• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** India in Australia

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Awful article. I posted my thoughts on another forum:

"oh dear. how is roebuck one of the most respected cricket journalists when he's going around writing crap like this?

yes, sack a man who has just won 16 straight games as captain. sack a man who is the only one to sweep a series in south africa. sack a man who became the second captain to sweet an ashes series 5-0. sack a man who brought us back from the brink of what could've easily been the end of our dominance (ashes 2005). sack a man who has lost a mere 3 tests out of the 40 he's captained. sack a man with the best winning percentage in cricketing history as captain. wonderful idea roeby!

"If Cricket Australia cares a fig for the tattered reputation of our national team in our national sport, it will not for a moment longer tolerate the sort of arrogant and abrasive conduct seen from the captain and his senior players over the past few days."

haha...tattered reputation? if anyone's reputation has been tattered over the last few days, it's that of the umpires, h. singh and the indian cricket board. what have ponting and his men done wrong? what have they done that no other captain or player would've done in the situation. does he condone the sacking of kumble because he is supporting a racist in a hearing, refused to shake the umpires hand and basically accused the opposition of cheating? i think ponting, having his integrity questioned so much over the last few days despite doing NOTHING wrong has handled the whole thing very well. i still fail to see how ponting is the bad guy out of all this...i really am struggling.

"Beyond comparison it was the ugliest performance put up by an Australian side for 20 years. The only surprising part of it is that the Indians have not packed their bags and gone home. There is no justice for them in this country, nor any manners."

ugliest performance from us? WTF!! we did nothing that we've not done in any other game!! there have been countless times where a player from our team has knicked a ball and not walked...just as there have been countless times an opposition player has knicked the ball and not walked!! it seems roebuck is confusing the ugly performance by the umpires to be an ugly performance by us...funny...a lot of people have been doing that in the wake of this game.

"That the senior players in the Australian team are oblivious to the fury they raised among many followers of the game in this country and beyond merely confirms their own narrow and self-obsessed viewpoint."

yeah, how dare those bastards go along with the umpires decisions and do their best to win a test match!!!! HOW DARE THEY!!!

"Doubtless they were not exposed to the messages that poured in from distressed enthusiasts aghast to see the scenes of bad sportsmanship and triumphalism presented at the SCG during and after the Test."

bad sportsmanship?? where?? the only thing i could see possibly being labelled as bad sportsmanship was the appeal against dravid...but every single team would've gone up for that one...so...null and void there...and he can't be referring to clarke's catch, because i have no doubt clarke felt he caught it. same with ponting's. we saw ponting admit he didn't get to one earlier in the test so..interesting how you forget about that one roeby.

"Harbhajan Singh can be an irritating young man but he is head of a family and responsible for raising nine people. And all the Australian elders want to do is to hunt him from the game. Australian fieldsmen fire insults from the corners of their mouths, an intemperate Sikh warrior overreacts and his rudeness is seized upon. It might impress barrack room lawyers."

wow...so roebuck thinks racism is comparable to sledging? that pretty much shows how much credibility this article has...

"Probably the worst aspect of the Australians' performance was their conduct at the end. When the last catch was taken they formed into a huddle and started jumping up and down like teenagers at a rave. It was not euphoria. It was ecstasy. They had swallowed a dangerous pill called vengeance. Not one player so much as thought about shaking hands with the defeated and departing. So much for Andrew Flintoff consoling a stricken opponent in his hour of defeat."

yeah, really disgusting how a team celebrates after a tight victory. really disgusting. and as a matter of fact, i did see all the australians shake the hands of the indians. all of them. pity the same can't be said for kumble who didn't shake hands with the umpires...where's the diatribe against him?

"Ponting has not provided the leadership expected from an Australian cricket captain and so must be sacked."

enlighten me. what would any other cricket captain in the world have done in the exact same circumstances?

this is merely sensationalist, reactionary BULL**** from someone who obviously has more respect than he should have. one of the worst, most misguided articles i think i've ever read. how are the indians being made the victims after racially abusing one of our players, accusing us of cheating, their captain not shaking hands with the umpires, and threatening to cancel the tour if their player doesn't get off. UNBELIEVABLE."
It shows a lot of your credibility here, mate...


LOTS of people find personal insults just as bad as racist insults.... Maybe in Australia, the racist insults are far worse than personal insults, but it isn't so in INdia...
 

Bracken

U19 Debutant
I think there was more than enough grounds to suspect their "neutrality"..

Again, I think "cheat" is too strong a word. I think they were far more ready to give the benefit of the doubt to the Aussies more than the Indians... Maybe it is just plain incompetence and maybe there was just a bit of bias, maybe even irrational bias... I don't know and honestly, I don't care... It was obvious that they ruined the game for the Indians and to me, it is perfectly understandable, if not totally justifiable, why Kumble didn't shake the hand of the umpire... And yes, whether the mods like it or not, after a match like this, there is bound to be questions reg. the umpire's integrity. The Indian team and the board are doing pretty much the same, asking Bucknor to be kept out and having won that particular battle... Don't see why anyone would expect followers to take any other view of the matter, really..... If you see horrendous decisions given against only one side, just like that match with Javed Akhtar, you are bound to have questions reg. the umpires' integrity.....


Maybe I did jump the gun reg. the umpires were biased comment, but I still think there is enough room for suspicion there... But in adherence to the practiced norm, I am more than willing to accept that they are innocent till proven guilty. Doesn't hide the fact that they were massively incompetent and cost India the game... Enough reasons not to shake the hands of such officials, for me...
I understand that emotions are running high, and that you are more than a little annoyed at the outcome- and with good reason. Still, I really think that this does yourself a bit of a disservice. Yes, the umpiring performance was poor, and yes, India got the rough end of the pineapple. No dispute at all there.

If all of the decisions went one way, then you could make a case. But your contention that the horrendous decisions went ONLY against the Indians is just not the case. There were some pretty bad decisions that went the other way also- albeit certainly not in the same volume as suffered by India.

Whilst it is obviously fair to condemn the umpires for not performing to the level that a competent umpire should, the suggestion that they were corrupt just rankles at me. There is nothing that constitutes even the slightest case that the poor decisions were based on corruption, rather than incompetence.
 

ColdSnow

School Boy/Girl Captain
From BBC:

"Australia were 134-6 in their first innings when Symonds, on 30 at the time, got a thick edge to Ishant Sharma."

I think that had symonds been given out at that stage, India may well have won this test match. Thats all I want to say...
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
They're still crybabies even if it's against the Harby hearing. Man up and accept the bloody punishment. They're esentially blackmailing the ICC into having the result of the hearing overturned by threatening to cancel the tour. I don't know how you can suggest they've done anything BUT throw their toys out of the pram.
sst calling someone crybaby.......



Pottle... kettle... black... anyone?????
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I'm sure the ICC wouldn't ban someone for 3 matches unless they had sufficient evidence. Lehmann copped his ban on the chin and admitted he was a complete wanker. Time for Harby to do the same.
time for someone to bloody damn prove that Harby said whatever he is alleged to have said.....



But then again, y wait for proofs when it is not an Aussie under the hammer?? 8-)
 

Agent TBY

International Captain
Was laughing my ass off at a columnist who was wondering if what Symonds misheard as "monkey" was actually Harbhajan saying "Teri maa ki". :laugh:

I'm getting a bit sick and tired of the Indian media, really. Some of the crap in the newspapers is almost as bad as some of the stuff posted in this thread.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Use logic mate. Why would the Aussies make up a charge of racism? That's pretty bloody serious stuff. If Harby didn't say anything untoward to Symonds, why on Earth would be he so damn apologetic towards him on the field? And if it was only minor, why would Symonds just not accept the apology? It seems the Indians are doing anything to get out of this charge and it's ridiculous. I just see absolutely no reason why the Australians would make up a fake charge against Harby...
Use logic mate... Why would someone like Sachin insist Harby is clean if he wasn't?
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Very possible.
Impossible, simply because why else would SAchin be asked to present at the hearing? He is not the captain or the vice captain, is he?

And why else would he be so sure that Harby is clean?


Maybe the Aussies don't like Harby and the fact that he has Ponting's number??? So they want to get him out of the way and are ganging up on him??? And CA has no other option but to support them, because they too, like the BCCI, back up their players????


It is just as ridiculous as your suggestion, so take your pick, folks....
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Casteism is racism under a different name, and there has been a long history of discrimination against darker skinned Indians. Light skin has always been preferred for hundreds of years, when it comes to marriage, jobs, etc.
coming to semantics again, are we?



The thing is, the odd "monkey" insult aside, which has many connotations, in that even dark skinned people of our country get called that, you don't see them being kept out of society etc and therefore, it is not the same. Casteism is another form of discrimination, but racism, the way it is understood the world over, didn't really exist in India. Sure, fair skin was always preferred to dark skin in most cases, but blatant racism, to put it that way, never really existed in India....

Doesn't really absolve Harby calling Symonds a monkey now, though.... If he did, he has to cop it, for sure. But the thing is, with people like Sachin denying it so vehemently, I don't think he would have said it.... And I do believe that the ref has reached his conclusion on the basis of what can only be very flimsy evidence.
 

Evermind

International Debutant
Do you have any proof of this? Or is this your first attempt at fiction?
How much proof do you want? Almost all the players admit to copping severe (sometimes racial) abuse from the Australians at some point. Here's something from Mahanama:

http://content-www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/95739.html

It seems racist sledging isn't only limited to cricket in Australia;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/26/2127355.htm

If you want official proof of racist sledging, then obviously we'll hardly find much other than the Lehmann incident. But that was the only reported one. Almost all of the subcontinent cricketers have talked about severe abuse and even racial abuse from Australian players. Are you saying that they're making it up?

The issue is that the policy has always been to keep it on the field. You don't go around reporting it. So it's been kept on the field...until now. A stupid policy like that was always going to backfire, but who'd have thunk it'd be used against a subcontinental player?

Hell, even Langer admits that sledging goes way too far at times:

http://www.rediff.com/wc2007/2007/apr/16pont.htm

Do you honestly still think that the Aussies play within the spirit of the game?
 

pup11

International Coach
Hb how can you be so sure about all the things you are saying, till the things aren't clear and there is no proof regarding it, everything that you or timmy say regarding the racism episode is just mere speculation!
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
coming to semantics again, are we?

The thing is, the odd "monkey" insult aside, which has many connotations, in that even dark skinned people of our country get called that, you don't see them being kept out of society etc and therefore, it is not the same. Casteism is another form of discrimination, but racism, the way it is understood the world over, didn't really exist in India. Sure, fair skin was always preferred to dark skin in most cases, but blatant racism, to put it that way, never really existed in India....
I'm sure they let black people do the odd job in Mississippi but preference based on racial trait, in this case skin colour, is racism. Whether the preference is of a small or large matter, it is racism.

Doesn't really absolve Harby calling Symonds a monkey now, though.... If he did, he has to cop it, for sure. But the thing is, with people like Sachin denying it so vehemently, I don't think he would have said it.... And I do believe that the ref has reached his conclusion on the basis of what can only be very flimsy evidence.
And I think the many more Aussie players who are testifying he did shows he did do it and corroborative evidence is not flimsy at all.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
How much proof do you want? Almost all the players admit to copping severe (sometimes racial) abuse from the Australians at some point. Here's something from Mahanama:

http://content-www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/95739.html

It seems racist sledging isn't only limited to cricket in Australia;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/26/2127355.htm

If you want official proof of racist sledging, then obviously we'll hardly find much other than the Lehmann incident. But that was the only reported one. Almost all of the subcontinent cricketers have talked about severe abuse and even racial abuse from Australian players. Are you saying that they're making it up?

The issue is that the policy has always been to keep it on the field. You don't go around reporting it. So it's been kept on the field...until now. A stupid policy like that was always going to backfire, but who'd have thunk it'd be used against a subcontinental player?

Hell, even Langer admits that sledging goes way too far at times:

http://www.rediff.com/wc2007/2007/apr/16pont.htm

Do you honestly still think that the Aussies play within the spirit of the game?
Should we go and get all the examples of other countries doing it?

This whole argument is tripe. This thread - no, this series - has been turned into a farce.
 

gwo

U19 Debutant
Too bad you wouldn't have won that test but for Billy Bowden's bad decision.

*if australia reacted as india are doing now*

HE SHOULD BE SACKED.

ENGLAND ARE CHEATS.

G. JOENS IS DISHONEST AND SHOULD NOT HAVE CLAIMED THE KASPA CATCH.

AUSTRALIA HAVENT LOST THE ASHES IN OVER 25 YEARS BECAUSE THEY DIDNT REALLY LOSE IN EDGEBASTON. LETSE BOY COTT ENGLAND 2009/10 BECAUSE THEY CHEATED AND ITS THEIR FAULT THAT BOWDEN GAVE KASPA OUT DUE TO EXCESSIVE APPEALING

//end bull****
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Too bad you wouldn't have won that test but for Billy Bowden's bad decision.

*if australia reacted as india are doing now*

HE SHOULD BE SACKED.

ENGLAND ARE CHEATS.

G. JOENS IS DISHONEST AND SHOULD NOT HAVE CLAIMED THE KASPA CATCH.

AUSTRALIA HAVENT LOST THE ASHES IN OVER 25 YEARS BECAUSE THEY DIDNT REALLY LOSE IN EDGEBASTON. LETSE BOY COTT ENGLAND 2009/10 BECAUSE THEY CHEATED AND ITS THEIR FAULT THAT BOWDEN GAVE KASPA OUT DUE TO EXCESSIVE APPEALING

//end bull****
Calm down, and don't use all caps. Secondly, it's about six decisions in a single match, not one. And third, I don't know who you refer to by 'you', because unless I have amnesia, I did not play in that series and was actually rooting for Australia.
 
Last edited:

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Here is the difference between Lehmann and Singh in a nutshell: Lehmann made full apologies, verbally and in writing, immediately following his disgraceful racist outburst. Furthermore, I give you Lehmann's words after getting banned for 5 ODIs:

"I would like to place on record the fact that I had a fair hearing"

"I accept the penalty handed down and would like to say once again how regretful I am that the incident took place."

"I meant no offence by my comments and again would like to apologise for making them.

"I would also like to thank the Sri Lankan team for their support and understanding in this matter."

Darren Lehmann is a long way ahead of Singh in the character department, I can tell you.

EDIT: you beat me to it, TopCat!
and yet we haven't seen you provide proof that Bhajji did racially insult Symonds????????????




But then again, if Aussies say it, it is Gospel, isn't it? 8-)
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I'm sure they let black people do the odd job in Mississippi but preference based on racial trait, in this case skin colour, is racism. Whether the preference is of a small or large matter, it is racism.



And I think the many more Aussie players who are testifying he did shows he did do it and corroborative evidence is not flimsy at all.
jobs have NEVER been handed out based on color of the skin in India... And neither have people been denied other social opportunities based on that...


And secondly, it should have been flimsy evidence... Otherwise, it is very very hard to explain the outburst of the senior Indian players, all of whom are very very highly regarded in terms of discipline and behaviour.....
 

Top