English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

18 answers

Don't forget that they are cleared by a jury of three judges and they won their appeal on grounds that they were not provided information on banned substances. They never said they did not take those steroids. In my opinion the decision is a fair one because PCB has admitted that they don't have any list of banned drugs. On the other hand I would also say that it should not be taken as a precedense in the future cases and every cricket board should provide its player the complete list of those banned items.

2006-12-22 07:05:24 · answer #1 · answered by dua 4 · 0 2

I think it is unfair. This was just some show put on by PCB. Obviously Pakistan wanted Shoaib and Asif badly for the world cup. They had to free them. PCB did it just to show the ICC and International Media that it is very strict and professional organization. If they have taken drugs and when it got proved by WADA, the matter ends. They should be kept off the game. It should have happened in every part of the world. If an Indian cricketer would have done it, I would have said the same thing. Shane Warne took steroid accidentally and still was kept out of game for 1 year and that decision was also taken just before the world cup. ACB was strict in following the rules while PCB is just putting up a show here. Everyone know how much internal politics is going on in PCB and in the Pakistan Cricekt Team. Same Internal Politics is destroying Indian Team. BCCI is the same thing, just full of Internal politics. Anyways, lets see what happens now as WADA has already re-appealed for the case.

2006-12-22 18:46:45 · answer #2 · answered by parth m 2 · 0 0

precise, the Aussies as is their wont will play now no longer shopper-friendly, it rather is rather no longer open to chat! some game fanatics play could prefer to besides the shown fact that determination the participating in taking area in enjoying cards or the photos like Clarke, Chris Rogers (ask your self), Faulkner, Haddin, Pattinson, Siddle, Lyon & Doherty. at circumstances England would desire to be very liable to the colourful Aussie element yet it rather is it, I project lots bearing directly to the Aussie batting, a ability for an prolonged time now. The bowling grew to regulate into continually promising, a efficient crop of at as quickly as bowlers being obtainable like Jackson poultry, Hastings, Kane Richardson all with some good %. & bypass. in spite of the indisputable fact that, the promising batters have not come by, Khwaja now no longer in %, Cowan promising yet now no longer thoroughly good, Warner in ordinary words usual for pulling the rabbit out of the hat & Maxwell untested at this element. Yea, England extremely are the outright favorites, its in ordinary words a count extensive form variety of time no count extensive form form if the Aussies capitulate indoors the 1st attempt or now no longer! which will furnish shivers down their necks & in the event that they're down 3-0, then the Ashes urn comes lower back to old blighty

2016-12-18 17:47:16 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Is very much fair. U see they used medicines to be fit early so that to get early in the squad for there country. They didnot know that medicines was refused by ICC to use. There intention was not to take pleasures from that medicine. Also they are talented players and can perform good for there country. Thats the reason they should given the chance.

2006-12-22 07:00:44 · answer #4 · answered by leo 6 · 0 0

It is totally unfair as it has set up a bad precedent. Being the governing body of Cricket, the matter should have been left to ICC to take a decision in the matter in order to have uniform policy in such matters.

2006-12-22 15:13:05 · answer #5 · answered by vakayil k 7 · 0 0

UNFAIR when aussie shane warne got busted for taking pain killers he didnt get let off now did he shoaib and asif getting let off is a load of crap and there is gonna be a lot of rage here in australia i can tell u that

2006-12-22 17:22:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

FAIR
http://justupit.com/video/view.php?video=9dc5e877ca5c24c7ff8325f6e8e7c537

2006-12-22 09:35:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Neither - it should have been dealt with by the ICC board instead of by the PCB - they're obviously going to be biased

2006-12-22 09:00:46 · answer #8 · answered by cric_tatz 2 · 0 0

of course fair ..cmon u cant let a person who takes drug on play international level .

2006-12-22 09:29:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Is this that boring game....chucking a red ball at some geezer all padded up and knocking over some sticks or things!

If so....I don't care.

2006-12-22 06:02:33 · answer #10 · answered by jamand 7 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers