***Official*** India in Australia

[GotSpin]

Cry babies???
How about crickets that complain about having to play too much cricket, then sign up for T20 games

or

Symonds to scared to tour Pakistan!

Thanks for that incredibly irrelevant post that has nothing to do with the dicussion at hand.

 

[Matt79]

Now it has become a question of ICC'S impartiality and their understanding of South asian culture.
Sidhu commented that yesterday that the " monkey word" being called offensive is insult to hinduism and our culture.
why does the match referee only accept the aussie version of events and act according to what they percieve racist and not racist?
This is way important than cricket now.
BCCI has almost confirmed that if harbhajan is not apologised too and let free then tour over as the players are united on this issue and are pressuring the board .
Yesterday there were protests outside board secretary's house,the whole country
is backing the team.

Nup - sorry, don't buy that at all. South Asian culture is completely irrelevant to the Bhajji abuse issue. Bhajji knew what 'monkey' meant to Symonds when he said it (he was present during the October controversy, he definitely knew what it means), hence he said it knowing how Symonds would interpret it and would consider it racial abuse, so he has to be banned.

Proctor wouldn't ban him unless he was satisfied that he knew that Bhajji said it, referees are as a rule quite reluctant to act on these kinds of exchanges unless they're sure they know what was said, so its a pretty cut and dried issue for me. If India do indeed boycott the rest of the series in support of Bhajji, they will lose my sympathy for the unfairness of the umpiring in the 2nd Test and make themselves a laughing stock, IMO.

 

[GotSpin]

It was symonds who went crying to the match referee.
And the match referee banning a innocent player on basis of no neutral evidence is correct?
Next time ,when you come to india after spate of bad decisions in matches(precisely 8-1) ,one of your player is jailed and disgraced for saying something which indians find "racist" but is said commonly in australia while rest of the indian team is getting away for calling symonds a "monkey" and a "chimpanzee" then how will your team react?
chin up my foot.

Why is it so hard to understand that calling someone (Symonds) a monkey or chimpanzee is rascist?

 

[Matt79]

It was symonds who went crying to the match referee.
And the match referee banning a innocent player on basis of no neutral evidence is correct?
Next time ,when you come to india after spate of bad decisions in matches(precisely 8-1) ,one of your player is jailed and disgraced for saying something which indians find "racist" but is said commonly in australia while rest of the indian team is getting away for calling symonds a "monkey" and a "chimpanzee" then how will your team react?
chin up my foot.

He hasn't been jailed.

 

[pup11]

Million dollar question is if Harbhajan confessed to inflicting this racial abuse or not. If he has, the Indian team is not justified in doing this.

If he has not, then it is a completely different kettle of fish. Picking Symonds and Ponting's word over Harbhajan's - especially when the stump mics, the Umpires or Sachin didnt catch the alleged tirade - leaves them in a very untenable position.

Not just Harbhajan, but Sachin also went out on a limb saying what he heard was harmless.

I don't like to believe umpires didn't hear anything, they probably just don't want to admit it publicly because they are already under for their umpiring and last thingh they want is to be involved in another controversy.

 

[aussie_26]

Now it has become a question of ICC'S impartiality and their understanding of South asian culture.
Sidhu commented that yesterday that the " monkey word" being called offensive is insult to hinduism and our culture.why does the match referee only accept the aussie version of events and act according to what they percieve racist and not racist?This is way important than cricket now.
BCCI has almost confirmed that if harbhajan is not apologised too and let free then tour over as the players are united on this issue and are pressuring the board .
Yesterday there were protests outside board secretary's house,the whole country
is backing the team.

because harbijan said it to symonds who would find that comment offensive thats why, when you are talking to another person you should take there culture into consideration and what they would find offensive becuase they are the ones who can be offended and upset , you cant offend yourself

 

[Cevno]

Nup - sorry, don't buy that at all. South Asian culture is completely irrelevant to the Bhajji abuse issue. Bhajji knew what 'monkey' meant to Symonds when he said it, hence he said it knowing Symonds would consider it racial abuse, so he has to be banned.

Proctor wouldn't ban him unless he was satisfied that he knew that Bhajji said it, referees are as a rule quite reluctant to act on these kinds of exchanges unless they're sure they know what was said, so its a pretty cut and dried issue for me. If India do indeed boycott the rest of the series in support of Bhajji, they will lose my sympathy for the unfairness of the umpiring in the 2nd Test and make themselves a laughing stock, IMO.

Tell me one thing who admitted that the word "monkey" was racist after the india tour?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Oh, to be a fly on Mark Benson's nose when he covered his mouth to talk after the altercation.

 

[Johnners]

Million dollar question is if Harbhajan confessed to inflicting this racial abuse or not. If he has, the Indian team is not justified in doing this.

If he has not, then it is a completely different kettle of fish. Picking Symonds and Ponting's word over Harbhajan's - especially when the stump mics, the Umpires or Sachin didnt catch the alleged tirade - leaves them in a very untenable position.

Not just Harbhajan, but Sachin also went out on a limb saying what he heard was harmless.

Does anyone know that the match referee etc. did exactly that? If anyone can officially confirm it then fine, otherwise, it seems a silly comment to make. To my understanding, it is not yet public knowledge as to exactly why Harhajan has been banned, meaning, it could well have come down to more than just "He said this, no he said that".

 

[Andrew Pollock]

Thanks for that incredibly irrelevant post that has nothing to do with the dicussion at hand.

Plenty more to come!!!

Hey Fred Durst Limp Biskit sucked

 

[Cevno]

because harbijan said it to symonds who would find that comment offensive thats why, when you are talking to another person you should take there culture into consideration and what they would find offensive becuase they are the ones who can be offended and upset , you cant offend yourself

so hogg should be punished similarly or even harshly as kumble and dhoni do find "bastard" racial and offensive?
What about rest of the aussie abuses?two can play that game.

 

[GotSpin]

Plenty more to come!!!

Hey Fred Durst Limp Biskit sucked

Be quiet you bastard

 

[Andrew Pollock]

Be quiet you bastard

I will put on my Ponting hat, and dob you in to the mods

 

[Isolator]

No because by result he had neither control of his body or the ball.

So how is it any different if he grounds the ball as he lands? Can you really say that he was in control of the ball? I mean there's a reason why fielders keep their hands up when completing diving catches. The ball would never pop out if all a fielder had to do was turn his hands downwards and ground the ball as he landed. That's not "control".

I certainly don't think it's possible to claim you're in control of the ball while in mid-air.

I'd even say that the Clarke case was suspect, even though he had the ball for much longer than Ponting did.

To me it boils down to asking yourself "if the ball had dropped/popped out of his hands at this point of time, would it have been a catch?", and if the answer to that is "no" (definitely the case with Ponting), then it should be good enough grounds to assume that the fielder was not in control of the ball.

 

[Cevno]

I don't like to believe umpires didn't hear anything, they probably just don't want to admit it publicly because they are already under for their umpiring and last thingh they want is to be involved in another controversy.

Yeah the match referee was only joking when he said on world television that umpires heard nothing?

 

[Johnners]

so hogg should be punished similarly or even harshly as kumble and dhoni do find "bastard" racial and offensive?
What about rest of the aussie abuses?two can play that game.

I don't think Hogg should be punished similarly because there was no previous issue (as there was with the "Monkey" chants), but if they found it racially offensive, then yes, he should receive some sort of punishment. If it happened a 2nd time (as in the Symonds/HB case, where HB should've been more than aware that Symonds found being called a monkey racially offensive given what happened in India) then Hogg would be in for a more serious punishment.

 

[Matt79]

Tell me one thing who admitted that the word "monkey" was racist after the india tour?

It SIMPLY DOES NOT MATTER whether Indian people think its an racist word or not. Symonds has stated he finds it a racist word. The massive media storm that was generated during the October incident has made it clear that it is generally considered a racist term of abuse when spoken to a black man. Whatever it has previously meant, it should have been blindingly clear to all the Indian team that it was a word they should not address towards Symonds if they did not want to be offensive in a racist sense.

No-where where racism is expressed can "I don't consider what I'm saying because its my culture" be used as an excuse. It's really that simple - and yes, I expect that to apply equally to all parties, including Australians. A first offence should probably escape punishment, so long as the offender is educated as to why what they said is offensive, but this was not a first offence.

 

[Johnners]

It SIMPLY DOES NOT MATTER whether Indian people think its an racist word or not. Symonds has stated he finds it a racist word. The massive media storm that was generated during the October incident has made it clear that it is generally considered a racist term of abuse when spoken to a black man. Whatever it has previously meant, it should have been blindingly clear to all the Indian team that it was a word they should not address towards Symonds if they did not want to be offensive in a racist sense.

No-where where racism is expressed can "I don't consider what I'm saying because its my culture" be used as an excuse. Its really that simple - and yes, I expect that to apply equally to all parties, including Australians. A first offence should probably escape punishment, so long as the offender is educated as to why what they said is offensive, but this was not a first offence.

AWTA (you said what I tried to, except in a much clearer fashion )

 

[GotSpin]

I will put on my Ponting hat, and dob you in to the mods

That was just too easy.

 

[aussie_26]

so hogg should be punished similarly or even harshly as kumble and dhoni do find "bastard" racial and offensive?
What about rest of the aussie abuses?two can play that game.

nope bestard is not racialy abusive, iff you want to ban players for swearing at each other than half the cricketers around the world will be taking holidays