[quote author=Goog Lee Reid link=topic=89518.msg562797#msg562797 date=1399645229]
but more importantly he did not pull away from McGrath when he was bowling but peppered him to the boundary!!
Partnering with Shiv to chase down the largest total in a 4th test inning.
[/quote]
Yes , indeed !
It is obvious that neither Mapoui nor ramesh saw Pollard silly action LIVE !
well..Starc is the one who is violent, initiatory. Pollard is moving away so he should have stopped, not delivered the ball. but he ran in and bowled the ball at Pollard looking to hit him
[/quote]
You should be locked up for Lying ...
It is evident that you are giving EVIDENCE without being there >
if allyuh did not know it before that is violence..incessant, natural white violence that once used to find and still finds full expression in mass murder of people of colour..Indians too.. and aggression on the cricket field allyuh always try explain away as competitiveness.
[/quote]
You need a Vacation ....head to TnT and enjoy some Sun and Rum..... :-[
you shud be so when you are wrong..not that I am in this anyway.
regardless of what went on in the past it is not up to Starc to punish Pollard if he has been pulling away..by bowling the ball at him.
no matter what the current issue could be legit..as in fact all of them. there may be no punishable reason in there are all. it si up to the IPL /ICC to look into that by asking the wicb to check out Pollard on the issue and report back. it is not up to Starc to take it into his own hands.
Googly is justifying lawlessness..trying to. when a batsman withdraws regardless..keep the ball out of harms way
Quote:stewwwpppsss...What happened the previous Bouncer to Polly head ??
lemme see IF u were there ....
that is not the point!. you will have to wait for that..until an appropriate and relevant moment occurs.
the point is the disparity in the punishment and the reported talk by Shastri talking about Polard's violence and not Starc's..while punishing them disproportionately
dam ridiculous
A bouncer bowled and words passed, uncalled for, Pollard responded in kind, uncalled for.
Matter over.
Pollard had no reason to pull away so late as there was no legitimate excuse. Starc walked away. Pollard was seen to be the aggressor because of his subsequent behaviour. It can be argued that Starc could not pull out.
My argument is based on the above and not the hue of the people concerned.
Pollard has opened himself for verbals as he dishes it out completely. So he has to take it. How many times do you see Pollard taunting the opposition?
Pollard is the one who demonstrated a clear will to hurt Starc by chucking his bat and following it up with verbals.
If we are to go by your childish rule of he started it, not only cricket but, the world would be in constant war.
Both men culpable but even if we accept Pollard was provoked in some way, in the end the measure of blame hiss fallen Pollard' sway because of his actions.
