Absolutely spot on. While I agree with the punishment Symonds got, it is just pathetic to see media doing a character assassination of the guy. No ones wants to be left behind. The amount of crap these journos write, I am surprised that they have the courage to go to bars.
As you said some of the articles regarding Symonds have been crap, any journo who dislikes Symonds has just poured in all their venom into their articles, they are just trying to pull him down as much as possible, as they know in the current scenrio anything written about him would easily be beleived by anybody who reads that.
Matter of time before another player comes along, gets pillored in the media for something like this then kills himself? Not all that likely but a possibility. Imagine the fall-out from that.
Some? I'd hazard that most have been rubbish. Haven't seen one I can think of that hasn't taken several pot-shots at Symonds. Whether people think the punishment was just or not, I can't remember having seen such vitriol directed at a sportsperson. As bad as Symonds is, surely he can't have been as disliked as Steve Waugh was yet in the press, Waugh was nothing short of a saint. They're ganging up on Symonds for some reason and I've never read of heard anthing which makes believe he's any worse a guy than many, many other top-level sportspeople.
There is more than sufficient evidence to label Malcolm Conn as a jerk
Surely now Symonds would be knowing what Bhajji would've felt.
There was no comparison. Merely the recalling of two different instances when he felt unsafe. Why on earth would you defend such an obviously unpleasant person. When your own teammates turn on you, that may (to anyone with even a hint of self awareness) tell you something.
Oh noes, but Matthew Elliott must be a really bad bloke, because he didn't get on with Steve Waugh!!!!
While it would be a great tragedy and a huge shock to the sporting and media world, the criticism that these journalists are getting from CW is a little silly, as some people don't appear to know about the freedom of speech. Not aiming with directly at you either mate, just a general sort of comment. Journalists can write anything they want provided their editors will publish it, and that's fair enough. Obviously some publications and writers gain notoriety for not being as 'professional' as others, but they've still got every entitlement to give their opinion however they want, so long as they aren't just making things up.
Malcolm.Perm said:
Never said he wasn't a jerk. Just saying he seems to be gathering a disproportionate amount of attention for being a jerk than the other jerks he plays with and past jerks, none of whom are any worse a jerk than he is and penis.
No.. seriously what are CA trying to achieve by humiliating Symonds publicly, this has to stop, has anybody heard Symonds utter a single word in the media or rebel against CA in any given way, so why are these morons trying to blow up the whole issue to massive proportions, after reading this, i think its CA who needs "professional help" and not Symonds.
It's all about limiting their liability
So, on the one hand, you blow up about Slater not receiving professional help when you claim he needed it. And yet, on the other hand, when CA offer professional help to Symonds it's somehow wrong? I'm not sure what the guy needs, but clearly going fishing when you know a team meeting is on, is not a normal way for a member of a professional team to act. Nor has he, according to his teammates, been acting normally for quite some time. Again, I would trust the judgement of people like Ponting and Clarke more than I would most others, especially guys who haven't been around the team.
