Talk:Hansie Cronje

Question

"A devout Christian, it came as a great shock to the cricketing community of South Africa when, in April 2000, he confessed to being involved with the largest match fixing scandal in the game of cricket..." This puts forward an idealised notion of Christian behavior and, as such, is POV. I'd remove the first three words. What do others think? Yankoz

Conspiracy

Wasn't it very convenient (for the bookkeepers) that he died in such a particular way?? Any clarifications as to how he missed the flight in the first place?

Forfeiture

Cronje is not the only captain to forfeit an innings. In that very Test match, England's Nasser Hussain also forfeited England's first innings while Cronje forfeited SA's second. The captains mutually agreed to do so to revive interest in that Test match after rain interrupted play after SA's first innings and relented only on the final day. England went on to win the match in the dying overs, thanks mainly to their present captain Michael Vaughan, who made his debut on that tour to SA.

Not true. In those days the laws did not permit a captain to forfeit his first innings. Therefore Nasser Hussain declared the England innings at 0 for 0 off 0.0 overs. Cronje then became the first and only captain to date to forfeit a Test innings. The laws have since changed so that a captain may forfeit the first innings. Kind regards, jguk 12:46, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

The gifts Cronje received from the Bookkeepers weren't for match-fixing. Those were only 'gifts' to make him soft. The one match-fixing incident was supposed to be during a 'fund raising friendly' in India, which the team never went through with, and never got paid. They lost the match in the end, but all the players who were supposed to be involved made good scores in that match. Only afterwards did the Indian cricket board request the game to be declared as an official international game. My point? Hansie Cronje was 'banished' for receiving gifts from bookkeepers, but not for match-fixing. The judge (as stupid as he was) tried to pin that 'forfeit from both captains' incident as a match-fixing incident. The poor stupid judge said: 'If you didn't declare, England would have had to reach the final score before the end of the last day otherwise South Africa would have won.' -Johan

He wasn't convicted for forfeiting an innings. He was convicted for what he did during the ODI series in India, which involved Gibbs not scoring more than 20 runs and Crookes opening the bowling, among other things, and taking payments for this information [1].

I've reverted the last edits by Johan, but also removed the last paragraph of the previous version, which went:

Cronje's native South Africa had at least partly forgiven him for his crimes, but the rest of the cricketing world most surely had not, particularly in South Asia where Cronje's corruption was a useful counterexample to the whispered belief in "white" cricket-playing nations that the corruption infecting the game was mainly a subcontinental issue. Before his death, it was occasionally whispered that Cronje and the South African cricketing hierarchy wished to see him return to the game in some form. Threats of boycotts of the South African team quickly ensued.

I would like to see some verification for this, because the "occasionally whispered" and "whispered belief" smells of unverifiable stuff. Sam Vimes 18:49, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but didn't Inzamam Ul-Haq forfeit a match against England in 2006?86.156.1.24

"A target of 250 from 70 overs was agreed." What exactly does this mean? Is it trying to say that SA would declare at either 250 or 70 overs, whichever came first? 130.225.25.207 (talk) 08:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Am i reading a movie plot or what?

Even a movie would not be able match the ups and downs, highs and lows of Cronje and SA Cricket Team. Fate has been brutal for them, its just like god is controlling them. 1991, SA Cricket begins a new era after decades of isolation, Cronje leads SA to Leading Team in the world cricket, completely confident to clinch 1999 world cup, would be a wonder of sorts considering they began playing international cricket just 9 years ago. They are in semi-finals, almost trounced australia but then fate had other plans, tie went in Aussie favour. SA is still a strong team, but then 2000, the shocking news beging to emerge, the images of Cronje in tears confessing about accepting bribe just makes me so emotional, what makes it even more tear-filled emotional story is the death of Cronje. 2003 world cup- SA fails to move into second stage due to duckworth lewis method while playing against west indies.

Despite god being unfair SA to most times, 12th of March, 2006 was completely different day. Australia makes a gigantic score which no team in the entire universe can think reaching even in their wildest dreams in the same match under that pressure. But for SA it was time to revenge the 1999 defeat, against all the odds SA achieved the impossible. Indeed Greatest one-day even played, also the most valuable one-day game for SA, something they will cherish for decades. IMO it was the match where fate lost and SA Teams determination won. I have to say even if 2012 world cup is directly given to SA and announce them as victorious without playing a single match, it wouldn't be such a big crime. I am actually from India but i always had a soft corner for South Africa. The sheer ups and downs always fascinated me, reality is indeed much more exciting and unstable than movies.

Its almost like a movie, he takes South African cricket team from zero to hero, then loses 1999 world cup by one small mistake, then lured into match-fixing, breaks into tears while confessing it, accused as shame of SA by his own country people, and few years later died in air crash. C--60.243.161.52 (talk) 16:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Whitewash, tie and forfeit

I tried to sort out the jumbled mess of punctuation, and/or confusion, that/which confusion, passive voice, and odd grammar, but I came across sentences that baffled me. One selection comes near the end of Whitewash, tie and forfeit:

When South Africa reached 248/8 Cronje declared; both teams then forfeited an innings leaving England a target of 249 to win the Test, which they did with two wickets left and only five balls remaining. It ended South Africa's 14 game unbeaten streak in Test cricket. Cronje was later learnt to have accepted money and a gift from a bookmaker in return for making an early declaration in this Test (see below).

… Cronje struggled against India in his final Test series scoring just 25 runs in two Tests (he took six wickets) however South Africa were still able to complete their first series win in India. India's first lost series at home since 1987.

Would someone familiar with the outcome check I didn't muck it up whilst trying to fix it? Thank you.

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 06:35, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

They look fine. I rewrote the article three years ago so I would be the one responsible for the poor grammar/punctuation, thanks for correcting it. --JP (Talk) 17:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. It is a huge well-documented article, so any 4000 word work is bound to have squinches, especially if it mostly falls on one person's shoulders.

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 04:39, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Correct name above Image.

Why is Hansie's name printed as Hansie Cronye (as opposed to Hansie Cronje) in the header above his image?? Papwalker (talk) 08:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

1999 start of cheating

Surely the illegal ear pieces he wore in the 1999 WC should be mentioned in the article? A forwarding of the cheating to come? 2A00:23C4:215:C500:94A9:A176:502C:857 (talk) 02:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)