James Sicilys AFL semi-final recall is a stark reminder to the Western Bulldogs that Hawthorn usually nail match-winning shots on goal.The Hawks made two changes for Friday nights clash at the MCG, with Billy Hartung also returning.Sicily missed last weeks epic qualifying final loss to Geelong because of illness and Hartung was dropped.Teammate Isaac Smith had a shot on goal after the final siren on Friday night, but he missed to give the Cats the win.It was a rare Hawthorn loss in a tight match.Sicily kicked the match-winner against the Bulldogs in round three and that was also the last time the two teams clashed.Hawthorn have had seven matches this season decided by nine points or less - last Friday was the first one they had lost.The Hawks left out Ryan Burton to a calf injury and Daniel Howe, Sicilys replacement, was dropped.Burton was close to being available for selection, but just not close enough, said Hawthorn football manager Chris Fagan.You cant afford to take a risk with players in finals, so unfortunately for Ryan he misses this week.James has recovered well and will bring us some added fire power up forward.Billy will add some good outside run and speed to the team which will be important against the Bulldogs.Hartungs recall is a welcome change of finals fortune - he admitted to being devastated when dropped for the grand final win last year over West Coast.He was also left out of the side for their 2013 finals campaign, which ended with the premiership win over Sydney.Defender Taylor Duryea was named, despite hurting his hand against the Cats.Toby McLean comes into the Bulldogs lineup after Lin Jong broke his collarbone a week ago in the elimination final win over West Coast.It will be McLeans second senior game this season since round 11.As expected, Sydney recalled Jeremy Laidler and Toby Nankervis for Saturdays semi-final against Adelaide at the SCG.They come in for Rising Star winner Callum Mills (hamstring) and ruck-forward Kurt Tippett (jaw), while the Crows are unchanged.Adelaide key forward Josh Jenkins rolled an ankle in the elimination final win over North Melbourne, but they are adamant he will play. Nike Air Max 97 Rea . Vettel was 0.168 seconds faster than Red Bull teammate Mark Webber around the Suzuka circuit. Mercedes driver Nico Rosberg was two tenths of a second off Vettel. "The car balance is decent, but I think we can still improve," Vettel said. Nike Air Max 720 Rabatt . At a Manhattan federal court hearing, attorney Jordan Siev said his law office has gotten more evidence nearly every day to support its lawsuit accusing MLB and Selig of going on a "witch hunt" to ruin Rodriguezs reputation and career. He said the defendants went "way over the line. http://www.reaairmaxsverige.com/air-max-270-rabatt/max-270-dam.html . Manuel was offered a position the day he was fired. He accepted earlier this week and the team made the announcement Friday. Nike Air Max Rabatt . The Olympic champion curler and TSN curling analyst immediately went online to look at the Halls long list of honoured members. Thats when the enormity of the honour sunk in. Nike Air Max Plus Sverige .Y. -- Leading 3-0 with only 11:25 left, the Colorado Avalanche committed a seemingly meaningless penalty to give the New York Islanders a power play. It is in cricket a rivalry unique. It does not rely on the conventional ingredients that form the undercurrent of most traditional rivalries: geography, religion, a tainted historical antecedent. Yet it has been as fractious, as heated, as packed with history, incident, drama, plots and sub-plots as any. Contests between Pakistan and England, by rule, have not been dramatic; often they have been direly one-sided, often deathly dull. Yet, always they have been loaded. It isnt, as with India and Pakistan, a matter simply of love or hate, moulded by prevalent political winds. It isnt, as with the Ashes, tied inexorably to a history that has shaped the game itself.Although there is considerable emotion, some history, and even a colonial legacy, there is a whole lot else that is more compelling. And precisely because the strength of antagonism is dictated by unconventional sources, it is maddeningly complex.Barring a handful of contests - the 1954, 1971 and 1996 tours to England by Pakistan - nearly every series, irrespective of venue or decade, holds something: controversy, theatre, intrigue. Even the mostly friendly 2005-06 tour of Pakistan produced at Faisalabad two controversial dismissals, a blast during play, and a ban for Shahid Afridi for scuffing the pitch. Each series has added a layer of subtext, some acrimony, some implication, some previous onto the next. As a relationship, progressively through the decades this one has mostly worsened, interrupted only sparingly by clashes which have merely left the status quo unmoved.In 1955, when Donald Carrs MCC toured Pakistan, a template of umpiring mistrust and discontent was set. The tourists complained about umpire Idrees Beg, then infamously doused him with cold water in Peshawar - allegedly as a prank. The series would have been abandoned but for diplomatic intervention; the tourists claimed Beg came voluntarily. Beg and other Pakistani officials asserted he had been kidnapped.Ted Dexters tourists in 1961, on what was an amicable enough tour, came across, according to reports, reasonable umpiring, although criticism came here and there. The sending back of Haseeb Ahsan from England in 1962, at his captains behest after Haseebs action was whispered to be less than legitimate, unfurled its significance two decades later when he toured as manager in 1987. That tour, of course, was steeped in confrontation and Haseeb was widely condemned by England as the instigator.In 1967 and 1974, Pakistan rumbled about inadequate covers allowing water to seep through at the English grounds. Even in between, in the Pakistan of 1969 and 1973, in encounters relatively free of rancour, there was the embellishment provided by political turmoil. The first of those series was played against the backdrop of Bangladeshs impending birth and abandoned after riots in the third Test at Karachi; Wisden called the tour a fiasco. The second went ahead after extra security was arranged for the tourists. The British mission in Islamabad had received a hand-written threat from a group called Black September promising to harm the team.From there on, the rivalry has spiralled: through the late seventies travails of the Packerites and the felling of Iqbal Qasim by Bob Willis at Edgbaston. It reached its confrontational peak, of course, in the spectacularly raucous mid-to-late-eighties and early-nineties contests, when familiarity bred hatred (the sides played 11 ODIs and eight Tests between December 1986 and December 1987, in those days considered overkill).What makes it what it is? Pakistan and England ostensibly provide crickets affirmation of Samuel Huntingtons thesis of the clash of civilisations. Huntingtons treatise of the same name, which examines potential ideological and cultural conflict post-Communism, serves to explain, superficially at least, the incendiary nature of this rivalry.Javed Miandad, no two-bit extra in these dramas, sagely substantiates this in his autobiography: Underlying cultural differences are always a fertile ground for misunderstandings. Certainly, as Simon Barnes argued before Englands 2000 tour to Pakistan, two more culturally divergent sides on the field are difficult to find.Barnes wrote, The fact is that Pakistanis are not only different to the English, but they really dont mind. They dont see their culture clash with the English as a personal and national failing; they suspect that there might be problems on the English side as well. Like arrogance and xenophobia and Islamophobia, just for starters.The behaviour of administrators further augments this line of thinking. The planning and method which seems to infuse every action of the British is anathema to Pakistan, where only the last minute is the most important - as was learned by, for example, the English tourists of 1968-69, who were disgruntled more than once by the inconvenience of last-minute venue changes.Both sets of players collectively and individually are, inevitably, subjects of caricature-ish, sometimes rude, profiles in the others backyard; if Pakistan is the abrasive, deviant child, inclined to deception and erratic behaviour, then England is the uptight, grumpy old man, moaning about anything and everything, bringing his own food, and unwilling to mingle.Pakistans heroes are portrayed as geniuses - sometimes mystical as in the case of Abdul Qadir, and sometimes warrior-like, as in that of Imran Khan and Wasim Akram. Imran, aware of this flimsy characterisation, prompted Qadir to grow his hair and a goatee to further heighten his numinous aura. Pakistans villains have been devious, conspiratorial and antagonistic, as Javed and Haseeb were deemed.Simon Heffers remarkably distasteful piece for The Sunday Telegraph in 1992 - Pakistan - The Pariahs of Cricket is the best example. Miandad was likened to a rickshaw driver and card-sharp; Pakistan was labelled a country of cheats, capable of fair play only when their grounds were turned over to their other popular use, as stadia for public flogging.Englands heroes have been plodding, but with innate goodness and uprightness of spirit - a Colin Cowdrey or a David Gower. Their villains have been pantomime - racist, colonialist and obnoxious like Mike Gatting and, of course, Ian Botham. The latter is remembered not so much for his 8 for 34 in 1978 as for his mother-in-law. Nothing has existed in between, and it is a seductive contrast.Add to this superficially enhanced clash considerable colonial residue and you have the beginnings of a dysfunctional relationship. Imran and Javed argue that the atmosphere only soured once Pakistan began asserting itself as a powerful Test nation in the late seventies and early eighties. As the one-time subservient colonised - tolerated for one-off successes like the Oval in 1954 - challenged at the very top, asserting a regular authority over the supercilious coloniser, the clashes became increasingly fraught and disputatious. A fundamental relationship was overturned.In a Daily Telegraph column about his retirement, Imran writes about how breaking free from mental colonial shackles and ridding Pakistan of its inferiority complex - where the ultimate ambition of every manager of a tour to England was to be elected to the MCC - was one of his most cherished achievements. Javed, naturally, was blunter. For years, Pakistani teams on foreign tours found it difficult to shake a sense of inferiority. Perhaps we were embarrassed to be from a Third World country that not too long ago had been ruled by white colonialists.Although, like with the cultural clash, there is undeniable truth in this argument, it too lacks depth. Revenge, colonial-style, was certainly on Aamer Sohails mind when he directed Botham to send his mother-in-law to bat next after a cheap dismissal in the 1992 World Cup final. But it overlooks, one, a quintessentially Pakistani paradox and two, a legitimately questionable English outlook, that have together added, if it was needed, a little extra zing. Now it gets complex.In broad swathes of Pakistan there is a deep-rooted contradiction towards the English (and Western civilisation). For a pot pourri of reasons - colonial, religious and cultural - they generate animosity. Post 9/11, this has intensified. Yet in this same country it is a widely held and cherished ambition to move westward and seek opportunity, fortune, and a better life.Similar paradoxes exist in cricket. One disconnect is exemplified best by Imrans own experience of, and attitude towards, England, as Ivo Tennant hints in his biography. Imran was seen by ma
