***Official*** India in Australia

[Nate]

Plenty more to come!!!

Hey Fred Durst Limp Biskit sucked

Be quiet you bastard

Nah, the bloke has a point.

 

[GotSpin]

Nah, the bloke has a point.

I honestly hope Nathan Bracken never wears the baggy green again. he sucks

 

[Matt79]

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

It's clearly not racist, but if it does fall into the category of unacceptable abuse, as defined in the ICC regulations (which includes things like discriminatory remarks on ***uality as well), in the eyes of the Indian team, then Hogg has to be counselled not to say it again, and the Australian team needs to be given a formal education session explaining that it is unacceptable (because has been generally considered acceptable within Australian cricket previously). And if it happens again, then people need to be punished in the same vein as Bhajji.

 

[Cevno]

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.

there was no previous issue because indians did not know that aussies would not leave something on the field on it.
Now that they know it,they are entitled to play the same game and ICC has to stay neutral.

 

[duffer]

It's clearly not racist, but if it does fall into the category of unacceptable abuse, as defined in the ICC regulations (which includes things like discriminatory remarks on ***uality as well), in the eyes of the Indian team, then Hogg has to be counselled not to say it again, and the Australian team needs to be given a formal education session explaining that it is unacceptable (because has been generally considered acceptable within Australian cricket previously). And if it happens again, then people need to be punished in the same vein as Bhajji.

The hilarity of making guys like Hayden, Roy and Lee sit in a room and tell them not to use those naughty words. God, I'd pay money to see that.

 

[Matt79]

there was no previous issue because indians did not know that aussies would not leave something on the field on it.
Now that they know it,they are entitled to play the same game and ICC has to stay neutral.

Two points: First, I don't understand what you're saying in this first sentence, can you explain it again?

Second, how do you conclude that Symonds is playing a game, as opposed to having been genuinely offended?

 

[jeevan]

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".

What we know publicly is the following:
Symonds,Ponting allege Harbhajan used racial slurs.
Harbhajan says he didnt. Sachin backs it up as what he heard was harmless.
Stump mics didnt pick anything like the allegations up.
Umpires say they didnt hear anything (if they did and are not reporting,
they are failing once more in their duties).

If you know more facts, please share.

Wish Mike Proctor will shine more light on it, a 3 match ban is serious.
Until then, I'm afraid it is he said-they said.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Be quiet you bastard

Plenty more to come!!!

Hey Fred Durst Limp Biskit sucked

Both of you, stop trying to court insults and wind people up. We've got enough going on in here without deliberate trouble making.

 

[Matt79]

The hilarity of making guys like Hayden, Roy and Lee sit in a room and tell them not to use those naughty words. God, I'd pay money to see that.

Still, if you're going to fix the problem, you have to do just that, so that there isn't any confusion and any further offences can be dealt with decisively.

As i understand it, its not that bastard is a swear word, so much as what the word literally means with regards to your parentage that is the cause of it being particularly offensive? Other swears are still good IMO

 

[Ikki]

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.

Because he DOES have control of his movement and the ball. Certain diving catches cannot be helped by the fielder when putting out his arm to get the ball and fall as gracefully as possible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InR2znAeTKI

But the intent to fall that way and to catch it that way illustrates control.

 

[Matt79]

What we know publicly is the following:
Symonds,Ponting allege Harbhajan used racial slurs.
Harbhajan says he didnt. Sachin backs it up as what he heard was harmless.
Stump mics didnt pick anything like the allegations up.
Umpires say they didnt hear anything (if they did and are not reporting,
they are failing once more in their duties).

If you know more facts, please share.

Wish Mike Proctor will shine more light on it, a 3 match ban is serious.
Until then, I'm afraid it is he said-they said.

I'm sure he'll be issuing a written report, once he's had a chance to write it, and the ICC review it (they only finished up the hearing about 12 hours ago). You'd think it would be released in the next day or two.

 

[Cevno]

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.

THEN WHY DOES WHETHER AUSTRALIANS CONSIDER IT RACIST OR NOT MATTER.
The massive media storm was only in australia not in india.
If it does not matter if bhajji thinks it is racist or not ,then why does what symonds think matter.
Tomorrow bhajji could claim that anything symonds said was racist and indian media kicks up a storm will it be considered racist?

 

[Andrew Pollock]

Both of you, stop trying to court insults and wind people up. We've got enough going on in here without deliberate trouble making.

?????????????????????????

 

[duffer]

As i understand it, its not that bastard is a swear word, so much as what the word literally means with regards to your parentage that is the cause of it being particularly offensive? Other swears are still good IMO

Isn't that the point of the word though? I know around here it's more of a throw around insult with people not considering the background to the word, but in India they may see it more as a direct attack on their parentage?

I think that's how they'll base their case against Hogg, that by saying it to an Indian the context becomes entirely more sinister.

 

[jeevan]

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

Is there something incorrigibly deficient in the intellect of half the cricketers? Other professions, including other sports, dont have folks mouthing obscenities or insults to their colleagues and rivals as a matter of course or to score a point. So this behavior is not intrinsic to the human race.

 

[Isolator]

No-where where racism is expressed can "I don't consider what I'm saying because its my culture" be used as an excuse.

I agree that after what happened here there's no claiming ignorance of the implications of "monkey" to people of African descent. However it's foolish to extend this into a general dismissing of the idea of cultural differences regarding the use/implications of words. It does exist. For example, in many places the "n word" is used frequently and without awareness of what it implies in say the US or the UK.

I myself use mock Nazi salutes at times. I'd get hell for that in the west. Here it's hardly an issue. Swastikas (yes, the Nazi variety) can be seen quite frequently among the "rock" crowd. One of the most well known rock-clothing shops here sells swastika bandanas and tshirts.

Let's say you walk around with a picture of Idi Amin on your shirt. Seriously, who is going to care? A few politically aware people maybe, but it will not evoke the gut-level reaction Hitler will.

 

[chalky]

Sky & BBC are reporting that India has suspended its tour of Australia

Shocking news if true

 

[Andrew Pollock]

ABC radio report said tour suspened by BCCI

 

[aussie_26]

It's clearly not racist, but if it does fall into the category of unacceptable abuse, as defined in the ICC regulations (which includes things like discriminatory remarks on ***uality as well), in the eyes of the Indian team, then Hogg has to be counselled not to say it again, and the Australian team needs to be given a formal education session explaining that it is unacceptable (because has been generally considered acceptable within Australian cricket previously). And if it happens again, then people need to be punished in the same vein as Bhajji.

all teams swear, as do most people in frustrating times, as long at its not over the top it is fine, no room for racism at all.There seems to be this attitude in society that racism is only a prolbem when it is said by a white person

 

[Johnners]

THEN WHY DOES WHETHER AUSTRALIANS CONSIDER IT RACIST OR NOT MATTER.
The massive media storm was only in australia not in india.
If it does not matter if bhajji thinks it is racist or not ,then why does what symonds think matter.
Tomorrow bhajji could claim that anything symonds said was racist and indian media kicks up a storm will it be considered racist?

Because it was alleged that Bhajji called Symonds something, not the otherway around. . If Symonds called Bhajji something he (Bhajji) considered to be racist, thats when it would matter what he thinks, and what Symonds thinks would not matter. You follow?