***Official*** India in Australia

[Matt79]

The thing is that the team management is saying that proctor was biased and did not give them any evidence and was just adamant that aussies were right.
If that is right then coupled with umpiring decisions and aussies getting away with excessive appealing,not waiting for umpires decision,showing dissent.saying offensive terms ,claiming wrong catches thend it is abolutely right.

If they can give a decent explanation of those claims, then maybe I'll be more sympathetic, but til then, I think its poor.

 

[vic_orthdox]

absolutely agree.
when they do it ,it is " mental disintegration" but when somebody else does it then "racism"
and the line has to be drawn according to them between these two.

For your information, sledging and racial abuse are two entirely different things.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

What's the difference between that and blackmail then?

None, as far as I can see.

Really dismal stuff from the BCCI if this is true.

 

[Evermind]

The funny thing is...if it were any other team, they'd be pretty incensed and give their 190% in their next few matches, and try to win the game at Perth by playing at their best. The Indian team OTOH will most likely capitulate even more tamely than at the MCG - I think this series as a contest is most definitely and finally finished.

 

[sideshowtim]

If the Indians were really, really deeply offended by the word 'bastard' then why has an official complain not been lodged about the word in the past? I have no doubts that an Aussie has called an Indian a bastard in thousands of matches before this. I believe that if it really was that offensive as Indians are making out, then we would've been told to stop it ages and ages ago.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

absolutely agree.
when they do it ,it is " mental disintegration" but when somebody else does it then "racism"
and the line has to be drawn according to them between these two.

You are still harping on about this? I get the feeling you still haven't been able to grasp that there are distinct differences between sledging to get under someone's skin and using racial abuse to get under someone's skin. Until you understand the difference, nobody can ever take what you say on this matter seriously.

 

[Evermind]

For your information, sledging and racial abuse are two entirely different things.

Both are rude and barbaric and deserve to be punished. Except Australians are quick to defend one as a "innocent banter" and equally quick to denounce the other (as it should be).

If you're going to tell me that in a hundred years of cricketing history the Australians haven't subjected the subcontinentals to onfield racial abuse, you must be incredibly naive. At that time of course it was just "sledging" and "friendly banter" and "what happens on the field stays on the field". The subcontinentals had no muscle in international cricket until about the last couple of decades, when financial clout has given them some amount of talking power.

The reason the word "bastard" hasn't been reported - just speculating here - is because of the mantra about not reporting stuff happening on the field, and also because it was just the cultural nature of the Aussie way that everyone had to stick with. But now that Harbhajan and Ponting/Symonds have opened this can of worms, the Indians want to make sure that the rest of the stuff isn't ignored either. Nothing at all wrong with that. Yes racial abuse is worse than personal abuse, but to use this awkward example again, it's like saying Mussolini was a kinder man than Hitler. At a war tribunal, wouldn't both be indicted?

 

[Andrew Pollock]

For your information, sledging and racial abuse are two entirely different things.

Explain how, sensi !!!

 

[Smudge]

Having just seen for the first time, the catch Ponting claimed, I have no issue with him claiming that. The law is open to interpretation, and while laws are written in a book, some real-time assessment needs to be taken into account, and that was alright. But then again, I'm not convinced it hit the gloves anyway...

 

[Cevno]

If the Indians were really, really deeply offended by the word 'bastard' then why has an official complain not been lodged about the word in the past? I have no doubts that an Aussie has called an Indian a bastard in thousands of matches before this. I believe that if it really was that offensive as Indians are making out, then we would've been told to stop it ages and ages ago.

Because Indian's did not want to be labelled "crybabies".
But now they have realised that if aussies can do it then why can't indians?

THE RULE has to be same for all not that indian's find "bastard" and "monkey" inoffensive they have a right to be called that while aussies find "monkey" offensive no one should call them that,
This would mean opressing the more liberals.

 

[Nate]

Having just seen for the first time, the catch Ponting claimed, I have no issue with him claiming that. The law is open to interpretation, and while laws are written in a book, some real-time assessment needs to be taken into account, and that was alright. But then again, I'm not convinced it hit the gloves anyway...

If rubbed against the little finger of Dhoni's glove on the way up, no question. An umpire would need incredible sight to give it, but it did brush the glove.

 

[Johnners]

Both are rude and barbaric and deserve to be punished. Except Australians are quick to defend one as a "innocent banter" and equally quick to denounce the other (as it should be).

If you're going to tell me that in a hundred years of cricketing history the Australians haven't subjected the subcontinentals to onfield racial abuse, you must be incredibly naive. At that time of course it was just "sledging" and "friendly banter" and "what happens on the field stays on the field".

I don't think anyone here has claimed that the Australian team hasn't subjected players from ANY country to onfield racial abuse in the past.

 

[mavric41]

I am really disappointed in the vitriol and negativity displayed in the aftermath of the game. It has clouded the brilliance of some fantastic individual performances from both sides. The umpiring was so poor that the players lost faith in the officials. This lead to the increased appeals because the players thought that anything might be given out.

Technology has come to a point now that it highlights any mistake made by umpires and continually questions decisions they make. This has not happened in the past. Commentators (especially that moron Tony Greig) use technology to deliberately to cause controversy so they have something to say. They are part of the problem. It is time to use this technology to help the umpires. Bring in a captain's challenge system like they do in tennis. DO SOMETHING to improve the quality of decisions and take the pressure off the umpires. They are human and not perfect but give them the means to get better.

Bitching and blame are pointless. What ifs are just that. Let us move forward from this game. Celebrate the positives, learn from the negatives and continue to improve the game.

 

[Cevno]

For your information, sledging and racial abuse are two entirely different things.

For your information what aussies consider sledging such as "bastard" or the f word is racial abuse for indians while "monkey" is sledging for indians.and it is other way arround for aussies.

 

[aussie_26]

Because Indian's did not want to be labelled "crybabies".
But now they have realised that if aussies can do it then why can't indians?

THE RULE has to be same for all not that indian's find "bastard" and "monkey" inoffensive they have a right to be called that while aussies find "monkey" offensive no one should call them that,
This would mean opressing the more liberals.

you cant ban a player every time they swear becuase most players from all sides do it at sometime, the indians are just nothing but sooks.They go on about playing the game in good spirate yet they are outraged that one of there playere was punished for being racist.the indians are jest jealous of australias success

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

For your information what aussies consider sledging such as "bastard" or the f word is racial abuse for indians while "monkey" is sledging for indians.and it is other way arround for aussies.

Again - bastard and the f-bomb are not racism.

 

[jeevan]

If the Indians were really, really deeply offended by the word 'bastard' then why has an official complain not been lodged about the word in the past? I have no doubts that an Aussie has called an Indian a bastard in thousands of matches before this. I believe that if it really was that offensive as Indians are making out, then we would've been told to stop it ages and ages ago.

Weak argument. Weren't the aboriginals were also called monkeys or similar in Australian sports thousands of times before the first formal complaint was lodged.

 

[vic_orthdox]

If you're going to tell me that in a hundred years of cricketing history the Australians haven't subjected the subcontinentals to onfield racial abuse, you must be incredibly naive

Wouldn't dream of doing so.

At that time of course it was just "sledging" and "friendly banter" and "what happens on the field stays on the field".

Which was wrong at the time.

Explain how, sensi !!!

Is it just me, or does everyone think that all anyone who plays cricket in Australia does is walk around saying, "**** off you ****ing **** ****"? Sledging in its most common form is much more subtle than that sort of stuff, which sees players suspended here as well. Stuff like, "Seeing 'em alright today" after an early extravagant shot, giving someone some stick about wearing a crap looking Andrew Strauss-style helmet, and maybe batting like a Pom if they're going slowly () is the sort of stuff that constitutes 95% of sledging.

 

[Evermind]

I don't think anyone here has claimed that the Australian team hasn't subjected players from ANY country to onfield racial abuse in the past.

Then you admit that it did happen in the past, and that it wasn't reported? Then why would the Indians report "bastard" - after all racial abuse is even worse, and that wasn't reported.

So the argument that "if it was offensive it would've been reported in the past, and because bastard wasn't reported in the past it's 100% ok with the Indians" is obviously a bogus one. Because the Indians haven't reported any sort of specific abuse before, and they have started to now - doesn't mean they have always been ok with the way they've been treated on the field.

What happens on the field stays on the field - except when we've been doing it for decades, when it was perfectly ok. That the staggering hypocrisy in this escapes even the most educated and reasonable on this forum really says a lot about cultural blind spots.

Who I really feel for is Andrew Symonds, who I must admit has conducted himself with dignity in India as well as in this soon-to-be-a-debacle. Not doubt he gets **** from white people all the time, and now he gets **** from brown people - in spite of being such a valuable member of the team - and yet doesn't seem to have much of animosity or spite. Ponting himself could take a page from his book in terms of temperament.

 

[Smudge]

If rubbed against the little finger of Dhoni's glove on the way up, no question. An umpire would need incredible sight to give it, but it did brush the glove.

No question? No offence, Nnanden, but you cannot use the unequivocal phrase "no question" going on that footage. There's no deviation as the ball goes up from the pad and balloons out. And if an umpire needed incredible sight to see it, it's just a shame there wasn't one of those in this game...

As for the potential boycott, I'm sympathetic to the Indian team and BCCI's cause, but this is not the way to go about it. No good can come out of the decision if they perservere with it.