Symonds sent home

[SJS]

Isn't Symonds bashing the flavour of the season right now, so why should Haigh be left behind, right now writing only nasty things about Symonds' is going to help all these journos make their articles spicy and attract maximum reader interest, nobody would be least bit interested in reading (or for that matter writing) anything good about Symonds atm.

I am not sure you can say Haigh is indulging in "Symonds-bashing". He, like many others - yours truly included - has just had enough of the ill-mannered louts that seem to be increasing in numbers on the world's cricket fields. Haigh has, in the same article used very strong words for others calling Harbhajan a "a juvenile smart-arse" while addressing Symond's as "an arrogant bonehead".

The authorities have been very lenient with the increasing numbers of such delinquents and a section of the fans seems to find such behaviour strangely 'attractive" (for want of another more suitable word).

We need to stop looking at our favourite cricketers with tinted glasses and ask ourselves where this is going to end up.

 

[four_or_six]

I am not sure you can say Haigh is indulging in "Symonds-bashing". He, like many others - yours truly included - has just had enough of the ill-mannered louts that seem to be increasing in numbers on the world's cricket fields. Haigh has, in the same article used very strong words for others calling Harbhajan a "a juvenile smart-arse" while addressing Symond's as "an arrogant bonehead".

The authorities have been very lenient with the increasing numbers of such delinquents and a section of the fans seems to find such behaviour strangely 'attractive" (for want of another more suitable word).

We need to stop looking at our favourite cricketers with tinted glasses and ask ourselves where this is going to end up.

Please God not like the Premiership.

 

[pup11]

Symonds is not the worst rule-breaker in world cricket, there have been and there are worse cricketers in that regard, but none of them have had to face this much flak from all the quarters of the media, its almost like as if he has become every journo's favourite punching bag.
I mean its his life, and atm whatever his actions might be, its taking only effecting his career and personal life, yeah it also has its effect on his team on a short-term, but more or less he is messing his own career and life, so if he has made up his mind to destroy his life and career then let him go ahead and do it, why should everybody hound the guy and make so much fuss about him.

 

[Precambrian]

Symonds is not the worst rule-breaker in world cricket, there have been and there are worse cricketers in that regard, but none of them have had to face this much flak from all the quarters of the media, its almost like as if he has become every journo's favourite punching bag.
I mean its his life, and atm whatever his actions might be, its taking only effecting his career and personal life, yeah it also has its effect on his team on a short-term, but more or less he is messing his own career and life, so if he has made up his mind to destroy his life and career then let him go ahead and do it, why should everybody hound the guy and make so much fuss about him.

Because Australian Cricket team is hardly giving them hardly any cricket to write about.

 

[social]

Putting Symonds' behaviour into perspective

36 members of the is organistion have been accused of spousal abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad cheques
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
3 have done time for assault
71, repeat 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 currently are defendants in lawsuits and
84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year


Can you guess which organization this is?

Australian Football League? No

National Rugby League? No

Australian First Class Cricket? No





Give up yet? . .. .







Scroll down

















Neither,

it's the 535 members of the AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENT IN CANBERRA





The same group of Idiots that crank out hundreds of new laws each year,
designed to keep the rest of us in line !!!!!!!!!

And they say Symonds needs therapy

 

[Sanz]

How many of them play Cricket ?

 

[Sanz]

Haigh's point seems to be that, ultimately, if a player disrespects his teammates (as seems to be the case in Symonds latest scrape) it will catch up with him.

Rumour is that he had a verbal clash with his Captain after the message to go home was delivered to him.

 

[R_D]

WTF? What in Symonds' mannerism is monkey-like, would you be kind enough to let us all know that!!

Lets see his hair and the way he puts his zinc cream on his lips to superimpose his lips.
Search the net and you'll see what i mean....

 

[pup11]

Rumour is that he had a verbal clash with his Captain after the message to go home was delivered to him.

Next thing we might get to hear is that Symonds is conspiring to assassinate the Aussie PM.

 

[pup11]

Lets see his hair and the way he puts his zinc cream on his lips to superimpose his lips.
Search the net and you'll see what i mean....

Appearence and mannerism are two different things, in case you didn't knew!

 

[R_D]

Next thing we might get to hear is that Symonds is conspiring to assassinate the Aussie PM.

not sure about this one but the rumour Sanz seems quite close to being true.

 

[Top_Cat]

I think it's quite obvious that Hansen was not making a judgement on whether the act of using the word 'monkey' in isolation was offensive or not.

He applied the reasonable person test in asking whether said reasonable person would be offended in the situation in question and he included the possibility that the word monkey was used. A white reasonable person would likely react very differently to a black reasonable person and I don't think his judgement reflects that at all, nor the standards of the community at large.

 

[Top_Cat]

Well-known Aussie-basher Gideon Haigh enters the debate (from The Guardian):

Surly Symonds the one that got away

Officially Andrew Symonds is to do a month's penance for going fishing instead of attending a team meeting ahead of Australia's three perfunctory one-day internationals against Bangladesh. Truth is that Symonds, a super cricketer, is also a surly boor, who has finally even alienated forbearing colleagues.

Thus have been revealed the true colours of antagonists at the centre of the on-field incident eight months ago that threatened to split the cricket world, the men with whom administrators stood shoulder-to-shoulder in the conviction that they could not possibly be at fault: first Harbhajan Singh, a juvenile smart-arse, was suspended during the IPL for slapping similarly excitable countryman Shantakumaran Sreesanth; now Symonds, an arrogant bonehead, has been invited to reflect on his insouciance. One wonders whether events might have played out differently had the ICC referee Mike Procter done his job in January and simply suspended both players for their contrived and unnecessary altercation, instead of allowing so much racial hay to be made. Instead, it has been disrespect to team-mates that has finally undone both men. That, at least, remains a taboo - maybe, in cricket, the last remaining.

Now if Haigh, the best current cricketing writer for my money & at worst a bloke who knows his onions, is laying on the invective (even-handedly too) there might possibly be something in it?

Well, first off I've said a number of times in thread thread I reckon Symonds is a jerk. Second, as fine a writer as Haigh is generally, someone who does this caper professionally should be above name-calling in my view. I, personally, found the above to be pretty damn unprofessional, regardless of the substance of the charge. Frankly, aside from all the other considerations, it's boring and the irony in him calling Symonds boorish after writing such a bogan piece is palpable. If I wanted to read such lightweight commentary, I'd read others like Dorries and Conn. Expect more from Haigh.

 

[SJS]

A sobering letdown for skipper
By Jon Pierik
August 31, 2008

IF there is one man Andrew Symonds has truly let down in his latest meltdown, it's his great mate Michael Clarke.

Clarke is not only a young, inexperienced captain who shouldn't have to put up with disciplinary issues, he is also the man who twice has tried to save Symonds through his tumultuous career.

On the 2006 South African tour, it was Clarke - six years younger than Symonds - who quelled a potential fight between Symonds and a Cheetahs rugby union player in Cape Town nightclub Hemisphere.

And it was Clarke on the 2005 Ashes tour who did his best to sober up Symonds after his now infamous alcohol-fuelled march around Cardiff nightclubs on the eve of Australia's one-day match against Bangladesh.

After noticing him at breakfast in the same clothes as the night before, Clarke threw Symonds in the shower and did his best to cover for him, until Symonds was exposed during the warm-ups as being drunk.

Team management then attempted their own cover-up, informing the media - including this reporter - Symonds was a late withdrawal because he had "a bug".

That didn't wash, and the ruse was soon blown wide open. Livid CA board members threatened to terminate his contract, and Symonds was lucky to escape with a two-match ban, much to the anger of then chairman of selectors Trevor Hohns, who wanted him sent home.

Now Clarke has had to sit in on a disciplinary hearing on Friday night and tell Symonds he wasn't wanted with the team and had to go home.

Sometimes friendship will only go so far. CA board members were in a more forgiving mood in a tele-conference call Saturday when they opted not to tear up his contract.

This move was justified with revelations Symonds is struggling to mentally cope with the pressures, demands and fame he now enjoys.

It's understood his fishing trip was a way of clearing his mind, but why he bypassed a compulsory morning team meeting - when he could have gone in the afternoon - is bewildering.

If he was mentally tired or struggling, he should have been able to talk with Clarke or his more senior teammates about the problems.

If anyone could have understood, it was Clarke, having seen first-hand what Symonds was capable of when his mind wonders.

The Sunday Mail (Qld)​

 

[Dasa]

Putting Symonds' behaviour into perspective

Using a fake/outdated/stupid Internet rumour/chain e-mail doesn't help put Symonds' behaviour into perspective or help your credibility.

 

[Precambrian]

There's a possibility that Andrew took Clarke for granted. Also Bangladesh for granted.

Having said that, i think he's got his punishment. To prevent him from touring India is taking it a bit far in my opinion.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Well, first off I've said a number of times in thread thread I reckon Symonds is a jerk. Second, as fine a writer as Haigh is generally, someone who does this caper professionally should be above name-calling in my view. I, personally, found the above to be pretty damn unprofessional, regardless of the substance of the charge. Frankly, aside from all the other considerations, it's boring and the irony in him calling Symonds boorish after writing such a bogan piece is palpable. If I wanted to read such lightweight commentary, I'd read others like Dorries and Conn. Expect more from Haigh.

Fair enough. I personally don't think there's anything "bogan" about it, one might baulk at calling a cricketer an "arrogant bonehead", but to my reading of it there's at least some of the weight of Haigh's intellect behind it. He seems to be indulging in that most Australian of virtues: forthright brevity.

 

[Top_Cat]

Fair enough. I personally don't think there's anything "bogan" about it, one might baulk at calling a cricketer an "arrogant bonehead", but to my reading of it there's at least some of the weight of Haigh's intellect behind it. He seems to be indulging in that most Australian of virtues: forthright brevity.

Yeah but look at his solution; ban them. Advocating preventing both players from playing cricket for a couple of matches I find a bit 'old man yells at cloud'. If both cases have shown anything, it's that punitive actions by themselves have done nothing to curb their behaviour.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah but look at his solution; ban them. Advocating preventing both players from playing cricket for a couple of matches I find a bit 'old man yells at cloud'. If both cases have shown anything, it's that punitive actions by themselves have done nothing to curb their behaviour.

One of my all-time favourite expressions. Cheers.

 

[Precambrian]

Yep. The solution mentioned would be funny had it not been so farcical. I think Haigh is also perceived to be a serial BCCI basher. But i like him as a cricket writer.