks cricket experience lacks admistrational (sic) experience spoke against Robert Mugabe would fight corruption in cricket. I think Eddie would lock in the last. Although his presence there would be widely symbolic, he 'd push ahead conservative ideas in accordance to the interests of the existing Anglo/Aus/NZ bloc. We need a democratic leadership here. African / Asian nations might rightly or wrongly have different attitudes toward Mugabe than the Anglo / Aus / NZ bloc. Quoting typo mistakes (such as "admistrational" instead of the correct administrational) made in the SB due to lack of time to re-read and correct won't get you places. At least I acknowledge my mistakes unlike your "thredonic" attempts to exhibit some sophistication. I am not really impressed by your cricket knowledge as exhibited in other threads. Don't engage if you are not sure what you are talking about! Please, don't proceed into being more open about naming certain personalities involved in whatever you interpret as "corruption." PS As homework, re-read my S/B comment about BCCI, do some extra search to learn one or two things about their way of approaching situations and come back with some useful observations. Being clueless is not a crime, but it's certainly not an advantage!

07-01-2010, 06:50 PM	#3 (permalink)
MOZ Volunteer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Ozchess is the marginalised cyber-spot where cc-Mods choose to engage with cc-banned posters. Posts: 3,541	Keep off the grass? Originally Posted by JaK I don't believe in rotation and symbolic representation. We are talking about the need of a dynamic style of leadership here! hi JaK Thanks for clarifying. I see you are advocating a change of policy from the rotational system. Fair enough. I don't have a view on this; but now I have opened a thread we may find some will engage. Originally Posted by JaK No, JH will continue with his nomination! He will not withdraw! As we would anticipate no less than this. Some newspapers indicate the nomination will be withdrawn and a N.Z. sub. put forward. Originally Posted by JaK Although his presence there would be widely symbolic, he 'd push ahead conservative ideas in accordance to the interests of the existing Anglo/Aus/NZ bloc. We need a democratic leadership here. Can't say I would want to argue against this idea of yours. Originally Posted by JaK African / Asian nations might rightly or wrongly have different attitudes toward Mugabe than the Anglo / Aus / NZ bloc. Of course. Originally Posted by JaK Quoting typo mistakes (such as "admistrational" instead of the correct administrational) made in the SB due to lack of time to re-read and correct won't get you places. At least I acknowledge my mistakes unlike your "thredonic" attempts to exhibit some sophistication. I pledge guilty as alleged. I did not even notice the typo. Originally Posted by JaK I am not really impressed by your cricket knowledge as exhibited in other threads. I did admit to it being limited to what I read in the journalistic Press. Originally Posted by JaK Don't engage if you are not sure what you are talking about! Well, that will probably drop my post-count rate. Originally Posted by JaK Please, don't proceed into being more open about naming certain personalities involved in whatever you interpret as "corruption." I was simply quoting Peter Roebuck, the journalist. PS As homework, re-read my S/B comment about BCCI, do some extra search to learn one or two things about their way of approaching situations and come back with some useful observations. After the earlier warning JaK I don't think I will even be walking on the grass. Being clueless is not a crime, but it's certainly not an advantage! Yes, Bill. __________________ FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: