• 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.

Harbhajan reignites racism storm

Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Stu274 said:
Just stating fact mate, at least that is how the law sees it in this country & IM pretty sure the game in question was in this country not elsewhere?
As with drug smugglers etc if you travel to another country you should know the laws & you should follow them or suffer the consequences.
Click to expand...
There are laws in india about family abuse too.
So when the aussies come here they should leave the word "bastard" out of their dictionary and symonds in a way could be charged for insulting our monkey god if he thinks "monkey is abusive.
It is better if you leave the criminal laws out of sport and let it be aestheic.
 
Matt79

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
sirdj said:
In legal terms it does not have to be reckless to constitute slander. The legal defination of slander is "communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation".

So to claim in a public forum that Harbhajan said it without adding that it is in 'your opinion' constitutes slander.
Click to expand...
Harbhajan called Symonds a monkey.

Prove that's false.
 
Cevno

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Stu274 said:
You seem to miss the point.
Abuse & racist abuse are two different things weather you like it or not.
Click to expand...
I call my sister "bandar" or " monkey" affectionately it is neither abuse nor racism.
Different phrases have different meanings and the crux of the matter on hand is How we determine what is racist or what is not.
 
LongHopCassidy

LongHopCassidy

International Captain
silentstriker said:
Jusy popping into this slop fest to say that's not how law works. The onus is always, always, on the accuser.
Click to expand...
The argument's not whether he should be banned or not as per the approval of the law. What's contentious is Harbhajan and the BCCI assuming the moral high ground as a consequence of Harbhajan's exoneration.

When he gets off on the grounds of 'not proven', but then admits to abuse anyway, it seems a spurious platform to operate from, frankly.
 
sirdj

sirdj

State Vice-Captain
Matt79 said:
Sorry, I just don't agree with any of the points you make there. Someone being half-white means that they can't be discriminated against on account of the other half of their heritage? Or racial abuse can only happen to people of darker skin than the abuser? Both are ridiculous propositions.

And what's trivialising in saying that being denigrated about the heritage of one of your parents is unacceptable? What is it that we non-coloured people are failing to understand here? You're saying that the use of the word "monkey" is a molehill? Is the use of the word "black"? To echo the argument that monkey was just describing what Symonds looks like, surely calling some a black something-or-other is just describing what they look like? I abhor racism in all its forms, and while sometimes the specific examples can seem line-ball or even, yes trivial, the only way to effectively remove it from a sport or environment is to smack down every example that occurs.
Click to expand...
The use of the word black in itself is not racist unless its a prefix to another abuse & then it does not even compare with monkey.
While I appreciate your attitude towards racism, if you trivialize it then it loses its significance and then people will play the race card at any given instance and occasion and you will have to comply each time.
 
S

Stu274

Cricket Spectator
Ok so now you recon someone can just kill someone on the cricket pitch & no-one can do anything about it?
Laws are laws & yes the Aussies should respect the laws of India & other countries it travels to. Im quite sure that once the term bastard is determined to be seen as such a comment in India that the Aussies would have the common sense to then not use it unlike Harbajhan did.


Cevno said:
There are laws in india about family abuse too.
So when the aussies come here they should leave the word "bastard" out of their dictionary and symonds in a way could be charged for insulting our monkey god if he thinks "monkey is abusive.
It is better if you leave the criminal laws out of sport and let it be aestheic.
Click to expand...
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Matt79 said:
Stu, can you please put your responses AFTER the comment you're quoting? It's quite annoying the way you're currently doing it, with the quoted comment appearing after your reply.
Click to expand...
Yeah, odd TSTL, that crickmate idiot always did the same thing.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
LongHopCassidy said:
The argument's not whether he should be banned or not as per the approval of the law. What's contentious is Harbhajan and the BCCI assuming the moral high ground as a consequence of Harbhajan's exoneration.

When he gets off on the grounds of 'not proven', but then admits to abuse anyway, it seems a spurious platform to operate from, frankly.
Click to expand...
Oh, yea I agree. Personally, I think he said it. The problem is how they initially ruled against him without solid evidence. I wouldn't mind if Harbhajan gets banned for life, and I have no time or respect for a douchebag like him anyway (see sig.) He has always been an ass, and this whole incident has left me with absolutely zero respect for him. Not only do I think he said it, he probably meant it in the worst way too, rather than the heat of the moment. He's an ass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top