Okay let me see if I understand this, basically your stating that,
1) Murali is not in a slightest way vilified towards his decision not to tour Australia in light of the comments by Howard?
2) He simply came to Australia purely on the basis that he can get something for himself, and his country?
1) Through out my stay in Australia I have been dumbfounded time and time again at Howard’s complete lack of conciliatory ability. He for one, is the Prime Minister of his country, I don’t know if he was seeking to vilify his tittle, and to quote the man, in his rather blubbering monotone tone “I’m a cricket tragic” then of course there’s the trademark chuckle.
The mans entitled to his opinion, the ramifications of which will be far reaching (in the context of this issue) considering his position in society, as frankly is Murali’s right not to tour Australia. Sure it’s extreme, but how can’t a prime mister labelling him a chucker be equally as an extreme length for a sportsman to endure. The thing is I didn’t agree with his position not to tour, I would have loved to see him come here, and wear it on the chin, he’s class as a bowler would prevail over the taunts and geers, but different people have different boiling points, that’s why society is so diverse. What gives people the right to criticise a man for taking a stance for his own self-respect. Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe Warne having a cry about not playing Country cricket after he copped an ear full on one of the previous Ashes tours, oh how easy it is to point a finger.
2) Yes he did come to Australia on the basis that he could gain something, but lets be serious, you do realise what he was striving to gain? Aid, which equates to money and medical supplies. For a multitude of victims, in a variety of different circumstances, can you justify any other ulterior motive?
I’m sure your aware that it was Tim May and the Australian players association that organised the event, and the aid raised will not only go to Sri Lanka, but Indonesia and other parts of the region, which frankly needs just as badly if not worse. Truth be told, Britain and the European Union have been very kind to Sri Lanka in terms of Aid, as have the Australian people, and people all over the world. Don’t turn this into something it isn’t, to have such a tragedy bring so many people together through camaraderie and the need to help their fellow man is something to be remembered and made an example of. This is not a man on a mission to exorcise some prejudicial demons, simultaneously seeking to raise his image into the public conscience, it’s a human being using his public image for good, dare I say, perhaps Howard can take leaf out of his book.
Marc71178
“One other thing to consider is that Murali's is reactive in his own country; Waugh's is proactive in a foreign country.”
That and the fact that if Sri Lanka was in a similar socio economic position to that of Australia Murali too, I would assume of course, be proactive elsewhere. The simple fact is Sri Lanka is a third world country, with third world issues, and a country where they are barely balancing a harmonious social system on the back of rebuilding from a destructive civil war. Murali to Sri Lanka is much, much more than a sportsman.
"Procter found Sangakkara guilty of a Level Two breach of the ICC's Code of Conduct, which deals with the use of "language that is obscene, offensive or of a generally insulting nature".
Sangakkara plays the game hard, and yes he’s aggressive. I don’t consider the Australian cricket team racist. They play the game hard, and the play it well, and frankly I love to hate them, but you can’t deny that they have raised the bar. And the fact people use their attempts at psychological degradation, as a means to justify their dominance over their opposition does not do this great team justice. We all know that this beautiful game is not as one dimensional as that, surely we can be kind enough to pass this assumption on to one of its greatest bowlers.
