*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[C_C]

Unfortunately, you neither change or learn. To preach about those virtues is hypocritical.

Perhaps it is hypocritical. Or perhaps you are mistaken, for several posters have commented in the past about me changing my mind about something.
But such a defensive reaction is yet more fodder for your justifications. It doesnt matter even if i am being a hypocrite- for recognition of what is right, even if one is unable to follow it, is a big improvement over denial.

 

[Ikki]

Simple question - what happened to the tosser with bootblack on his face ?
Did he get charged for race-crimes or not ?
What would've been the response if the same guy sat in the crowd doing a seig heil ?
Consitency please!

I ask the same of you. Does one person warrant all this whinging? Enough to not come to Australia for it? Or is it the rather absurd exaggeration of being called a chucker? Consistancy please....

Murali reprimanded for reaction to crowd taunts

""It's not racial, we are not going to do anything on the racial side of it, but we are quite cheesed off that this abuse keeps going on and on and on," Mr Tissera said.

"There's nothing we can do. This taunting keeps going on and on and on and the player is thoroughly frustrated."

Now if the Sri Lankan manager, Michael Tissera, is not doing anything about it and negating the racial implications by not complaining. Then you really have to look to him and the Sri Lankans if you feel cheated of just action. I think you're definately blowing on the coals here.

 

[C_C]

Who the hell are you, my mum? I don't need to change at all, and you're seriously delusional if you think that you know what is best for all.

AND in an attempt to put this train back on the rails, again I do this:
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html
http://www.sportstats.com.au/warnemurali.html

For one, a lotta those stats are outdated.
For two, no I am not yer mum and neither did i claim to know whats best for all. But one thing upon which there is agreement is that stagnation is just the beginning of petrification.
And regardless of who i am, the cause for you to change should be the reasoning supplied, not who supplies it.

 

[C_C]

I ask the same of you. Does one person warrant all this whinging? Enough to not come to Australia for it? Or is it the rather absurd exaggeration of being called a chucker? Consistancy please....

""It's not racial, we are not going to do anything on the racial side of it, but we are quite cheesed off that this abuse keeps going on and on and on," Mr Tissera said.

"There's nothing we can do. This taunting keeps going on and on and on and the player is thoroughly frustrated."

Now if the Sri Lankan manager, Michael Tissera, is not doing anything about it and negating the racial implications by not complaining. Then you really have to look to him and the Sri Lankans if you feel cheated of just action. I think you're definately blowing on the coals here.

Oh it is most definately reason enough not to come to Australia. Like i said and numerous others have said, there is a huge difference between poking fun at someone's hair or someone's competence and calling someone a cheater. I see no reason whatsoever to perform in front of an unappreciated crowd, with some tosser wearing bootblack and getting tolerated by the rest.
And yes, one person is worth the trouble- for it was one person who's plight started the social revolution in the USA and it often takes one person for a viewpoint to coalesce into.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

For one, I wished to see if there could be some decent discussion brought from that, which isn't that out-dated, having been done mid-2005.
For two, regardless of what you happen to believe about yourself, your attitude is displaying just that. You seem to believe that your opinion [opinion is the key word here, sir] is fact. I'll give you that you are quite often right, but that doesn't mean you are never wrong. NOR does this mean I'm saying you are wrong here, for the most part I agree with you, but no matter how many times I seem to say it you don't listen.

I don't care who you are, or where you're from. Your opinion is not law.

 

[C_C]

You seem to believe that your opinion [opinion is the key word here, sir] is fact. I'll give you that you are quite often right, but that doesn't mean you are never wrong. NOR does this mean I'm saying you are wrong here, for the most part I agree with you, but no matter how many times I seem to say it you don't listen.

I am not seeing agreement, nor am i seeking pats on my back. Tolerance of something speaks volumes about a society. And if a person can get away scot-free taunting a dark skinned player of their ethnicity by painting their faces bootblack, then it speaks a lot about the tolerance of those despicable things in the crowd present.
And seems like some here(not you) are continously shooting themselves in the foot with their contradictory arguments. On one hand they want to see 'class' in dealing with such abusive remarks, judging that 'class' would be to continue soldering on despite the abuse. On the other, they deny the problem simply because the Sri Lankan manager acted with the same 'class' and refused to press the issue. Go figure!

 

[Ikki]

Oh it is most definately reason enough not to come to Australia. Like i said and numerous others have said, there is a huge difference between poking fun at someone's hair or someone's competence and calling someone a cheater. I see no reason whatsoever to perform in front of an unappreciated crowd, with some tosser wearing bootblack and getting tolerated by the rest.
And yes, one person is worth the trouble- for it was one person who's plight started the social revolution in the USA and it often takes one person for a viewpoint to coalesce into.

Here's a newsflash: No one cares what you see fit or reason to believe because you obviously have a more than warped view of this. This is about Murali and about his career. His standing in cricket and the eventual reflection of his career. If it was racial and it bothered him that much he should have lodged a formal complaint, obviously, by the route he has taken it wasn't. So what does it come down to? Being called a chucker. You say being called fat or teased for every little thing is not as bad as that? I'll be less proud than you, and accept it all as sledging for which Murali does not have the capacity to take.

ADD: It doesn't mean he is any less of a bowler, he just does not neccessary have as thicker skin as other people. As I suggested before, whether anyone likes this or not, he will always have that question mark hang over his head. So when he is an old man and he reads essay's outlining his career he will be upsetted. The best way to counter this is to prove himself now and while he is bowling. To deal with this now because it will always exist. Whether we want it to or not, whether it's right or not.

 

[C_C]

Here's a newsflash: No one cares what you see fit or reason to believe because you obviously have a more than warped view of this. This is about Murali and about his career. His standing in cricket and the eventual reflection of his career. If it was racial and it bothered him that much he should have lodged a formal complaint, obviously, by the route he has taken it wasn't. So what does it come down to? Being called a chucker. You say being called fat or teased for every little thing is not as bad as that? I'll be less proud than you, and accept it all as sledging for which Murali does not have the capacity to take.

Capacity or willingness to take abuse is of no consequence to the judgement on your skills.
If you think so, you are muddling two very seperate things.
And another newsflash for you - a far bigger number of people dont give a toss either what some Aussies think about Murali for not visiting their shores more often. Whats your point ?
In my opinion, Murali not touring OZ is of little consequence to his career. He's proven himself to be a class bowler and someone who can carry an attack all on his own with much better results than his immediate counterpart.
And for most people, being called a cheat is a far bigger offence than poking fun at their hairstyle or skills. One is questioning a man's integrity, the other his competence. Chalk and cheese difference here.

 

[C_C]

As I suggested before, whether anyone likes this or not, he will always have that question mark hang over his head. So when he is an old man and he reads essay's outlining his career he will be upsetted. The best way to counter this is to prove himself now and while he is bowling. To deal with this now because it will always exist. Whether we want it to or not, whether it's right or not.

ANd as i suggested before, whether anyone likes it or not, Murali has less question marks associated with him than Warney.
As per him getting upset , you dont know that for a fact. He has nothing left to prove. Only thing left for him to do is continue playing for another 5-6 years and put the world record outta reach.

 

[Ikki]

I am not seeing agreement, nor am i seeking pats on my back. Tolerance of something speaks volumes about a society. And if a person can get away scot-free taunting a dark skinned player of their ethnicity by painting their faces bootblack, then it speaks a lot about the tolerance of those despicable things in the crowd present.
And seems like some here(not you) are continously shooting themselves in the foot with their contradictory arguments. On one hand they want to see 'class' in dealing with such abusive remarks, judging that 'class' would be to continue soldering on despite the abuse. On the other, they deny the problem simply because the Sri Lankan manager acted with the same 'class' and refused to press the issue. Go figure!

LMAO, you are a barrel of laughs C_C.

You illustrate the racist action and imply it plurally. This is the scapegoat you need for your argument. To label the WHOLE crowd as such.

 

[C_C]

LMAO, you are a barrel of laughs C_C.

You illustrate the racist action and imply it plurally. This is the scapegoat you need for your argument. To label the WHOLE crowd as such.

No, i am implying its tolerance. If i kill a man and sit in the crowd scot-free, it shows that the crowd is tolerant of my killing. If i taunt a player racially and sit in the crowd scot-free, it shows that the crowd is indicretly complicit by tolerating the intolerable.

PS: Which one is it gonna be ? Are you gonna shove the issue under the carpet because someone refused to lodge a complaint or are ya gonna commend them for the 'class' they showed in the matter ?

 

[Ikki]

Capacity or willingness to take abuse is of no consequence to the judgement on your skills.
If you think so, you are muddling two very seperate things.
And another newsflash for you - a far bigger number of people dont give a toss either what some Aussies think about Murali for not visiting their shores more often. Whats your point ?
In my opinion, Murali not touring OZ is of little consequence to his career. He's proven himself to be a class bowler and someone who can carry an attack all on his own with much better results than his immediate counterpart.
And for most people, being called a cheat is a far bigger offence than poking fun at their hairstyle or skills. One is questioning a man's integrity, the other his competence. Chalk and cheese difference here.

No one is arguing that it doesn't make him a better player. You fail to see the point. He is a public figure and his actions speak volumes to the youth who put him up as an idol. So when you figure 1 person in a crowd as influential enough to start a social revolution. What do you forecast when a player of Murali' stature does so? Now who is contradictory?

 

[C_C]

No one is arguing that it doesn't make him a better player. You fail to see the point. He is a public figure and his actions speak volumes to the youth who put him up as an idol. So when you figure 1 person in a crowd as influential enough to start a social revolution. What do you forecast when a player of Murali' stature does so? Now who is contradictory?

Oh yes- his actions speak volumes to the youth who put him up as an idol. And to those youth, he would come across as one who does not tolerate abuse and racist connotations. If they hold an iconoclastic view of Murali, they would replicate Murali's objective in the future- and the world would be a better place for throwing in a few more people who dont tolerate abuse or racism. Says far more about someone's character than someone who is gonna walk around acting impervious to abuse and racism, implying to the youth who hold him/her as an icon that it is 'okay and no big a deal'.

 

[Ikki]

No, i am implying its tolerance. If i kill a man and sit in the crowd scot-free, it shows that the crowd is tolerant of my killing. If i taunt a player racially and sit in the crowd scot-free, it shows that the crowd is indicretly complicit by tolerating the intolerable.

PS: Which one is it gonna be ? Are you gonna shove the issue under the carpet because someone refused to lodge a complaint or are ya gonna commend them for the 'class' they showed in the matter ?

Do you realise where you're going with this? The extremity of your interpretation. You're insane mate. Murder in comparison to that? What would you have the crowd do? Honestly...

Let's be realistic. The only people who had the authority to do something weren't sitting beside the guy, and when quizzed on the action to be deteremined, those who were insulted, did not do anything. As I implied, this did not happen to you and the ones insulted did not lodge a complaint. So what can you ask of anybody else? If they're not willing to help themselves why are you pointing fingers at other people?

 

[Ikki]

Oh yes- his actions speak volumes to the youth who put him up as an idol. And to those youth, he would come across as one who does not tolerate abuse and racist connotations. If they hold an iconoclastic view of Murali, they would replicate Murali's objective in the future- and the world would be a better place for throwing in a few more people who dont tolerate abuse or racism. Says far more about someone's character than someone who is gonna walk around acting impervious to abuse and racism, implying to the youth who hold him/her as an icon that it is 'okay and no big a deal'.

LMAO you are absolutely ridiculous. They're going to see all that from him? How poetically you decipher everybody else's perception. I wonder why I dialogue with you, you're like a kid.

 

[C_C]

LMAO you are absolutely ridiculous. They're going to see all that from him? How poetically you decipher everybody else's perception. I wonder why I dialogue with you, you're like a kid.

And to me, you are like a little kid, continously contradicting your own words.
I ask you again- which one will it be - Does the SL manager get kudos for showing class in the racist situation of that match or does the racist situation not exist, since the SL team didnt lodge a complaint ?

PS: I applied the SAME standards as you did- with a different perspective. If Murali is an icon(which he is to many budding cricketers), his actions, as you said yourself, will be influencing the budding minds.
And his actions there depicted an intolerance for abuse and racism. If that has a re-enforcing effect on the impressionable youths, Murali would've done far more to reduce racism and abuse in this world than the guys who walk around desensetised, projecting the image that it is normal behaviour and nothing more than a minor annoyance.

 

[C_C]

Do you realise where you're going with this? The extremity of your interpretation. You're insane mate. Murder in comparison to that? What would you have the crowd do? Honestly...

Let's be realistic. The only people who had the authority to do something weren't sitting beside the guy, and when quizzed on the action to be deteremined, those who were insulted, did not do anything. As I implied, this did not happen to you and the ones insulted did not lodge a complaint. So what can you ask of anybody else? If they're not willing to help themselves why are you pointing fingers at other people?

What would I have the crowd do ? The same when someone holds up an anti-Muslim placquard in the stands in India when IND-PAK are playing - toss him outta the stadium or call the authorities to take action over it.
The blatant fact remains that a person clearly made racist connotations on national tv, in presence of thousands of people and got away scot free for it.

And your 'if they are not willing to help themselves, why point fingers at others' statement is a direct contradiction to your comments about how people should show 'class' in such situations and shrug it off.

PS: The countries i've been in, race-crimes and abusive crimes does NOT have to be reported by the victim for the perpetrator to be prosecuted. If a third party witnesses the abuse/race-crime and reports it in, the perpetrator is tried for crimes against the state. Even if the victim denies ( often is the case in marital trouble for example), it is of utterly no consequence. Perhaps that is not valid in your country. And perhaps that might explain the tolerance of such actions and their normalisations like you've tried to do.

 

[Ikki]

And to me, you are like a little kid, continously contradicting your own words.
I ask you again- which one will it be - Does the SL manager get kudos for showing class in the racist situation of that match or does the racist situation not exist, since the SL team didnt lodge a complaint ?

PS: I applied the SAME standards as you did- with a different perspective. If Murali is an icon(which he is to many budding cricketers), his actions, as you said yourself, will be influencing the budding minds.
And his actions there depicted an intolerance for abuse and racism. If that has a re-enforcing effect on the impressionable youths, Murali would've done far more to reduce racism and abuse in this world than the guys who walk around desensetised, projecting the image that it is normal behaviour and nothing more than a minor annoyance.

Of course he gets praise for that. When did I contradict myself on that point or any point? Instead of fuming a small incident he took it realistically.

I'm sorry, he gets praise for not standing racism? There wasn't a better way to display that then showing the finger in a guest nation? Are you warped? Instead of (as I mentioned 100 times) not behaving in that manner and lodging a formal complaint he did that. Wouldn't the latter have been more mature/professional/heroic? Or does insulting someone back represent the mannerisms you've been taught to adhere to?

 

[C_C]

I'm sorry, he gets praise for not standing racism? There wasn't a better way to display that then showing the finger in a guest nation? Are you warped? Instead of (as I mentioned 100 times) not behaving in that manner and lodging a formal complaint he did that. Wouldn't the latter have been more mature/professional/heroic? Or does insulting someone back represent the mannerisms you've been taught to adhere to?

I would rather see someone give the finger to a racist tosser than try being politically correct and sue him for something in the court for months or years. Sends a much clearer and instant message, instead of it being buried under the hubris.
As per etiquette in the guest nation, the onus is on the host to show etiquette and friendliness before the guest reciprocates. For a guest under your roof is your responsibility.

 

[Ikki]

What would I have the crowd do ? The same when someone holds up an anti-Muslim placquard in the stands in India when IND-PAK are playing - toss him outta the stadium or call the authorities to take action over it.
The blatant fact remains that a person clearly made racist connotations on national tv, in presence of thousands of people and got away scot free for it.

And your 'if they are not willing to help themselves, why point fingers at others' statement is a direct contradiction to your comments about how people should show 'class' in such situations and shrug it off.

PS: The countries i've been in, race-crimes and abusive crimes does NOT have to be reported by the victim for the perpetrator to be prosecuted. If a third party witnesses the abuse/race-crime and reports it in, the perpetrator is tried for crimes against the state. Even if the victim denies ( often is the case in marital trouble for example), it is of utterly no consequence. Perhaps that is not valid in your country. And perhaps that might explain the tolerance of such actions and their normalisations like you've tried to do.

Here is my stance:

Racists: Bad Murali's reaction: Bad

I do not condone either behaviour. But one has to take the realities into account. That sledging and crowd control is almost impossible (in the manner you seem to want) and that the only one here who should (as have others) is be professional about it. Murali here is the one who is in the public light. So as that has advantages it also has disadvantages and he will be scrutinised harsher. These are the realities you have to come to terms with.

As has been mentioned, substantial aggrevation was exhibited and Murali reacted as any normal human would under a lot of pressure. Yet, there is a reason why the ICC are taking action towards Murali's retaliation and that is the point you're missing.