• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Man Of The Tournament - Wc 2003

Status
Not open for further replies.

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
You're getting confused here.

If you're looking for the best performer then you want the player of the Tournament.

Man of the Tournament has to go to the biggest man, and Olonga wins that hands down for his stance.

Player of the Tournament would probably be someone like Tendulkar because Aus have had a team effort.
I disagree, Marc.

1. Legglancer started this thread for our opinions on the "Man of the Tournament" as to who is the best performer in the tournament. Go back and check the first post in this thread if you want.

2. Does "Man of the Match" usually go to the biggest "man" in the match or the best performer? Does "Man of the Series" go to the biggest "man" in the series or the best performer in the series? Why should "Man of the Tournament" be any different? Neil interpreted it differently and I explained in my previous posts why his interpretation is inappropriate.

Once again, if Olonga is regarded as a hero in Zimbabwe because of his stance and actions, that is appropriate. If he is regarded as the "Man of Zimbabwe", it is appropriate. If he is regarded as the "Man of the Tournament", in a tournament where he played very little part, just because he chose to make a political statement on a cricket field, it is totally inappropriate.
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Anil, why should it? Henry Olonga has sacrificed his career for his country, he deserves an award. Why such a stance?
 
Last edited:

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
anilramavarma said:
Once again, if Olonga is regarded as a hero in Zimbabwe because of his stance and actions, that is appropriate. If he is regarded as the "Man of Zimbabwe", it is appropriate. If he is regarded as the "Man of the Tournament", in a tournament where he played very little part, just because he chose to make a political statement on a cricket field, it is totally inappropriate.
I disagree here.

There is much more to this Tournament than just Cricket, and Olonga has been a bigger man than anyone can comprehend.
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Rik said:
Anil, why should it? Henry Olonga has sacrificed his career for his country, he deserves an award. Why such a stance?
For God's sake, guys, where did I ever say that Olonga and Flower doesn't deserve praise and awards for what they did? I repeatedly said they are heroes of Zimbabwe and should be regarded and respected as such. My only objection was to the statement that Henry Olonga is the "Man of the 2003 World Cup". He most definitely is not. That is an insult to the Tendulkars, the Bevans, the Vaas and the Bichels of this WC.
 
Last edited:

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
I disagree here.

There is much more to this Tournament than just Cricket, and Olonga has been a bigger man than anyone can comprehend.
It's true that this tournament has been a controversial one for both cricketing and non-cricketing reasons. There has been a lot of politics which has affected play. However, this still remains the premier cricket tournament and the games played and the results achieved are all about cricket, not politics, mate. As I told Rik, Olonga has shown himself to be a big man, probably the biggest man in Zimbabwe and let's honor him as such. As far as the WC is concerned, let's honor the best player in the tournament as the "Man of the Tournament". I am sure whoever he is, deserves the award for his exploits on the field thoroughly.
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
anilramavarma said:
For God's sake, guys, where did I ever say that Olonga and Flower doesn't deserve praise and awards for what they did? I repeatedly said they are heroes of Zimbabwe and should be regarded and respected as such. My only objection was to the statement that Henry Olonga is the "Man of the 2003 World Cup". He most definitely is not. That is an insult to the Tendulkars, the Bevans, the Vaas and the Bichels of this WC.
No it's proof that life is more important than just a game of cricket. Tendulkar has belted the ball around, but has he done anything else? Like standing against a facist dictator? No? Didn't think so.
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Rik said:
No it's proof that life is more important than just a game of cricket. Tendulkar has belted the ball around, but has he done anything else? Like standing against a facist dictator? No? Didn't think so.
Whoever said that life is not more important than cricket? Of course, it is way more important even to cricketers, forget people like us. However, this tournament is definitely all about that tiny part of a cricketer's life and even tinier part of us fan's lives, ie cricket.

Does Tendulkar live under the shadow of a dictator? No, he lives in a democracy. The human rights problems which are right now encountered in Zimbabwe are not present in India. Olonga has lived all his life under Mugabe's dictatorship, but has his voice of dissent been heard till now? So, that comparison is unfair to the other cricketers because they just haven't faced such a situation. How can you or anyone predict how Tendulkar or any other cricketer for that matter will react if faced with a similar crisis? Probably, even they don't know. Quite probably, even Olonga didn't know. The full mettle of a man has to be tested first, to be understood, agreed?
 
Last edited:

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
I shouldn't have bothered with that post, should I?

Right, it's obvious that Henry (and Andy) are the men of the Tournament, so now let's keep this to the best player as we're going nowhere!

Aside: I can't believe Rik and Marc agree on something!
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Originally posted by Neil Pickup Aside: I can't believe Rik and Marc agree on something! [/B]
It's happened before...why not now? :)

Hey...sometimes I even agree with you ;)
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Neil Pickup said:
Right, it's obvious that Henry (and Andy) are the men of the Tournament, so now let's keep this to the best player as we're going nowhere!
That(the best player) should have been the focus from the beginning.
 

aussie_beater

State Vice-Captain
Who do we call a "man of the match" ? The player who performs the best in that match or someone who shows the admirable courage to make a statement in that match about some extraneous political issues surrounding that match ??

Going by that same logic who would we call a "man of the tournament".... the player who does best in that tournament or the person who bravely demonstrates his views on a political issue surrounding that tournament ?

Come on guys.......we are talking cricket when we are talking about "man of the tournament" and that's implied and obvious.

So Olonga gets the "Zimbabwe people's award" or "all-freedom-loving-cricket-fans" award for his brave stance but never the "man of the tournament" for a cricket world cup in which he didn't do much.
 
Last edited:

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
aussie_beater said:
Who do we call a "man of the match" ? The player who performs the best in that match or someone who shows the admirable courage to make a statement in that match about some extraneous political issues surrounding that match ??

Going by that same logic who would we call a "man of the tournament".... the player who does best in that tournament or the person who bravely demonstrates his views on a political issue surrounding that tournament ?

Come on guys.......we are talking cricket when we are talking about "man of the tournament" and that's implied and obvious.

So Olonga gets the "Zimbabwe people's award" or "all-freedom-loving-cricket-fans" award for his brave stance but never the "man of the tournament" for a cricket world cup in which he didn't do much.
a_b, I have been at pains to explain this point as clearly and succinctly as I can, but Marc, Neil and Rik just refuse to take it up. They come up with statements like Olonga is a much bigger "man", life is more important than cricket, Tendulkar has never fought against a dictator....etc...etc....:rolleyes:
 

aussie_beater

State Vice-Captain
Yes life is more important then cricket.... no doubt about that, but the context here is cricket and not Zimbabwe's political history.So when a "man of the tournament" is judged for a cricket world cup, its the cricketing achievements that are looked at and not make a moral judgement on the political leanings of certain people playing in the torunament.That's not what ICC or the organizers of this world cup have set out to do.
 

krkode

State Captain
Anil, sure Tendulkar hasn't fought against a dictator or anything like that, but there are different awards for those kinds of things.

Man of the Series is an award given to the best player of the series, the one who's performance most impacted his team's great results.

Olonga did what he did because he was in the situation and given the situation, he loved his country more than he loved to play cricket.

As I said before, Olonga is a great man, but there are greater players.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
I have been at pains to explain this point as clearly and succinctly as I can, but Marc, Neil and Rik just refuse to take it up.
Anil, I have made four posts in this topic:
  1. It has to be Sachin...
  2. Henry Olonga
  3. No, we just made it up...
  4. Let's stop this pointless argument...
    [/list=1]

    The Henry Olonga post was a half-serious sideways look at the whole thing, but it got blown out of all proportion into a pointless argument in which both sides said the same thing in different ways!
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
Killer Harbhajan. He's the only player to knock a tooth out.

And before anyone picks me up on it, I'm deadly serious (but not as deadly as 'The Dentist'):P
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Neil Pickup said:
Anil, I have made four posts in this topic:
  1. It has to be Sachin...
  2. Henry Olonga
  3. No, we just made it up...
  4. Let's stop this pointless argument...
    [/list=1]

    The Henry Olonga post was a half-serious sideways look at the whole thing, but it got blown out of all proportion into a pointless argument in which both sides said the same thing in different ways!


  1. I know..I know. However, "your half-serious sideways look" was then supported and promoted by Marc and Rik which prompted my counter-arguments. Both sides didn't exactly say the same thing. There were significant differences in outlook. I just got frustrated because what they were bringing up as arguments was not what I was arguing against and when I tried to explain that, it just didn't seem to get through. I guess you are right, though, it's a pointless argument, basically two ways of looking at the issue. I am pretty sure that my view is logical, makes sense, but then, maybe so are you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top