snub (sn
b)
tr.v. snubbed, snub·bing, snubs
1. To ignore or behave coldly toward; slight.
2. To dismiss, turn down, or frustrate the expectations of.
3. Nautical
a. To check the movement of (a rope or cable running out) by turning it quickly about a post or cleat.
b. To secure (a vessel, for example) in this manner.
4. To stub out (a cigarette, for example).
n.
1. A deliberate slight or affront.
2. Nautical A sudden checking, as of a rope or cable running out.
adj.
Unusually short: a snub nose.
[Middle English snubben, to rebuke; akin to Old Norse snubba.]
snub
ber n.
ber n.The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
snub
Verb
[snubbing, snubbed]
to insult (someone) deliberately
Noun
a deliberately insulting act or remark
Adjective
(of a nose) short and turned up [Old Norse snubba to scold]
Sky TV has snubbed the Board of Control for Cricket in India by retaining former international Craig McMillan in their commentary team for tomorrow's second test at McLean Park, Napier.
Now, as I understand it, there has not been any official ( or unofficial) request by the BCCI or Sony to stand Craig McMillan down.
The only view expressed in this specific matter is an open ended remark by Ravi Shastri ( the context to which is unknown). Yes, Niranjan Shah did express his opinion, but it was the standard by the rote statements the BCCI regularly doles out on all matters ICL.
Which then begs the question - who snubbed whom and when?
Sky TV has snubbed the Board of Control for Cricket in India by retaining former international Craig McMillan in their commentary team for tomorrow's second test at McLean Park, Napier.
Now, as I understand it, there has not been any official ( or unofficial) request by the BCCI or Sony to stand Craig McMillan down.
The only view expressed in this specific matter is an open ended remark by Ravi Shastri ( the context to which is unknown). Yes, Niranjan Shah did express his opinion, but it was the standard by the rote statements the BCCI regularly doles out on all matters ICL.
Which then begs the question - who snubbed whom and when?
16 comments:
more like snob than snub.
not as if mcmillan's gonna be playing book cricket in the box
Now, as I understand it, there has not been any official ( or unofficial) request by the BCCI or Sony to stand Craig McMillan down.
Actually, the BCCI did ask NZC to stand McMillan down, as detailed here.
I don't see what they were expecting though as NZC should have no influence over Sky TV.
lol NC :)
Cheers,
Ben,
The video link does not open.
And if the link is the Niranjan Shah interview, I have seen and re-seen it. And every time I see it, I am more convinced that Shah is doing nothing other than repeating the party line - that the BCCI will have no truck with the ICL.
Sony never came back to Sky with any adverse comments on the commentator list, the BCCI did not throw a hissy fit, the INdian team is playing the Test match as we speak - so where is the question of the snub anyways?
It was a non story - Niranjan Shah gave it a new life, there was no follow up from the NZ press from that point on till the start of the second test, it was a dead issue.
Then, out of the blue, it becomes all about a snub!
Cheers,
True, it is not much of a story. Though if we are to believe what Shah said, the BCCI did want NZC to get McMillan dropped. He wasn't dropped, BCCI didn't get their way. ('Snub' might not be the most accurate term to use, but that's newspapers for you.) It is all ultimately worth reporting.
The match is looking good at the moment: shades of a collapse, then a strong recovery...
Ben,
The game is set for a draw.. I dont see this wicket deteriorating anytime soon and I dont see a collapse either.
A wicket for batsmen to fill their boots.
Which may not be such a bad thing :)
As regards the story, it was worth reporting, sure, but I am not sure of the hysteria that accompanied it.
Cheers,
The game is set for a draw..
That's a bold claim half way through the first day :). Matches in NZ don't typically go for draws unless the weather intervenes.
The pitch will wear and start to take spin before the end of day 5 and in the meantime the new ball will remain a danger. I'm not going to make a prediction myself, though I will say that there is a lot of play still to come.
Ben,
351/4 at the end of Day 1 after being 23/3 and a run rate of 3.9.
Even if the wicket deteriorates, it wont become a raging turner on day 5 and given how even the bounce was on Day 1, I cant see the bounce going up and down on Day 5.
No cracks on the wicket, fast outfield and the best batting days yet to come.
NZ already have a big score and will push for a bigger score.
And then there is the little matter of taking 20 Indian wickets.
So, time becomes a factor.
Also, there is history. In the last 5 years, Napier has hosted 4 tests, 3 of which have been draws. And high scoring draws at that
2005 - NZ 561 and 238 SL 498 and 7/0
2006 - WI 256/4
2008 - England 253 and 467/7 NZ 168 and 431
2008 - WI 307 and 375 NZ 371 and 220/5
351/4 is par for course although it could have been a lot better for India if we had held on to our catches
Cheers,
Homer, hubris man hubris. Remember what happened short of length - yes, they became punters biggest fan blog.
Do you, like, want to become Bucknor's official fan-site?
(let's say, are you willing to do what S-of-L did and promise me that you will change your blog name for a month if India lost this test? :-)
Also, there is history. In the last 5 years, Napier has hosted 4 tests, 3 of which have been draws.
But rain was a factor in two of those draws. (There were only two days play in the 2006 test.)
351/4 is par for course although it could have been a lot better for India if we had held on to our catches
I don't think 4 wickets is par. I think NZ did well to hold onto wickets, just as the Indian catching and positioning of their slips was poor. Expect more wickets to fall in the coming days.
Raj,
India could very well lose this game, but it will take a brain fade of monumental proportions for that to happen.
Taking 20 wickets is going to be hard work on this wicket, no matter what.
"let's say, are you willing to do what S-of-L did and promise me that you will change your blog name for a month if India lost this test? :-)" - they bet on the series, not one test. And just for kicks, lets assume I agree.. What happens if India does not lose.. What is the quid pro quo?
Cheers,
Ben,
36 in the next 4 days? 26 in the next 4?
3 wickets a session - thats a stretch. 2 wickets and a bit per session + a follow on + more brain fade by India - unlikely too.
Cheers,
Well, the least I can do as quid pro quo is promise that I will actually start a blog and name it what you want it to be named :-). Deal?
Raj,
lol :).. I will pass :)
Cheers,
Just as well you passed it - india losing in napier cricket test match is a sure event now - by tommorrow or at worst day after the formalities will be completed and the series will be tied 1-1
raj,
We shall have this discussion when the match is completed :)
Cheers,
Post a Comment