Harbhajan reignites racism storm

[honestbharani]

I for one am very confident that if the Aussies agree to only claim catches they thought they had taken, then that is how they would play the game

have u ever watched Steve Waugh trying to claim that joke of a catch against Srikkanth in his debut ODI series?????


He picked up the bloody ball from the floor and then appealed... Sure the Aussies will only claim catches they think they have caught...

 

[archie mac]

then how in the hell can our grapes be sour????


And what I meant by the first line was that, there was enough doubt on the catch being taken and even if one were to assume it was taken cleanly, he did ground the ball when rolling over and not in complete control of the ball and there is no way he wouldn't have known that, therefore, there was enough grounds for the umpire to NOT take the fielders' word on this one, whatever be the agreement. And Clarke is no angel. To me, he, Dhoni and perhaps Jayawardene are among the top guys when it comes to claiming such catches in world cricket.

It is sour when you start blaming the loss on conspiracy theories, or that the umpires are cheating, or that the Aussies are cheating

It is sour grapes when you say it was obvious the ball touched the ground, when I have watched the replay 100 times and still can not tell, and the umpire did the right thing, they agreed they would take the fielders word and he ruled it that way

The umpires cost India that game (not that I am sure they would have won anyway), not the Aussies appealing for catches. India do the same thing and will continue to do it

 

[honestbharani]

It is sour when you start blaming the loss on conspiracy theories, or that the umpires are cheating, or that the Aussies are cheating

It is sour grapes when you say it was obvious the ball touched the ground, when I have watched the replay 100 times and still can not tell, and the umpire did the right thing, they agreed they would take the fielders word and he ruled it that way

The umpires cost India that game (not that I am sure they would have won anyway), not the Aussies appealing for catches. India do the same thing and will continue to do it

Bucknor has a history with Indian players and there is enough room to suspect stuff about him. Have made it clear why in a post in the official thread, can't be bothered to do it again here. Benson was just plain incompetent but his incompetence cost us more than Australia and is one of the main reasons Australia won.


Aussies are not exactly cheats in the sense that claiming such catches seems to happen everywhere, but when you make an agreement and then still claim such catches, your claims to playing fair will be questioned. Why is that a surprise, I cannot fathom...


And yes, it was obvious that the ball touched the ground. Watch the replay, watch Clarke's finger positions and where they are pointed and tell me how is it possible to take a clean catch when the ball is so low from that position? And leaving such circumstantial evidence aside, he quite obviously did ground the ball while rolling over and as such, by the law, it is not out. It is one thing to claim such catches when there are no agreements, but when an agreement is made, it assumes that the players will be fair and here, Clarke wasn't... End of story. As I said, to me Ponting appears the more honest sort and I tend to think he might have thought he was in control of the ball when he appealed for that Dhoni catch, but CLarke is just a different story.

 

[archie mac]

Bucknor has a history with Indian players and there is enough room to suspect stuff about him. Have made it clear why in a post in the official thread, can't be bothered to do it again here. Benson was just plain incompetent but his incompetence cost us more than Australia and is one of the main reasons Australia won.


Aussies are not exactly cheats in the sense that claiming such catches seems to happen everywhere, but when you make an agreement and then still claim such catches, your claims to playing fair will be questioned. Why is that a surprise, I cannot fathom...


And yes, it was obvious that the ball touched the ground. Watch the replay, watch Clarke's finger positions and where they are pointed and tell me how is it possible to take a clean catch when the ball is so low from that position? And leaving such circumstantial evidence aside, he quite obviously did ground the ball while rolling over and as such, by the law, it is not out. It is one thing to claim such catches when there are no agreements, but when an agreement is made, it assumes that the players will be fair and here, Clarke wasn't... End of story. As I said, to me Ponting appears the more honest sort and I tend to think he might have thought he was in control of the ball when he appealed for that Dhoni catch, but CLarke is just a different story.

I have watched it, and yet again they had an agreement, fair catch for mine, you can't tell on replays, hence the agreement

As for the umpire that is just plain and simple rubbish. They had a bad game, Bucknor with millions of Indians watching is going to cheat?

 

[archie mac]

have u ever watched Steve Waugh trying to claim that joke of a catch against Srikkanth in his debut ODI series?????


He picked up the bloody ball from the floor and then appealed... Sure the Aussies will only claim catches they think they have caught...

I don't think they had an agreement in that game. They did in this one, and I have no doubt that the Aussies will only claim catches they think are out

 

[Andrew Pollock]

the Aussies will only claim catches they think are out

You are funnier than Adam Sandler

 

[archie mac]

You are funnier than Adam Sandler

Worst actor

 

[luckyeddie]

You know, if Michael Clarke told me that today was Sunday, I would ask for a second opinion.

 

[Jono]

 

[Son Of Coco]

then how in the hell can our grapes be sour?

Maybe you drink too much pineapple juice

 

[silentstriker]

I don't think they had an agreement in that game. They did in this one, and I have no doubt that the Aussies will only claim catches they think are out

Not that Australians are unique in this regard, but you sure about that?

 

[Richard]

You know, if Michael Clarke told me that today was Sunday, I would ask for a second opinion.

A return to the norm, it seems, for Mr Sanders.

 

[howardj]

See Symonds in the paper yesterday effectively saying that he doesn't mind being on the end of racist remarks if they're from his friends, but apparently Harbijhan's comment was 'socially offensive', he said.

I'll say it again that this whole thing was only reported because Harbijhan got under the skin of Ricky Ponting by people labelling him as his bunny before the Test match, and Ponting's dismissal off an inside edge onto the pad in the first innings.

I think it has little to do with Symonds feeling deeply offended.

 

[JBH001]

I have watched it, and yet again they had an agreement, fair catch for mine, you can't tell on replays, hence the agreement

As for the umpire that is just plain and simple rubbish. They had a bad game, Bucknor with millions of Indians watching is going to cheat?

Incidentally, there was an article in the Sunday Star Times here in New Zealand, quoting Fraser Stewart of the MCC Law Department at Lords who stated that the Ponting catch (and the Harris catch in SA) were unequivocally not out (he did not see the Clarke catch). However, this does not mean that the players themselves may not have thought it was not out, depending on the catch taken - as least not arguably Ponting, but Harris and Sinclair against Bangladesh would certainly have known and I think Clarke too. But if so, it certainly does call into question the adage that the fielder "always" knows and agreements of the kind Ponting has been trying to engineer are therefore rendered null and void.

 

[luckyeddie]

A return to the norm, it seems, for Mr Sanders.

I'd be interested in anyone coming up with a 'first sledge average'.How are you fixed?

 

[luckyeddie]

See Symonds in the paper yesterday effectively saying that he doesn't mind being on the end of racist remarks if they're from his friends, but apparently Harbijhan's comment was 'socially offensive', he said.

QUOTE]

Symonds thinks that Social is offensive?

He must read CricketWeb.

 

[Richard]

See Symonds in the paper yesterday effectively saying that he doesn't mind being on the end of racist remarks if they're from his friends, but apparently Harbijhan's comment was 'socially offensive', he said.

Symonds thinks that Social is offensive?

He must read CricketWeb.

No capital "s".

I'd be interested in anyone coming up with a 'first sledge average'.How are you fixed?

Well I'm a tadge busy @themo, but will see what I can do.

 

[Anil]

They had an agreement, because you can't tell on the replay, that is the reason they came up with the agreement. You must have great eyes to tell on the replay

Sour Grapes

whether he caught the ball cleanly or not(and there is doubt on that), he clearly grounded the ball while rolling over(there is absolutely no doubt on that one, if you can't see that on the replay, you must be watching some other replay ), that in itself would invalidate the catch...anyway, no point in going back and forth on this, the guy got away with his claim, let's move on to perth...

 

[archie mac]

Not that Australians are unique in this regard, but you sure about that?

Let me ask, did the captains have an agreement in that series?

If yes, then that is a worry

I am still sure if they have an agreement in this series (Aus V Ind) then the Aussies will only claim catches that they think they have taken

Edit: and so will India

 

[archie mac]

whether he caught the ball cleanly or not(and there is doubt on that), he clearly grounded the ball while rolling over(there is absolutely no doubt on that one, if you can't see that on the replay, you must be watching some other replay ), that in itself would invalidate the catch...anyway, no point in going back and forth on this, the guy got away with his claim, let's move on to perth...

Mate I just watched it again, and I still can't see anything that would make me doubt the word of Clarke