SA Footy

Rik E Boy wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:So why does Cricket South Africa direct players to do this, but other South African national teams don't??

Why should any team direct their players to do it?

What happen to freedom of speech and personal choice?

You can elect do say what you want but there are consequences. You have the right to not take the knee but you aren't immune from the criticism that act will draw.

regards,

REB

That’s fine but excluding him from his employment is then denying his personal choices.

RB wrote:

Dutchy wrote:however he was clearly prevented from exercising his personal choice.

Was he? Seems to me that he did exercise his personal choice (that is, to sit out rather than take the knee).

Is taking a knee now an official part of being a cricketer and the World Cup process? Like the national anthems?

Australian & NZ chose to not to take a knee in their recent ODI series, where is the outrage for that?

Dutchy wrote:

RB wrote:

Dutchy wrote:however he was clearly prevented from exercising his personal choice.

Was he? Seems to me that he did exercise his personal choice (that is, to sit out rather than take the knee).

Is taking a knee now an official part of being a cricketer and the World Cup process? Like the national anthems?

Australian & NZ chose to not to take a knee in their recent ODI series, where is the outrage for that?

Pakistan didn't take a knee

Sent from my SM-G781B using Tapatalk

amber_fluid wrote:

Rik E Boy wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:So why does Cricket South Africa direct players to do this, but other South African national teams don't??

Why should any team direct their players to do it?

What happen to freedom of speech and personal choice?

You can elect do say what you want but there are consequences. You have the right to not take the knee but you aren't immune from the criticism that act will draw.

regards,

REB

That’s fine but excluding him from his employment is then denying his personal choices.

What?

He excluded himself from his employment by pulling out of yesterday match due to 'personal reasons' which was his personal choice.

Coz he wasn’t prepared to take a knee.
He was obviously told he had to do it which is wrong.

He should be able to choose don’t you think?

Dutchy wrote:

RB wrote:

Dutchy wrote:however he was clearly prevented from exercising his personal choice.

Was he? Seems to me that he did exercise his personal choice (that is, to sit out rather than take the knee).

Is taking a knee now an official part of being a cricketer and the World Cup process? Like the national anthems?

Australian & NZ chose to not to take a knee in their recent ODI series, where is the outrage for that?

Keep sport and politics separate

Dutchy wrote:

RB wrote:

Dutchy wrote:however he was clearly prevented from exercising his personal choice.

Was he? Seems to me that he did exercise his personal choice (that is, to sit out rather than take the knee).

Is taking a knee now an official part of being a cricketer and the World Cup process? Like the national anthems?

In the South African team, it apparently is. To be clear, I wouldn't necessarily be supportive of the Australian team introducing such a mandate. And perhaps if I were South African, I wouldn't favour the South Africans all having to do it.

The way I see it, de Kock was given a choice - take the knee if you want to play, or if you don't want to play, please yourself. He decided for personal reasons not to play. That's his choice. Presumably, he exercised his personal choice by not kneeing during the anthem (wherever he was).

I could say that it's my choice to open the batting against the Poms this summer. By not picking me, does that mean that ACB are preventing me from exercising my choice?

Dutchy wrote:Australian & NZ chose to not to take a knee in their recent ODI series, where is the outrage for that?

No outrage here. As I said, I don't have strong views either way on the knee gesture. Perhaps your argument is actually that you don't think mandating it is a good idea - in which case I'd understand your point of view. But I'm not convinced that having to abide by certain team policies to get picked denies you freedom of choice.

amber_fluid wrote:Coz he wasn’t prepared to take a knee.
He was obviously told he had to do it which is wrong.

He should be able to choose don’t you think?

Where has it been mentioned that he was told he had to do it?

I agree he should be able to choose but I thought being a senior, long term South African player he would be someone who supported his team mates of colour on a matter that has infamously been part of South African sport for a very long time.

Will be interesting to see if we hear from de Kock about the situation.

RB wrote:
In the South African team, it apparently is. To be clear, I wouldn't necessarily be supportive of the Australian team introducing such a mandate. And perhaps if I were South African, I wouldn't favour the South Africans all having to do it.

The way I see it, de Kock was given a choice - take the knee if you want to play, or if you don't want to play, please yourself. He decided for personal reasons not to play. That's his choice. Presumably, he exercised his personal choice by not kneeing during the anthem (wherever he was).

I could say that it's my choice to open the batting against the Poms this summer. By not picking me, does that mean that ACB are preventing me from exercising my choice?

Dutchy wrote:Australian & NZ chose to not to take a knee in their recent ODI series, where is the outrage for that?

No outrage here. As I said, I don't have strong views either way on the knee gesture. Perhaps your argument is actually that you don't think mandating it is a good idea - in which case I'd understand your point of view. But I'm not convinced that having to abide by certain team policies to get picked denies you freedom of choice.

Wearing the right uniform, respecting the rules of cricket, abiding by COVID bubble - all these things are required to play in the world cup, is taking a knee part of this? No. It is something that is unofficial and should be a personal choice.

Fait to say after 4 balls Scotland in a tad bit of trouble at 3/2 and thats the Australian way of saying it

Quinton de Kock has spoken and apologised-
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/sout ... ee-1285649

Australia play Sri Lanka tonight at 12.30am.

Earlier I was watching some of the highlights of England v Bangladesh and I saw English left arm quick Tymal Mills run out Bangladeshi batsman Afif Hossain. Hossain and Mahmudullah got in a terrible mix up and Mills threw the ball RIGHT handed to Buttler who took the bails off.

Turns out like Jack Leach Mills bowls left handed and throws with his right arm. It always weirds me out when I see this kind of thing happen and I had to rewind the video to make sure it was Mills who was throwing the ball.

Be chasing a big Total after this Start

Australia beat Sri Lanka by 7 wickets
Sri Lanka 6/154
Zampa 2/12
Starc 2/27
Cummins 2/34

Australia 3/155
Warner 65 (42)- That's for all his SA Footy fans haha.
Finch 37 (23)- Now has 2500 runs in 78 T20I's, the fifth most behind Kohli, Guptill, Sharma and Stirling. Finch the highest strike rate of the top five.
Smith 28* (26)

We will win this thing.

whufc wrote:We will win this thing.

We? WI or AUS?

How the hell is the MOTM worked out, there have been some baffling ones, Zampa's 2/12(4) trumps Warner's 65(42) for instance.

Nortje's 1/14(4) trumped Markham's 61*(26)

Moen Ali took the honours against the Windies with 2/17(4) While Rashid collected 4/2(2.2)

Lightning McQueen wrote:

whufc wrote:We will win this thing.

We? WI or AUS?

Yeah I have two We's

In this case Aus......world cup specialists, finally putting our best side on the park.

Lightning McQueen wrote:How the hell is the MOTM worked out, there have been some baffling ones, Zampa's 2/12(4) trumps Warner's 65(42) for instance.

They got that one right, Lankans were 40 off 4 overs, Zampa came and got out the danger man Asalanka..going at 3 an over in t20 is insane.

Armchair expert wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:How the hell is the MOTM worked out, there have been some baffling ones, Zampa's 2/12(4) trumps Warner's 65(42) for instance.

They got that one right, Lankans were 40 off 4 overs, Zampa came and got out the danger man Asalanka..going at 3 an over in t20 is insane.

Yeah, I thought it was a 50/50 (or a T20 in this case), not watching the game I wasn't going to be the most accurate judge.