Loud Thinking

Archive for 2013

Ball tampering by the two Proteas players and the role of the on field ICC elite umpires

The question before everyone particularly the ICC and the match referee David Boon is that
whether the umpires changed the ball and granted 5 penalty runs to the Pakistani team, under the latest ICC Test match playing conditions coming into effect from 1st October, 2013 rule 42.1.1 or 42.1.2 ?

If rule 42.1.1 was applied, then why the umpires did not allow the batsman at the wicket to choose the ball as per clearly specified law which stipulates as below:
a) change the ball forthwith. The batsman at the wicket shall choose the replacement ball from a selection of six other balls of various degrees of usage (including a new ball) and of the same brand as the ball in use prior to the contravention.

However, if the rule 42.1.2 was applied quoted as below:

42.1.2 If it is not possible to do identify the player(s) responsible:
a) change the ball forthwith. The umpires shall choose the replacement ball for one of similar wear and of the same brand as the ball in use prior to the contravention.
b) the bowler’s end umpire shall issue the captain with a first and final warning, and
c) advise him that should there be any further incident by that team during the remainder of the match, steps 42.1.1 a) to e) above will be adopted, with the captain deemed under e) to be the player responsible.

Why did the bowler’s end umpire, NOT issue first and final warning as per 42.1.2 (b) to GC Smith? And if the warning was issued to the SA Captain, then why after the match AB de Villiers said the following on record, as reported by ESPNcricinfo, quoted as below:

Quote “De Villiers said there was uncertainty as to what they were being penalised for: “I don’t even know where the message came from. There were no warnings, no talk of it. I still don’t know the facts.” Unquote

As such, all the above mentioned facts must be cleared by the ICC and the match referee. It should also be explained that whether De Villiers was speaking a white lie, or did the elite ICC umpires, miserably failed in performance of their duties, as per law; and gave undue benefits and advantages to the South African team, at the expense of the Pakistani team?

“Live your truth. Express your love. Share your enthusiasm. Take action towards your dreams. Walk your talk. Dance and sing to your music. Embrace your blessings. Make today worth remembering.”

— Steve Maraboli

Preparation is the process of making ready for use.

“There are no secrets to success. It is the result of preparation, hard work, and learning from failure.”

Colin Powell (born 1937);
65th U.S. Secretary of State

• Persist no matter what.
• Endure discomfort.
• Request help.
• Steadfastly hold on to your beliefs and values.
• Envision triumph.
• Very consistently keep at it.
• Embrace adversity as your teacher.
• Refuse to give up.
• Enjoy and celebrate every tiny bit of progress!

Driving the Road to Success in a Pink Cadillac

The Best Way Out is Always Through

by BJ Gallagher

Mary Kay Ash banged her head on the corporate glass ceiling one too many times. Working for several direct sales companies from the 1930s until the early 1960s, she achieved considerable success. She climbed the corporate ladder to become the sole woman on the board of directors of the World Gift Company—quite an accomplishment for a woman in the 1950s.
But life wasn’t rosy at the top. Even though Mary Kay had the title and the track record, she was not taken seriously by her male peers. In board meetings, her opinions and suggestions were ignored, dismissed, or even ridiculed. Male board members minced no words in their judgment, pronouncing her guilty of “thinking like a woman.”

Since the sales force was almost entirely female, Mary Kay thought that thinking like a woman was an asset. But her fellow board members disagreed. Finally, in frustration, she retired in 1963, intending to write a book to assist women in the male-dominated business.

Sitting at her kitchen table, she made two lists: one list was all the good things she had seen in the companies where she’d worked, and the other list was all the things she thought could be improved. As she re-read her lists, she realized that what she had in front of her was a marketing plan for her ideal company. In just four weeks, her “book” had become a business plan, and her retirement was over.

Both her accountant and her attorney did their best to discourage her, warning that she would be throwing her money away on this venture. But Mary Kay had heard enough male nay-saying in her corporate years—she ignored her advisors.

Her husband, unlike her accountant and attorney, was very supportive. With his help, Mary Kay developed cosmetic products, designed packaging, wrote promotional materials and recruited and trained her female sales force.
Then the unthinkable happened; her husband of twenty-one years died of a heart attack. Another woman might have dropped her plans, or at least delayed them, but Mary Kay was a strong Texas woman. She stayed on track with the help of her twenty-year-old son, Richard Rogers, and rolled out her new business in September of 1963.

Beginning with a storefront in Dallas and an investment of $5,000, Mary Kay Cosmetics earned close to $200,000 in its first year—quadrupling that amount in its second year. When Mary Kay took her company public in 1968, sales had climbed to more than $10 million.
Mary Kay’s unusual corporate motto, “God first, family second, career third,” was unconventional, to say the least. But she understood the need for women to have balance in their lives, and she was committed to providing unlimited opportunity for women’s financial AND personal success.

Mary Kay authored three books, all of which became best-sellers. Her business model is taught at the Harvard Business School. She received many honors, including the Horatio Alger Award. Fortune magazine has named Mary Kay Cosmetics as one of the Ten Best Companies for Women, as well as one of The 100 Best Companies to Work for in America.

At the time of her death in 2001, Mary Kay Cosmetics had 800,000 independent beauty consultants in 37 countries, with total annual sales of over two billion dollars. Never underestimate the power of a woman with a mission!

No doubt ZA Bhutto was a statesman

Indira Gandhi ordered a gold hunt in 1976; Pak sought share

A TOI news published today.

NEW DELHI: The last time an Indian government, led by the redoubtable Indira Gandhi, went looking for hidden gold among private property, Pakistan also jumped on to the bandwagon.

In 1976, at the height of the Emergency, Indira ordered the Indian Army to march off to look for hidden treasure in Jaigarh fort, which was still a property of the Jaipur royal family. Legend had it that Man Singh had stashed away huge amounts of treasure from some of his campaigns. That legend persisted after India’s independence. With Gayatri Devi imprisoned during Emergency, Indira thought it fit to search Jaipur royal properties for the treasure.

The correspondence finds space in an invaluable work of history, India-Pakistan Relations (1947-2007), edited by Avtar Singh Bhasin, released earlier this year and is mandatory reading for any student of history.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, then prime minister of Pakistan, heard about the treasure hunt and decided Pakistan should not be denied its share. In a letter to Indira on August 11, 1976, Bhutto said, “As your expedition of locating the treasure proceeds, I would urge you to remain cognizant of Pakistan’s claim to its due share of this wealth. This is an asset which was not known at the time of partition between the two successor states (then called dominions) of India and Pakistan.

“However, the order that was enforced with the agreement of both governments did not fail to provide that any property or benefits can be shared between them where such sharing is just and equitable. The historical provenance of this treasure, regardless of the location of its physical discovery, makes it the joint patrimony of our two countries and I am confident that, with an approach based on equity, we will dis-countenance any usurpation and amicably arrive at a formula for the division between us.”

Indira did not dignify Bhutto’s claim with a response until December of that year. By then, the Army division sent to unearth the treasure returned empty-handed after three months of fruitless search. Responding to Bhutto on December 31, 1976, Indira said, “I had asked our legal experts to give careful consideration to the claim you made on behalf of Pakistan. They are of the clear opinion that the claim has no legal basis. Incidentally, the treasure has turned out to be non-existent.”

Bhutto complimented Indira on abolishing the old royalty, saying, “Both our countries have taken the same view of the rights of the princely order and, with complete justification, abolished it as an appendage or association of the colonial regime. I am certain that no one can maintain the argument that your government’s action involves confiscation of the private property of any individual or dynasty.”

The Pakistani PM justified asking for a share of the riches. “It is clear that the treasure is a historical inheritance of the subcontinent which was bequeathed to it by its pre-colonial sovereignties, especially the Mughal emperors in coalition with their Rajput allies. That, before or during the anarchy which ravaged the subcontinent and invited foreign domination, these assets were misappropriated and hoarded by a particular warlord has no bearing whatsoever on their legal or moral ownership.” Indira, however, would have none of it.

Behind every great fortune there is a crime.
—Balzac
Author of “The God Father”.

“Life can be difficult sometimes, it gets bumpy. What with family and kids and things not going exactly like you planned. But that’s what makes it interesting. In life the first act is always exciting. The second act, that is where the depth comes in.”

— Joyce Van Patten

Gratitude is being thankful.