The way he appeals for catches, I don't think anyone should ever really trust him anymore. He is just as bad as Dhoni in that respect....
And yes, it is very fishy that he says he never heard anything that Symonds said but only the things that Bhajji said.
Anyways, there never really was any evidence to convict Bhajji of racism and that is exactly what has transpired. Juz don't understand what the big fuss is from the Aussies about it. The same Aussies who now say that the players' words has to carry weight never gave it much thought when Gayle told that Clarke incited him in the CT in 2006... Funny how things change when it is not the person from your camp.....
I think you're right mate: it's not the decision but the way all the outside stuff was going on which leaves a pretty bitter taste. I thought all along that it was pretty surprising he was ever found guilty int he first place, but the ends cannot always justify the means.
take it easy with the hypocrites there... Kumble hasn't appealed for bump ball catches yet......
And yes, the Aussies aren't much better either. There is no need to mention what India have or have not done in the sport, we still are the oxygen for the bloody sport, so go and spout out your nonsense about India not doing well somewhere else.
You talk about it as though racism is foreign in Australia... Quite funny that it should be said because believe me, it is a lot more foreign in India than it is in Australia. And last of all, where the hell is the bloody proof that Bhajji did say something racist? Give that and we will have something to talk about... Of course, Indians would be offended when they branded something they were not... Didn't Smith react like hell when he was termed to have said something "racist"? It is a sensitive issue and people don't like to branded as so and so when it comes to such issues. The Indians were hurt because Bhajji says he didn't say it (and his word is as acceptable to me as Hayden's, Symonds' and Clarke's and Ponting's are) and the Indians see that there is no evidence to suggest otherwise and yet he is penalized. So they say that if the hearing continues in what they believe to be a biased manner, they will walk out... Why can't they do that? Because few Aussies can't accept that they could be wrong?????????
My calling Kumble a hypocrite mate, scame from his banging on about the spirit of thgame, when about 4 weeks ealrier he's verbally abusing Yousuf on the field in India.
My comments about how India have gone and their reactions to things ring true to me. And I accept the Aussies aren't a lot better - there aren't any (or at least many) angels out there, which is a shame of course. I can't recall the last time CA demanded an umpire be withdrawn from a series though, or threatened to cancel a tour unless a discipinary hearing went their way.
Just because a hearing goes against you doesn't mean it was biased!! That's the whole point of it. You might say it was wrong, you might say it should have been overturned (and it probably should have) but it's different to say say it was biased - that there was a predisposition to find against HBS on the part of Proctor is different to saying he got it wrong.
The fuss isn't really that he got off, which imo is fair enough. The fuss is that the proceedings seem to have been hijacked and held to ransom.
That's my point in this, though I asmit I haven't put it across as clearly as I ought to have.
Pretty much shows why emotions in front of logic always results in rubbish. And some of that **** is downright disgraceful.
And Burgey, will all due respect, you've been shown to be pretty damn biased with your views all tour, so nothing too new here.
As far as I'm concerned, both parties are at fault here, BCCI and CA. And going further, the Australian cricket team, and the Indian team.
No surprise there. Wouldn't expect anything more from one of the most biased people on this forum. But its good to see whose opinions I can take with a pinch of salt when it comes to international cricket affairs nowadays.
Love how the true views and bias come out eventually. Its always interesting.
And in the mean time, my (and many other people I assume) opinion of Michael Clarke just fell further. I used to have so much respect for this player two years ago as well.
Jono, you were the bloke I was referring to in my earlier post as saying you "hated" Ponting.
Certainly agree both parties were at fault, and Symonds carried on like a pork chop to get the whole thing started, and his comments in the hearing wer edire to say the least.
But I'm still pretty damn annoyed that one country, any country, can see fit to hold a tour to ransom because a hearing doesn't go their way. I just think it's wrong. And it takes the sport to a place where it really ought not go, imo.
Why did Symonds take offense to Harby patting Lee on the back?
I know he hates the guy but c'mon. I'm not blaming the alleged victim either but sheesh, lighten up.
I don't think he's the sharpest tool in the shed, to put it mildly.
He said a Test is not a time to be friendly and congratulate your opponent on a delivery well bowled, apparently. My worst bloke ever sig continues to be vindicated.
Though, Harbhajan has now moved into 1st place with the lowest IQ to talent ratio, well ahead of Sreesanth.
Think you're right on both counts. What Symonds said in that transcript about friendliness was as weird as it was inappropriate. Was it Norman Yardley who was godfather to one of Don Bradman's children? Hell of a come down since then, isn't it?
