***Official*** India in Australia

[pup11]

The BCCI Chief Administrative Officer Proffesor Shetty was just on Fox Sports News and he said that Mike Procter made the decision based on Australian players testimony with no concrete evidence cited.

He said India is confident the decision will be overturned because there was no evidence to convict a player of such a serious allegation in the first place.

So the question remains the same, is Procter foolish enough to convict Harbhajan on just the basis of testimony of five Australian players, when there is no conclusive evidence to support their allegation.

 

[duffer]

So the question remains the same, is Procter foolish enough to convict Harbhajan on just the basis of testimony of five Australian players, when there is no conclusive evidence to support their allegation.

It looks like that's exactly what he did according to the BCCI official. He's really balls'd this up. From the tone of the intervier with Shetty it sounds like India will fight this if it isn't overturned.

 

[Scotty]

I'm sure it's been said already, but at the end of the day what's said on the field should stay on the field, and I think the Aussies should have left it on the field.

 

[Matt79]

So the question remains the same, is Procter foolish enough to convict Harbhajan on just the basis of testimony of five Australian players, when there is no conclusive evidence to support their allegation.

It looks like that's exactly what he did according to the BCCI official. He's really balls'd this up. From the tone of the intervier with Shetty it sounds like India will fight this if it isn't overturned.

Depending on how convincing their evidence was, especially in comparison to Bhajji and Sachin's testimony, it could be an entirely reasonable conclusion - i.e. It could be the case that he felt the Australian players story made sense, was consistent, and that they answered his questions naturally and appeared to be being honest. He might also have felt that Bhajji hesitated, was unclear, or gave evasive answers. To emphasise, that is just a possible scenario, and might not be what happened, but something along those lines would explain why Proctor felt that he had to convict Harbhajhan.

That could not be the case, and it will be interesting to see his reasoning, but I don't buy the "you need to be caught on tape before you can be censured for racial abuse" argument. People make decisions based on interviews of people all the time, and in most cases it's not difficult to determine whether someone is being honest with you.

Regardless of all that, its premature to decide he ballsed anything up until his report is released and the appeal heard.

 

[pup11]

It looks like that's exactly what he did according to the BCCI official. He's really balls'd this up. From the tone of the intervier with Shetty it sounds like India will fight this if it isn't overturned.

Of course it would get turned, BCCI is a cricketing gaint and when they decide to flex their muscles then ICC won't have any other option but to bow in front of them!

 

[duffer]

Depending on how convincing their evidence was, especially in comparison to Bhajji and Sachin's testimony, it could be an entirely reasonable conclusion - i.e. It could be the case that he felt the Australian players story made sense, was consistent, and that they answered his questions naturally and appeared to be being honest. He might also have felt that Bhajji hesitated, was unclear, or gave evasive answers. To emphasise, that is just a possible scenario, and might not be what happened, but something along those lines would explain why Proctor felt that he had to convict Harbhajhan.

That could not be the case, and it will be interesting to see his reasoning, but I don't buy the "you need to be caught on tape before you can be censured for racial abuse" argument. People make decisions based on interviews of people all the time, and in most cases it's not difficult to determine whether someone is being honest with you.

Regardless of all that, its premature to decide he ballsed anything up until his report is released and the appeal heard.

Regardless though it still boils down to one team's word against the other. The transcript of what occured would be fascinating but without proper evidence I'm not entirely sure the BCCI will let this go lightly no matter what transpired in the meeting.

 

[Matt79]

Of course it would get turned, BCCI is a cricketing gaint and when they decide to flex their muscles then ICC won't have any other option but to bow in front of them!

Actually, if the decision gets binned without the appeal revealing that something wrong was done by Proctor, ie if it does just appear that India has 'flexed its muscle', it will be a disaster and we might end up with an Australian boycott of the series. Or at the least, a lot more real nastiness in the 3rd test.

 

[duffer]

Actually, if the decision gets binned without the appeal revealing that something wrong was done by Proctor, ie if it does just appear that India has 'flexed its muscle', it will be a disaster and we might end up with an Australian boycott of the series. Or at the least, a lot more real nastiness in the 3rd test.

Yep no matter what the outcome, this is going to get incredibly ugly, far more so than it already is.

 

[Matt79]

Regardless though it still boils down to one team's word against the other. The transcript of what occured would be fascinating but without proper evidence I'm not entirely sure the BCCI will let this go lightly no matter what transpired in the meeting.

Yeah, but my point is that its could well be possible for Proctor and the ICC to actually make a judgement about the honesty of one team's word versus another's. People do it all the time, and as long as the reasons for them doing so can be shown (ie. a transcript be made available etc), I have no problem with that. It happens in all sorts of disciplinery cases in all sorts of sports.

As you say, the BCCI rightfully should demand a proper explanation and if the advice they're getting from their team is that the hearing wasn't conducted properly, then they are right to back their team, but should it be demonstrated that the process was reasonable, then they don't really have grounds for complaint.

 

[duffer]

Yeah I know what you are saying mate, but I'm not sure they will be reasonable about the whole thing. I can't see them standing for it no matter what line of thinking drove Procter to his decision.

 

[Matt79]

Yep no matter what the outcome, this is going to get incredibly ugly, far more so than it already is.

The only scenario that will not result in a disaster is that it turns out that Proctor either:
- had a clear reason for finding about Harbhajhan and that when that comes out the BCCI and Indian media accept his decision, or
- made some serious errors in reaching his findings or that there were serious problems with the evidence the Aussies provided, and when that comes out Cricket Australia and Australian media accept that his decision was wrong.

Anything else and this is going to be Bodyline, but with 24hours news networks and instant communication ensuring there isn't the time factor that existed in Bodyline that meant that people had time to process what was happening and calm down a bit before making decisions.

 

[duffer]

The only scenario that will not result in a disaster is that it turns out that Proctor either:
- had a clear reason for finding about Harbhajhan and that when that comes out the BCCI and Indian media accept his decision, or
- made some serious errors in reaching his findings or that there were serious problems with the evidence the Aussies provided, and when that comes out Cricket Australia and Australian media accept that his decision was wrong.

Anything else and this is going to be Bodyline, but with 24hours news networks and instant communication ensuring there isn't the time factor that existed in Bodyline that meant that people had time to process what was happening and calm down a bit before making decisions.

Fat chance of them letting this die easily.

Sigh, guess we'll just have to wait and see. Hopefully there'll be some level of transparency on the whole matter.

 

[Johnners]

At this point in time, I think it's highly unlikely that either team is going to admit they're wrong, and that 1 team will almost certainly feel agreived with the final decision. Honestly can't see a happy ending.

 

[Matt79]

Fat chance of them letting this die easily.

Sigh, guess we'll just have to wait and see. Hopefully there'll be some level of transparency on the whole matter.

Yeah, agreed.

 

[Random Hero]

Not to talk about cricket or anything ... but it looks like Hayden is going to struggle to be fit for next week's match, so who comes in? Rodgers? That opening juggernaunt Shane Watson? Push Hussey up and play Katich?

Incidently, is this the first test Hayden will have missed since he came back into the team around 2000? Quite the streak he's got going.

 

[Johnners]

Hussey up, Katich at 4 imo.

 

[Freddie_Fittler]

Not to talk about cricket or anything ... but it looks like Hayden is going to struggle to be fit for next week's match, so who comes in? Rodgers? That opening juggernaunt Shane Watson? Push Hussey up and play Katich?

Incidently, is this the first test Hayden will have missed since he came back into the team around 2000? Quite the streak he's got going.

Please no. Hussey can open, but I don't like him as an opener, I would choose M. Elliot or S. Katich.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Rogers been making any runs?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Please no. Hussey can open, but I don't like him as an opener, I would choose M. Elliot or S. Katich.

Elliott's made all his runs in OD stuff, really. May as well pick Michael Dighton.

 

[Matt79]

Not to talk about cricket or anything ... but it looks like Hayden is going to struggle to be fit for next week's match, so who comes in? Rodgers? That opening juggernaunt Shane Watson? Push Hussey up and play Katich?

Incidently, is this the first test Hayden will have missed since he came back into the team around 2000? Quite the streak he's got going.

I reckon Hayden will get up - the bloke is a machine.

If he doesn't, I reckon they'll give Rogers a go, given its at his home ground and his record there. Imagine this next test as the one you make your debut in!