Sunil blasts the Australians

[telsor]

to be true i didnt also like the fact david hookes death was put into this..

Sunny should have cited the two examples mentioned in this link to ponting

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wc2007/content/story/80457.html

That article is over 8 years old...The fact that he hasn't don't similar things more recently would imply that he's learned from his lesson.

 

[pasag]

This whole thing's turned into such a mess. Even though I didn't agree with Gavaskar's initial comments at all, I did sympathise with the stance and his opinion and I certainly didn't think it was outrageous, even though I really strongly disagree with it. However to bring a tragic death, into a petty cricket argument is so tactless, it's unbelievable. And I never liked Hookes very much before his death tbh, but ffs.

 

[C_C]

Let me put it this way. Our players are accused of sledging and playing tough cricket on the field, and we are called bad sports, bad winners etc.

This is true and justified because :

a) Aussies started it
b) Aussies do it way more than others

Yet when the English did THE EXACT SAME THING that we did during the 2005 Ashes, they were applauded for their tough, no holds barred style of play. When Paul Collingwood stood up to Hayden, he was praised for not backing down.

Its called fighting fire with fire. Well done to the Poms.

Sunil, and the bulk of the entire cricketing world, can be accused of blatant hypocritscy and double standards.

Incorrect and that is just your aussie sentimentality speaking. There aint no double standards or hypocrasy because Sunil is just underscoring the fact that Aussies are the worst behaved of the lot.

Fact is most people are sick of us winning all the time and are whinging about the fact that our fall is going much slower than the rest of the world anticipated.

Bull****. As you know, the Windies team were even more successful than this current Aussie team and didnt cop it as much. Very good reason for that- they aint uncouth like the Aussies.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

And I didn't see you anywhere on this forum when Ricky was attacking Sunny, Indian team and what not, but you jump when Sunny retorts ?

I read the thread and decided to stay out of the discussion as it didn't really seem to have much of a point, frankly. I think the comments of both parties the first time around were quite silly, and Ponting was silly for raising India's lack of test success, which is largely irrelevant.

The Hookes comments, if intentional, are a totally different matter.

 

[C_C]

Regardless, its still about winning.

No. Winning is secondary to entertainment. Don't lose sight of the big picture- anything and everything is NOT justified in the name of winning and you spouting such nonsense is nothign more than 'if you can't beat em, join em' mentality towards the uncouth Aussie team.

If you're the opposition's best bowler, and I can take you out of the game with a few choice words regarding your daughter, it would be ludicrous to not try and do that.

And if i were the batsman, the opposition bowler would be dead.

All sports come down to doing whatever is necessary to win, for yourself, and your team/fans/country.

No. WInning is irrelevant in front of being a good sport. This is just overhyping sports when putting winning above everything else. At the end of the day, sports is a pretty small, meaningless endavour and there are a zillion professions and things on this world more important than sports. If winning-justifies-all mentality is allowed to take hold in a relatively meaningless and irrelevant passtime activity as sport, it bodes very ill for rest of mankind and more serious issues. Sports personalities should remember that at the end of the day, they are entertainers. They arnt there to win at all costs but to entertain the public.

 

[C_C]

For it not to be hypocritical, there would be no exceptions, no ifs, buts or maybes

False.
Gavaskar was not perfect but he was a class ahead of practically any Aussie cricketer out there.

 

[social]

False.
Gavaskar was not perfect but he was a class ahead of practically any Aussie cricketer out there.

Sunny stands accused of:

a. being primarily responsible for throwing a WC match

b. staging a near-forfeit for his own motives;

c. making what you would undoubtedly perceive to be racist remarks about Jamaican crowds; and

d.making tasteless remarks about somebody that was tragically killed for his own benefit.

I wonder if you'd be so forgiving if he happened to be Australian?

 

[archie mac]

False.
Gavaskar was not perfect but he was a class ahead of practically any Aussie cricketer out there.

All of the Aussies are uncouth, all of the Windies were saints blah blah blah

Perspective anyone

 

[sirdj]

Sunny stands accused of:
a. being primarily responsible for throwing a WC match

To be fair, I think you can only throw a match that you were/could be winning. I don't think the indians were anyway near winning that match. And unlike the rest who had experience playing limited over cricket in the Packer series in Australia, this was India's very first ODI.

b. staging a near-forfeit for his own motives;

Which he has repeatedly apologized for.
Have anyone else apologized for their behavior.........unless they were being brought to book by the ICC?

c. making what you would undoubtedly perceive to be racist remarks about Jamaican crowds;

What is considered to be racist changes with the times you live in. A gollywog toy is considered racist, while the racist context did not even enter my mind when I read Noddy books as a child.
Sunny has a special relationship with the West Indies.........there is even a calypso composed in his honor. Why would he like the West Indies and the people so much if he was racist? Isn't he going around saying that they were so great blah blah blah......How can he have such a good opinion on the players and then be also considered racist as well?? If to say that people were behaving like a wild mob = being a savage is being racist............the same could have happened in India as the Indian crowds get pretty wild too..........and Sunny would have pretty much called them savages too.........would that have been racist?

d.making tasteless remarks about somebody that was tragically killed for his own benefit.

I agree that its tasteless.

I wonder if you'd be so forgiving if he happened to be Australian?

I don't think Australians are being targeted because they are winning, they are being targeted because they behave ungentlemanly on the pitch. Adam Gilchrist is Australian, but is quite popular.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

If to say that people were behaving like a wild mob = being a savage is being racist............the same could have happened in India as the Indian crowds get pretty wild too..........and Sunny would have pretty much called them savages too.........would that have been racist?

While it's a bit beside the point, he didn't just call them savages. He said they "belonged in the jungles instead of in a civilised city". Really, it's about as racist as you can get.

 

[sirdj]

While it's a bit beside the point, he didn't just call them savages. He said they "belonged in the jungles instead of in a civilised city". Really, it's about as racist as you can get.

Isn't that just a different way of saying that they are savages??
What construes racism is really being stretched nowadays to put down statements not really made in a racial context, while real racism hides behind what seems like a really innocuous statement.

Is that really as racist as you can get?? the very fact that some people don't think its racist means that its borderline if at all racist.

 

[honestbharani]

Ricky Ponting is the captain of a Cricket Team. If anyone (ICC Offical or not) has a go at his team, he has the right to defend them. Gavaskar however is an official of the ICC, he shouldn't be going around taking potshots at teams he is jealous of over an issue he is clearly still bitter over.

yeah, but that has to start with the CEO.

 

[honestbharani]

Where have I called us saints? I'm simply pointing out that whenever we play tough we're criticised from everywhere, yet when the English did exactly the same during the 05 Ashes, they were praised.

That, unfortunately, is the EFFECT of the example that Australia have set. People all over the world have started thinking that Aussies are successful BECAUSE of the way they behave on the field, and not INSPITE of it.

 

[Smudge]

People all over the world have started thinking that Aussies are successful BECAUSE of the way they behave on the field, and not INSPITE of it.

Wow - you must have talked to a lot of people to be able to quantify that statement.

 

[honestbharani]

well at the end of the day the Aussies are the winners here lol hah. it is geting soo jucy and i am enjoying every bit of this. i can't wait what Ricky pointing has to say about this.

it seems to me that Sunil is saying this out of Jealousy or whatever personal issues he has with Aussies. i mean c'mon at first he said all these raciest comments about WI of 80s and 70s.


( "When I faced Holding, I received four bouncers in an over and a beamer which Holding pretended had slipped from his hand....To call a crowd 'a crowd in Jamaica is a misnomer. It should be called a mob. The way they shrieked and howled every time Holding bowled was positively horrible... All this proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that these people still belong to the jungles and forests instead of a civilised country".).


then to prove his point he is contradicting himself by saying this now


( "They [West Indies] did not abuse the opponents. They did not have anything to say to the opponents. When they were dominating world cricket the West Indians did not resort to personal abuse on the field, they just played the game hard, they were very tough competitors but there was nothing untoward in their behaviour towards their opponents".)

i mean c'mon this is a clear contradiction and if someone is contradicting himself, this always means that this person has baised opinion about something.

again i do agree with sunil to some existence. but what differs my agreement with him (sunil) is that he is being baised and i am not.

yep, bowling bouncers = sledging and the fans = Windies players.


Here's what he has said:

1. Holding bowled bouncers and beamers at him.
2. The crowd taunted him.
3. The Windies players never resorted to personal abuse on the field.


The only contradiction is that Sunny is implying that the Windies team of that era were rather sporting and sporting teams dont bowl intentional beamers.


That said, if Sunny had said that the Windies team of that time were better behaved than the current Aussie side, I think it would have been very very close to the truth.

 

[honestbharani]

Wow - you must have talked to a lot of people to be able to quantify that statement.

lol, I meant the cricket world. U know what I meant.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Sports personalities should remember that at the end of the day, they are entertainers. They arnt there to win at all costs but to entertain the public.

It doesn't surprise me that tennis was the sport you were best at. That's the view of someone with a greater tie to individual sporting pursuits than team.

 

[haroon510]

yep, bowling bouncers = sledging and the fans = Windies players.


Here's what he has said:

1. Holding bowled bouncers and beamers at him.
2. The crowd taunted him.
3. The Windies players never resorted to personal abuse on the field.


The only contradiction is that Sunny is implying that the Windies team of that era were rather sporting and sporting teams dont bowl intentional beamers.


That said, if Sunny had said that the Windies team of that time were better behaved than the current Aussie side, I think it would have been very very close to the truth.

what?? go ahead and read the two quotes again. the guy is clearly conterdicting himself there. look at this quote
"When I faced Holding, I received four bouncers in an over and a beamer which Holding pretended had slipped from his hand...."

campring it to this quote

"They [West Indies] did not abuse the opponents"
according to that quote what he meant was that Holding wanted to abuse and hurt him physically.
and then look at this one

"When they were dominating world cricket the West Indians did not resort to personal abuse on the field".
then what the hell Holding was doing when he was bowling him four bouncers in a over and one beamer in perpuse to hurt Sunil.

now here i am not saying that WI team of 70s or 80s fitted the describtion of Sunil but i am just reffering to Sunil's comments. He is fully conterdiacting himself in order to prove Aussies as bad behavier cricketers.

Also his comments on the first line about WI people is outragous. People like this should be ban from talking or commentating in cricket or any type of sport games.

 

[honestbharani]

lol, I meant the cricket world. U know what I meant.

BTW, whoever caused the brawl that unlead to the unfortunate and untimely demise of David Hookes, it is absolutely senseless of Gavaskar to have brought that up now. There are countless other examples that could have served his purpose but he has just stooped to a level that is lower than even Bedi's.

 

[honestbharani]

what?? go ahead and read the two quotes again. the guy is clearly conterdicting himself there. look at this quote
"When I faced Holding, I received four bouncers in an over and a beamer which Holding pretended had slipped from his hand...."

campring it to this quote

"They [West Indies] did not abuse the opponents"
according to that quote what he meant was that Holding wanted to abuse and hurt him physically.
and then look at this one

"When they were dominating world cricket the West Indians did not resort to personal abuse on the field".
then what the hell Holding was doing when he was bowling him four bouncers in a over and one beamer in perpuse to hurt Sunil.

now here i am not saying that WI team of 70s or 80s fitted the describtion of Sunil but i am just reffering to Sunil's comments. He is fully conterdiacting himself in order to prove Aussies as bad behavier cricketers.

Also his comments on the first line about WI people is outragous. People like this should be ban from talking or commentating in cricket or any type of sport games.

I think he meant "verbal" stuff. Obviously it is contradictory in terms of implication, but literally speaking, it is not contrary at all.