I decided to take the scenic route from Edinburgh to Oxford, which meant two days offline. During my absence, it emerged that cricket is in danger of imploding after the fall-out from Australia’s victory over India in the second test. Rather than rehash what’s already been said, I’ll point Catallaxians to this excellent but very long thread over at After Grog Blog. Tony the Teacher’s observations are at the bottom of the post, which is in the form of a match report for each day of the test.
In the meantime, I make the following observations:
1. The Indians copped the worst of some very bad umpiring, although Australia by no means escaped.
2. With Jason Gillespie’s departure, Andrew Symonds is now the only black player in the Australian team. Unlike Gillespie (who, at worst, could be cited for crimes against fashion with the most luxuriant mullet in sport), Symonds goes the whole hog with ‘looking black’ - complete with dreadlocks and face paint (the first photograph is a head and shoulders portrait of him).
3. He is clearly disliked in India, and at least some of this animus is racial (the second photograph shows a section of the crowd during Australia’s recent ODI series in India). For those perplexed by the spectacle of one group of non-white people abusing another non-white person, it is perhaps worth pointing out that many members of higher castes in India consider themselves ‘white’, and discrimination against ‘Dalits’ (untouchables) is in part based on their generally darker skin-colour.
4. India has the most money to throw into cricket’s financial pot, but Australia is the best side.
5. India’s board (the BCCI) has repeatedly used its financial clout to intimidate the ICC.
6. Australia’s players have repeatedly used their superior ability to scare the living shit out of touring teams, sometimes in an over-the-top, even ‘unsporting’ fashion.
7. Ricky Ponting is about as diplomatic as a housebrick dropped from thirty thousand feet.
8. Harbhajan Singh is about as a diplomatic as a housebrick dropped from fifty thousand feet.
9. If Mike Proctor says Harbhajan Singh called Andrew Symonds a ‘monkey’, then he’s telling the truth.
10. I live with a black man. I can say with absolute certainty that the ‘M-word’ is worse than the ‘N-word’, the latter of which has been pseudo-legitimized by the likes of 50 Cent and Snoop Dogg getting down wit’ it in da hood.
11. Suspension for three test matches is too harsh (a single test match, the equivalent of Darren Lehmann’s suspension for five one-dayers for a similar indiscretion, would have been sufficient).
12. The BCCI’s threat to scupper the rest of the series is childish petulance of the first water, and has the potential to split the sport in two.
More from CricInfo, the BBC, The Hindu, the SMH and The Australian.
Reaction from around Ozblogistan: Chris at Troppo, Shaun at LP, Tim Blair, Andrew Bartlett, Harry Clarke, Tim Dunlop
The SMH letters page. Wow. Just wow.
190 Comments
what has got up their nose is:
1) ONLY Australians corroborated this. The Harbarnator denied it.
2) Sachin was not called in at all
Hence your 9) obervation is meaningless.
Thus the suspension is due only to the Australian team.
The Aussies are wellknown, including one Andrew Symonds, for making observations littered with expletives.
IF the offence took place it was begun by the Aussies and then exacerbated by them.
The laws of cricket give the captains the resposbility for observing the sspirit of the game.
In this I totally agree with Peter roebeck in today’s SMH
The hearing went for five hours. And Proctor is a Yarpie of the most careful type. I don’t think so, Homer.
Rubbish CL. Lehmann was suspended calling the Sri Lankans “Black Bastards” in similar circumstances except Lehmann didn’t direct it against anyone, in fact just yelled it out in the changerooms after being dismissed and was overheard by the Sri Lankan touring party in the adjacent changeroom. Nobody from the Australian team corroborated anything on that occasion.
“IF the offence took place it was begun by the Aussies and then exacerbated by them.”
It doesn’t matter who begun what, you can’t racially vilify players.
What’s calling Sachin in got to do with anything? He’s not the captain and he wasn’t involved in the incident. His opinion is about as necessary as Brad Hogg’s.
“In this I totally agree with Peter roebeck in today’s SMH ”
Anyone who agrees with peter roebuck about anything is obviously biased and should have their opinion discounted. Roebuck’s job description is “Bag Australia at every opportunity”.
I agree with most of what you wrote SL. One test would have been more appropriate.
Personally I think he did call him a monkey as they are pretty keen to try and say it isn’t derogatory term, a pointless defense if you didn’t say it. Also complete garbage given the history of this being used against Symonds previously in India. There is no doubt Harbajan new it was offensive. I don’t doubt that Harbajan did this thinking he could get away with it.
Once again I am annoyed that we have sub continental teams doing this boycott crap when decisions go against them. There is nothing more against the spirit of the game than this.
I also think that the Indians could call whoever they like to testify. If they didn’t call Tendulkar its probably because he didn’t have anything to contribute.
My understanding is that Tendulkar was called - he was batting at the time, so fair enough. I think part of the Indian angst is based on irritation at Proctor ‘believing the white man’, but Symonds isn’t white, so the whole business just gets into pointless name-calling go-round mode once again.
Yobbo,
you are incoorect in terms of boof however I agree nothing should have been done. Racial slurring is at people not inanmate objects.
Sachin was there and in hearing distance if what was alleged to have been said was said
He was not called.
What is grating on the indians is that the word of Australians is being taken when evidence supporting the Harbarnator wasn’t called for.
I would also add why would anyone take the word of cheats.
It is about time ALL types of abuse is not allowed.
Homer you are flat our wrong about Sachin.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23015099-661,00.html?from=mostpop
There are so many separate issues in all this it’s hard to know what to concentrate on. But I’ll pick just one - the so-called incompetent umpiring. I’m heartily sick of the likes of Ian Chappell’s and Tony Greig’s expertise on umpiring decisions after viewing six or seven replays slow-motion replays from as many different angles and five minutes to think about it, pronouncing ex cathedra what the umpire’s decision should have been. The umpire has one real-time viewing from 22 metres away and sometimes in retrospect may call it wrong.
I’ve been following cricket since before most of you were born and I can tell you that before live TV technology umpires may or may not have made mistakes but nobody really knew except the batsman (and then only in cases of catches behind). Umpires rarely make mistakes that are detectable without hi-tech 20-20 hindsight except in kids’ cricket.
I’m heartly sick of the present day sitting of judgment on umpires, from the disgraceful treatment of Darrel Hair for simply doing his job, to the changing of the rules to allow a particular player to throw while bowling, to forbidding umpires to call no-ball for illegal bowling actions, to the vilification and dummy-spitting accompanying a very calmly deliberate verdict by Mike Proctor.
This tour has had it. It can’t be rescued. The sooner the Indians retreat from this country never to return the better. And the same goes for the Pakistanis.
Steve,
I would be wary of that. for a start Kumble wasn’t there so couldn’tbe a witness and I have heard it numerous times from Indian Journalists that Sachin was there but wasn’t called. If he was and said the word wasn’t mentioned then the tension is exacerbated.
The problem of the umpires is compounded by this silly practice of staying two yeards back from the stumps. why they do it I do not know.
I do find it strange when one hears a snick as spectator but somehow the umpire doesn’t.
What was unusual in this instance was the umpiring decisions favoured the Asutralians by the bucketload. Indeed if Symonds was given out India could well have won the game!
I actually wouldnt use technology in any decisions. One of the great parts of cricket is accepting the umpire’s decision even when you know it is wrong.
what i find profoundly dissapointing in all of this is that my 7 year old sson apparently knows the laws of cricket and the Australian captain does not.
He also observes that appealing for decisions when the ball hasn’t hit the bat is cheating.
Any close in fiekdsman knows the difference between the ball hitting the bat and hitting the pad.
I would love it one day to be able to say to young kiddies watch the Australian team asthat is how you should paly cricket unfortunatelt all too often it is the opposite
The rule changing point is very fair, whyisitso. Part of the reason I only made a few observations is because I simply don’t have time to thrash through all the issues - which you quite rightly point out are multifarious.
Part of the reason - apart from his daily reports - Tony the Teacher’s post is so long is because there is so much in this. All the ugly carbuncles present in the game of cricket (and, I might add, its administration) have come to a head in this one test match. We either fix it now or the game may well be broken for all time.
The daily telegraph says Tendulkar was called and I always believe everything they write..
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23016753-5006069,00.html?id=
I disagree that you always know, particularly bat pad in quick succession. I also disagree with walking for the same reason. As Gilchrist demonstrated once by walking when he hadn’t hit the ball. The batsman doesn’t always know, neither do the fielders. I don’t doubt that appeals are made by players who think that its not out, but really I think the threshold is that they should appeal if they think it might be out.
As for the umpiring being appalling I do agree.
Steve a close in fieldsman cansee whether that bat is in line with the bat or behind it.
The sound is completely different for a start.
The Australians knew how bad the umpires were and took it to the nth degree.
If you have nicked it you know it. Watch the head. you are putting umpires under too much pressure and that is when bad decisions start.
So if Sachin did give evidence his was discarded but the Aussies weren’t.
I know whom I would be puttimg more import on
Interesting mix of comments over at Blair’s, mainly in response to Roebuck’s effusions. Interesting, too, how many people want to blame Symonds for any racism he cops based on his dreadlocks and zinc cream!
http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/comments/arrogant_and_abrasive/
If I was managing the Indian cricket team, they’d be home already. The Aussie cricket team are world famous for what Australians call ’sledging’ and what everyone else calls smart-arse behaviour. Yet they can’t take it. The young Indian bowler has humiliated Ponting at every outing and then, all of a sudden, the same Ponting lays a charge of racism. Puh-Leeze.
There is something else everyone loses sight of; these guys are professionals and we can expect professional behaviour. Falling apart at the knees because someone called you a ‘monkey’ is taking preciousness to a new level.
As Yobbo pointed out Australia has grounds to be aggrieved after Malcolm Speed made an example of Lehmann. It was dumb then, it is dumb now. Insulting people is boorish behaviour - but most of the team would be gone.
The other point to make is that this whole episode distracts from Ponting himself. He is not playing well and he nearly drew a game that should ahve been easily won. But for dodgy umpiring decisions it would have been a draw.
There is something to be said for leaving all this crap on the field (although what to do about spectators? It can be downright dangerous to play in the subcontinent). Somehow I think the crap is well and truly everywhere now, and probably has to be dealt with.
You mean the paying customers?
I should say Symonds is a fantastic player and how he has gone about improving his game is inspirational, but this incident reflects poorly on him and the Australian cricket community (and of course on that anti-free speech organisation the ICC and Malcolm Speed).
Sorry, wasn’t being clear… players can agree to leave insults on the field (indeedy, it’s what Australians used to do), but do you think anything should be done about spectators making ‘monkey’ gestures, or yelling ‘kaffir’ at visiting Saffie players etc. Much as I hate the fun police, I think that’s grounds to throw people out - at least streakers back in the day were funny!
The cricket grounds are private property. I’m a bit more sympathetic to throwing people out who shout “kaffir” or “nigger” or whatever than those who make “monkey” gestures. But I wouldn’t prosecute anyone. The other distinction is that boorish behaviour should be dealt with differently to other manifestations of rascism.
Rdward Glaeser had a nice paper on this sort of thing.
Umm as a know nothing on cricket let me take this discussion a knotch down. How is ‘monkey’ racist? And it isn’t a particularly effective insult anyway since many Indians have hairier backs than whites
Whoaaaah, Jason, let the free speech fly
Tony the Teacher’s comments:
what is particularly interesting is thatthese chants are not directed to the West Indies when they are there.
What goes round comes round. it is the Asussies that stoked the fires of abuse.
you cannot ban one form of abuse and leave other forms in. you must ban all forms
I agree that whatever rule is adopted must be consistent. It’s either all out or all in. I must say I think some journo at the Crawling Snail is having fun here:
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23016355-10389,00.html
My thoughts…
Symonds doe look like a monkey and that has nothing to do with his ethnicity as he isn’t particularly black looking. If anything, he more of an Al Jolson impersonator. Swanee! How I love ya! Symonds playing the race card is pathetic.
Australia is famous for it good sportsmen (and women) but is more famous for its poor sportsmanship (ungracious winners and bad losers). This alleged vilification should have been left on the field. Ponting is a tosser for highlighting the whole incident and Symonds will cop the monkey slur for the rest of his career as a result..but the Australian team weren’t selected for their intelligence.
A few points regarding Mike Procter’s finding against Harbhajan:
1. If the evidentiary basis consists solely of Symonds’ word (supported by his teammates) against Harbhajan’s (supported by Tendulkar) without independent corroboration of one or other version, it is not surprising that the Indians are feeling hard done by. That said, in cases of one person’s word against another it is still conceivable that a suitably skilled arbiter/inquisitor could, after questioning, find that one person’s word was more plausible, logical, internally consistent and/or stood up better under questioning than the other’s. That may be so in this instance, although obviously we can’t know without having the text of Procter’s report in front of us.
2. As the Indian’s have lodged an appeal on Harbhajan’s behalf, they should now be prepared to let the appeals process take its course rather than pressuring it to come to a preconceived position of upholding the appeal to avert a boycott.
3. If the alleged incident had been lodged with an Australian Federal or State anti-discrimination commission, it would have first been referred to conciliation, which allows greater scope for misunderstandings to be ironed out and for apologies and recompense to be made by offending parties without losing face. Only if conciliation fails would it go to a formal public hearing. Perhaps the cricketing authorities could consider a simliar procedure.
4. Was it necessary for Ricky Ponting to lodge a formal complaint the minute the alleged incident happened (thereby locking both sides into positions from which neither could honourably climb down)? Could the current situation have been averted had Ponting, Symonds and the Australians taken the time to consider all their options that evening, and then perhaps made an informal approach to Harbhajan and Kumble the next day to resolve the matter without escalating to a formal complaint? Again, perhaps the cricketing authorities could consider a procedure whereby formal complaints of on-field racial, etc., abuse are lodged after the match is over, thereby allowing, indeed forcing, protagonists to simmer down before deciding how to proceed.
Hmmm.. doe? …. does!
“Indian’s” should read “Indians” in my second par above.
Jason and Sinclair, if black people say “monkey” is extremely offensive then it is. I take SL’s word for it. I agree appealing to authorities is not really a very good behavour but do they do? If they were in a pub they would probably punch their nose but they can’t do that on the field, can they?
DrPaul - apparently both teams had locked themselves into some formal complaints procedure before the game - Punter and Kumble went on record about it in India, after the heckling (from spectators, not players) directed at Symonds in particular. It sounds ridiculous and probably is ridiculous but obviously no-one expected anything to happen, certainly not like this.
People on all sides have definitely ‘unholstered the lawyers’ without thinking - and I say that as a lawyer!
It’s worth noting in this context that the main form of racist abuse by white European soccer crowds against Africans playing for opposing European clubs is to chant “Ook Ook Ook” in imitation of an ape. More generally, using the term “monkey” to describe a person of African ancestry carries the clearly insulting implication that they haven’t fully evolved.
The Al Jolson point was made over at Blair’s, too. The general rule is that you can get away with ‘jokes on your own kind’, which is PC but also seems to be the way of the world these days. ie Symonds is black so he can ‘paint up’ like that. My partner once did the Al Jolson look for a fancy dress party, which he can get away with but I can’t. Like Jewish comedians telling Jewish jokes etc. It’s a double standard but I don’t know how you get round it.
Boris -
You’re right, it is extremely offensive. I sure monkeys are incredibly upset at being associated with Australian cricketers and deserve an apology.
Translation of Nanue:
It’s ok to call black people monkeys as long as they are Australian Cricketers. Because Australian cricketers are arseholes and therefore can’t be victims.
Presumably under this rule then it’d perfectly fine to call Michael Long or George Gregan a monkey too.
The same people coming up with this bullshit are the same people who’d be calling for the gallows if Ricky Ponting called Brian Lara a monkey.
The message is the same message we get all the time - Australians, as the undeserving descendants of evil white colonialists, are always in the wrong, and those who disagree with us are always in the right.
I did not even know Symonds was black. And I have seen him many times (on TV).
yobbo,
if you abuse people aand then they come back and abuse then you shouldn’t be surprised.
This all stems from boorish behaviour in the first place.
It is the captains who have the responsibility and I have no confidence in ‘punter’!
Sinkers,
if the decisions had gone the other way India would have won not drawn!
Poem by Barrie from Blair’s:
I wonder Sinclair if your position has at least something to do with your SA background? Not the racial aspect of it, but the cricketing aspect. I know a number of former South Africans and they always admire Aus cricketers as masters of the game, but decry their behavour on the field. Although I would have thought the most notorious ones have retired.
Homer, it wasn’t Australia’s idea to bring in the racial vilification laws, however we were the first country to have a player charged under them.
What you think about the laws is irrelevant. There are ICC laws against sledging based on race/religion/ethnicity and Harbajahn broke them.
Symonds is from a prominent FNQ family (Townsville & Charters Towers) so quite a few of us have seen him ‘for real’. He looks a lot darker in person than on telly, for some reason.
Yobbo -
“Translation of Nanue” - What are you on about?
Interesting piece from last year on the experiences of Africans in India - including a bit of an exposition on how “monkey” is routinely used to describe them and not in an affectionate way, it seems……
http://www.shivamvij.com/2007/02/the-stain-that-just-wont-wash.html
India is a very racially complex country to say the least. A lot of these hangups are I dare say a legacy of their being so racially mixed. The caste system was essentially an early form of apartheid which was imposed to maintain racial purity among the upper castes:
http://www.genetics.utah.edu/news/sc6press11.html
new study of genetic data shows that the ancestors of Indian men came from different parts of the world than those of Indian women and produced modern upper caste Indian populations that are genetically more similar to Europeans and lower caste populations that are more similar to Asians. These findings support historical data suggesting that West Eurasians migrating into India during the last 10,000 years more often left descendants in the higher rather than lower castes. The study is to be published in the June 1 edition of the journal Genome Research.
“The dispersal and subsequent growth of Indian populations during the Neolithic age is one of the most important events to have shaped the history of South Asia. Thus, it is an obvious question to ask who are the closest relatives of Indians and are the different castes more or less similar to the same relatives,” says lead study author Michael Bamshad, M.D., a geneticist at the University of Utah.
Previous studies by other scientists analyzing either Y-chromosome or mitochondrial genetic data of Indian populations have often produced conflicting results, suggesting stronger similarity to either Europeans or Asians. The new study analyzed both types of data in more than 1000 people and showed that ancestors of Indian men and women came from different parts of the world. The differences likely account for the different genetic relationships shown by looking at the gender-specific Y-chromosome and mitochondrial genetic data.
Bamshad’s study showed that each caste’s mitochondrial DNA, which derives from the mother only, has a greater similarity to Asians than to Europeans, but the upper castes show less similarity than do the lower castes. Conversely, Y-chromosome data, derived from the father only, show each caste more similar to Europeans, with the upper castes being most similar, probably because more Eurasian males migrated to India than did Eurasian females.
To increase the power of the study, Bamshad and his co-authors also examined 40 additional genes that are inherited from the father and the mother. All of these data strongly supported the conclusion that upper castes have a higher genetic similarity to Europeans than do lower castes.
Overall, the study indicates that Indian caste populations are likely to be of Asian origin with greater West Eurasian influence on the upper castes than lower castes. These results demonstrate the power of using genetic tools to dissect human history and suggest that such complex patterns of relationship between genders and social groups may be more usual than scientists had previously thought.
Boris - maybe. Mrs D tells me that South Africans are very polite, but have no manners.
Yobbo - I hear what you and often I would even agree. Not in this case. I realise two wrongs don’t make a right and all that … but what goes around comes around.
SL - poem at 36 is a bit unfair. Symonds is a superstar. I get the same feeling now when he walks up to bat as a I used to when Gilchrist came in. But Ponting should go. Mind you dropping him from the team would improve the batting.
let he who is racist caste the first stone?
Homer, if you start with the bad puns, I will get VERY ANNOYED. A whole thread of Homer commenting normally, and then he reverts…
Sinkers: The Saffies have the worst chirper of them all - Andre Nel. Mind you, he’s so bad, he’s funny
Barrie (who wrote that poem) was actually defending Symonds throughout the Blair thread, and used it to have a go at people blaming racism on Symonds’ hairstyle and zinc-cream choices (ie the ’she asked for it’ argument).
SL my caste jokes are untouchable!!
You cannot light a fire and then complain about the heat.
I would add Gideon Haigh’s piece together with Roer’s as well.
I might add as well the ABC radio team were wel balanced in their commentary on the game as opposed to 9
Don’t know him - I didn’t follow cricket when I lived in SA.
it is now being alleged this has been brought on by the little master who assures the BCCI the Harbarnator said no such thing.
If true I would take his word before any of the Aussies
Nel’s a current SAF player - quick bowler, and wow, what a mouth!
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=andre+nel&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
“Boris - maybe. ”
“I didn’t follow cricket when I lived in SA.”
I think these are two incompatible statements. The whole point of my suggestion is that you viewed Aus cricketers behaviour from SA cricketing perspective. If you did not follow cricket you couldn’t possibly have that perspective.
Quite aside from that I think yout references to the quality of play are totally irrelevant to the issue of bad behavour.
Interesting comment from Steve Waugh:
More here: http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/current/story/329710.html
Whenever I read about sports and bad behaviour, I remember this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/letter_from_america/464752.stm
Its interesting to contrast Roebuck’s article on this today, where he dismisses Harbhajan’s comment as merely rude over reaction by “an intemperate Sikh warrior”, with his attitude in this article, in reference to the Lehmann incident.
Apparently advice that only applies to Australia.
Just say no to speech codes. Everyone has the right to hold and express racist views if they choose to. It’s staggering to me the number of libertarian poseurs here who think that violence is an acceptable response to speech they disagree with.
As every good plane wreck investigator knows only too well, this one will be a combination of factors, where all the bad planets aligned and down she went.
Go way back to the controversial sanctions against Aparthied South Africa and the black and brown countries all barracking for politics in sport, presumably against those recalcitrant white colonials who couldn’t see the light, through their slippery slope sunnies that sport and politics should never mix. Fast forward to the obvious similarities with Mugabe’s Zimbawe and how quickly the caps changed.
Fresh from their off field victory with Aparthied, the black and brown countries then began to flex their muscles over umpiring. Clearly some affirmative action was called for here. Never mind the fact that the Dickie Birds were clearly selected on merit, quotas became the order of the day, despite the disgraceful LBW home town decisions on the Continent. No matter, that could be papered over with neutral umpires at least and the prickly Daryl Hehirs quickly despatched. How their own folly must have seethed beneath the surface as one of their own, Steve Bucknor, snatched a great triumph on white soil, from their eager grasp. And all this, after they’d managed to push through draconian new racial vilification laws in cricket. No more sticks and stones, etc for them now, the white opressors like Lehman would be hauled kicking and screaming before almighty justice at long last. They couldn’t explode against one of their own in Bucknor, but as chance would have it and as every plane wreck investigator knows, it was monkey boy that just happened to be the object of their wrath and frustration. Hoisted on their own petard for all the world to see and now they want to take their bat and ball and go home. That petard was of course their very own mandatory reporting obligation now. Ponting would be damned if he didn’t and damned if he did, so he did what any teacher, etc would do and reported it under their rules. In that respect, Harby needs to consider himself lucky the test wasn’t in Melbourne and some Catch the Fire Minister didn’t report him under Victoria’s vilification laws too.
Well here we all are gazing at the smouldering wreck of international cricket, and the call goes up that this Mexican standoff should be resolved quietly and soberly between the two captains, so we can all let bygones be bygones and move on. Bloody priceless that all their PC laws and affirmative action have all come back down to leaving it on the field between the captains. Some would say, we bloody well told you so, way back dickheads.
..Mexican standoff between plane wreck investigators..
Steve Bucknor has been sacked from the series. I agree that he made some bad decisions but worry about the fact that it encourages teams to make this kind of threats if they don’t get their way.
Surely there is a more formal review process they can do to assess bad umpiring rather than responding to threats to cancel the series.
Jason: Monkey is derogatory due to Social Darwinism connotations. I was initially incensed when I saw footage of the ODI in Mumbai showing fans chanting monkey and imitating monkeys when Symonds came into bat.
I’ve since had a discussion with an Indian friend and am pretty convinced that, for the most part, the taunts have nothing to do with Symonds race.
Having said that Harbhajan had been warned in the past that this was not on so he really has no recourse to claim innocence (if he did call Symonds a monkey this time)
Timothy, What violence are you talking about? Don’t the ICC have the right to say what can and can’t go on in their tournaments?
#31 Its a bit like going to a fancy dress party and finding out that the guy dressed as a heavily tattooed chains and leather rock-n-roll bikie is really a heavily tattooed chains and leather rock-n-roll bikie and he doesnt appreciate your comments about his make up.
A coupla things. I went to high school for five years with Andrew Symonds. We gave him crap all the time - eg little mocking chants of “I want to be like Andrew Symonds” - because he was so much fking better at sport than the rest of us combined. One of the boys once got done by our senior master, who happened to be Symonds’ adoptive father, for calling him “Simbo” (ie combining the nickname Symmo with the epithet “sambo”), but that was the one and only time anyone ever ever said anything that related to his colour. And in any case, the boy/man was one of his good mates, so yes, it was all in fun.
We all used to put the zinc on our lips during cricket matches. It’s Qld - you’re mad if you don’t if you’re out in the sun for half the day. Symonds still does it - so what? I remember back in 1995 or 96 during an interstate match at the WACA (after I left Qld) that some of the crowd called him “Milko”. Big deal. Andrew got used to taking a lot of crap from everyone and I’m pretty convinced that if it had been anyone from any team other than one from the grossly sanctimonious and hypocritical Indian subcontinent who had “villified” him we’d not be hearing anything of it. As it is, and as others have pointed out, Indians are very quick to be calling the kettle blacker than the pot.
Still, Ponting’s a little twerp - as holier-than-thou as the Indians in many ways.
Steve,
Did you notice that in one breath Roebuck dismisses Harbhajan’s behavior due to his religion and then complains about Hayden crossing himself in the catholic fashion in another? That article was simply the ramblings of a tired old never was with a penchant for caning little kiddies.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/1608831.stm
I used to go to school with a Symonds, too, and we called him Simbo because he was an imbo.
Wouter Bos, the deputy prime minister of the Netherlands-
“In a democracy, we do not recognise the right not to be insulted.â€
It’s a rather quaint notion Wouter
observa: We’re not talking about Free Speech here. This is a tournament run by a private body who have the right to draw up the rules of engagement as they see fit.
“This is a tournament run by a private body who have the right to draw up the rules of engagement as they see fit.”
Bwahahahahahahahahahaahahaha!
Interesting discussion by Skeptic.
“Nigger” obviously retains some degree of offensiveness by the sheer fact it was a slave-name, although it’s rehabilitation in rap-culture (and even apparent embracing by blacks themselves) isn’t the first time a slur has actually been worn as a badge of pride by the victims. For example, “Tory” actually came from the old Irish word for “robber” (as supporters of the British monarchy were, with justification, seen). But given that many black people publicly use the word “nigger” so often, I think it’s lost a lot of its sting (as other swear words tend to do when used too often).
Monkey, on the other hand, is clearly a blatant attempt to dehumanise someone - I don’t think you’ll ever hear hip-hop enthusiasts saying “Yo, Monkey!”
The only thing funnier is that Indians get so fired up over engaging in a former imperialist culture’s culture. As some famous men got mangled and said- ‘This is not about liberty or death, it’s more important than that!’
” The message is the same message we get all the time - Australians, as the undeserving descendants of evil white colonialists, are always in the wrong, and those who disagree with us are always in the right. ”
Ah, so that’s their escape clause! Simbo is the Uncle Tom, and therefore can be legimately insulted due to his “white-privilege-by-association”.
And Bucknor can be sutteed with him.
This is such a trivial set of issues to discuss, it is hardly worth the effort. I just wish they’d get on with playing the damn game.
Sinclair: There’s not really any doubt that Ponting is the best batsman in the world. You obviously haven’t followed cricket ever if you believe otherwise.
Ponting averages over 59 in test cricket, only 3 men (Bradman, Mike Hussey and Graeme Pollock) have averaged more in history and Pollock and Hussey only played 20 tests (Hussey will likely finish with a lower average than he has now).
The ICC has rolled on the Bucknor issue - he’s been pulled from the next test. I feel sorry for the bastard who gets to fill in for him:
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23020332-661,00.html
Call me the angel’s advocate, but to me it’s clear that each side has disgraced itself and much of what each purports to uphold in relation to the traditions of cricket. The last 30 mins of the match were absolutely thrilling (said as an Australian) but no-one can walk out with his head held high. A necessary failing perhaps, if only in the sense that something like this - a confluence of emotions and events - demands discussion and debate; but if cricket, especially Test cricket, follows the path trodden in the past few days, it will die.
Die? They’ll pack the WACA to the rafters and who the hell wants bloody robots umpiring now? Certainly not the sponsors.
The formal Hogg ‘bastard’ charge:
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/current/story/329815.html
Apparently Ponting told Hogg to pull his head in at the time. This is looking sillier and sillier, and also like Steve Waugh’s ‘cultural difference’ comments writ large.
That wouldn’t be the same Steve War that made choo choo train noises to a Seth Efriken that had a close relly killed in a train accident, now would it?
“but to me it’s clear that each side has disgraced itself”
Good point. I think the debate is largely going around of who is right. But actually both are very wrong and neither side will come out clean. The difference of course is that in Australia the controversy will linger while in India the supporters will back the team no matter what. Well, up to a point (remember Pakistan and the world cup).
Look, I know it’s preposterous to suggest this, but is GMB actually Brad Hogg’s secret identity? The drooling [tongue], the offensive language, the whole “Chinaman”/left-handed “molly-dooker” thing? Fractional reserve, anyone? Wait, wait, I have it! GMB is actually the Aus XII’s No.8!
Pretty unlikely, although it is odd that GMB never seems to post when the games are on.
Fair point. There are some incredible pictures of Indians going OTT over at AGB. There’s one incredibly pythonesque effigy graphic, for a start.
This is such a beatup of a non issue by a bunch of pussies - GWB has been called “chimp” (and satan, adolf, stupid etc) for over 8 years and hasn’t baulked once.
“on the basis of that person’s race, religion, gender, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin”.
How does Hogg’s offence measure up to this aspect of the charge, Helen? Pretend you are the prosecutor and let’s hear the arguments supporting that proposition.
It doesn’t, unless the referee is expected to take cultural peculiarities into account - ie, that in India (a more conservative country than Australia, particularly on matters of gender) a slur on legitimacy/parenthood is viewed now as it was 50-100 years ago in Australia.
Everyone has missed the point.
My parents in lawwho are in India at present confirm the REASON for India’s hostility is that Mr Proctor tookthe word of the Aussies but not of the Indians in particular one Sachin Tendulkar.
To my mind I would ALWAYS take theword of Sachin over any Aussie cricketer.
Thealleged incident did not origianlly involve Mr Symonds but he wanted to go on with it.
1) there should be no abuse at all
2) people who do abuse another person ssuch as Mr Symonds in thiscase can hardly squeal if someone says something back.
Tendulkar was so incensed by the decision he was a prime mover in India’s reaction. considering how he behaves I am led to speculate that the Harbarnator did not use the word monkey. It would seem silly as Sachin thought Symonds was being provoctive however the Aussies heard something.
Surely the intent of the perp must be taken into account. Hogg obviously intended to insult the Indian playes by the use of the word “bastard”, a common insult word in Oz. It’s also used as a term of endearment, but context is everything and in this case, it was meant to insult. However the original meaning has been totally lost and Hogg’s intent would have been a million miles away from illegitimate parenthood when he uttered the word. Unlike the Singh utterance which was obviously meant to racially abuse Symonds.
Sorry about the double comment. I’m having trouble logging in to comments and in getting a response after I click Submit.
My reading of the charge would rule out mere insult as an indictable crime unless it was associated with “race, religion, gender, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin” So I guess to say “you’re an Indian bastard” would come within the charge, but simply to call a man a bastard would have no reference to his ethnicity or nationality.
For Homer to admit “To my mind I would ALWAYS take the word of Sachin over any Aussie cricketer” is showing sheer mindless prejudice and reveals his almost total lack of intelligence. Heaven help us if he ever got onto a tribunal of any sort.
What was his score in the last test? Who won the 2005 Ashes - he should have been sacked as captain then. I have no doubt he was the best batsman, but when you’re reduced to beating your bowling nemesis with rascism allegations then you’re past it. No nostalgia Yobbo, you have to move on.
Sinkers, who won the 2006 Ashes? Did you check Ponting’s contribution to Australia’s performance?
And apart from that, England won the 2005 Ashes because they played better cricket. End. Of. Story. They then partied too hard while Punter went home and figured out how to clean them up next time.
Just as a curiosity, why didn’t you follow cricket in SAF? You obviously know the rules and have familiarity with the game… not taking the piss at all here, just genuinely curious.
I’ll fix the double post, whyisitso.
Sure they on the 2006. They lost the 2005 when 5 minutes before the second test Ponting said “we’ll have a bowl” after winning the toss. Now when a casual observer such as myself sits up and says “big mistake” then it was a stuff up. Poor judgement cost them the 2005 Ashes and Ponting showed it again in the Sydney test. I’m sure I could think up other examples too. The big problem, I think, is that cricket has a producer orientation and not a consumer orientation. It is not about the game, it is about the paying customers.
This is an extract from an email I recently sent to Rafe. I’m sure he won’t mind me relating part of my side of the discussion.
… I, on the other hand, loathed cricket in my youth and have only come to appreciate the contest between bowler and batsman as I grew older. I never even saw a cricket game until I was 12* when my parents moved to the city and I went to the Christian Brothers. The Brothers took the view that all boys had a desire to play cricket and speak Latin. For all those ‘poor chaps’ who just couldn’t make the first team, they organised a ‘Thursday League’. A limited 20 over game, where batsmen were required to retire at 20 runs (so max individual score was 25 - hit 19 then a six) and the number of players was the number of boys (less the first team) divided by the number of cricket fields divided by two - so about 15 or so per team.
We played for points. So the batsmen who hit 20 got a point, if the entire team arrived you got a point, another point if they were all wearing white, if you won the game you got point, and so on. The batting team provided the umpires - so you can imagine how that went. No LBW, lots of ‘no balls’ and the like.
Anyway, it was compulsory to play right up until year 12. So I did. Hating it all along. I can say with confidence that I scored two leg byes in all that time (maybe four). …
* Just to explain that point - TV came late to South Africa and sport was televised on a Saturday afternoon only. I seldom watched. My parents lived in a small mining village and the local primary school did not play cricket. It was an Afrikaans school and as an ‘engelsman’ or ‘rooineck’ I wasn’t expected play rugby as that was a game for the masterrace - so I don’t really know the rules of rugby (union) at all. So I grew up in South Africa not knowing the rules of rugby (the Brothers didn’t play rugby either - it is, apparently, a game suitable for Afrikaaners
) and not liking cricket.
Whyisitso,
pray tell me the last time Sachin Tendulkar was EVER involved with the boorish behaviour that Australians so proudly display.
He is a softly spoken man who has a well deserved reputation through out the cricketing world.
Indeed he does not get involved in the heat of the moment when some of his teammates do.
If you do not recognise that then you are both blind and deaf.
For Homer to admit “To my mind I would ALWAYS take the word of Sachin over any Aussie cricketer†is showing sheer mindless prejudice and reveals his almost total lack of intelligence. Heaven help us if he ever got onto a tribunal of any sort.
I’ll say. Truer words have never been spoken.
I couldn’t contemplate the horror of the idiot on some tribunal. The mere suggestion is too painful.
Sinkers, that’s an amazing story. The idea of playing Rugby without input from people of English heritage…
That part’s even more amazing than the cricket aspects, although I’ve heard before about how strictly the ‘no sport on Sunday’ rule was enforced in apartheid SAF.
I think when they were in South Africa in 2001. Sachin got done for ball tampering. Should we trust the word of a convicted cheat? Way worse than anything the Aussies did. Of course the whole team was involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Denness_and_Indian_cricket_team_incident
Steve - this is where Steve Waugh’s cultural difference points come into play, I think. A good way to piss off Australians is to bowl your overs slowly and mess with the ball, as well as engage in off-field ‘gamesmanship’. A good way to piss off Indians and Pakistanis is to sledge them, especially by calling their sexual honour into doubt.
Unfortunately, both sides have trouble seeing what the other side is complaining about. This makes the whole situation worse.
once 7 years ago compared to……
I do onte you have ignored the comment of whom is more respected in world cricket.
Another absurdity is the thought Tendulkur would light the fire of this knowing the word was said.
What we have here is merely another form of belligerent nationalism.
We are right and they are wrong.
This completely ignores any behaviour of Australian players up to the alleged incident.
My Symonds did not merely ‘talk’ to the Harbarnator once but quite a few times in what language?
SL - if the ‘values’ of each team are so different, then secession is a solution. I got that impression from Waugh’s piece too - he wasn’t saying that, of course. Would it be such a tragedy if some countries did leave the ICC? I don’t know - all the commentary seems to suggest that it would be a tragedy.
In the eyes of people currently making disgusting amounts of money out of the game, yes. Cricket is huge in global terms thanks to India, with its vast population, followed by Pakistan and now Bangladesh.
The Deshis were welcomed into global test-match cricket before they were ready simply because there’s more than 100 million of them, and they’re cricket obsessives. Now China is starting to get into cricket - God knows what’ll happen when they get to the top of the tree. Some pretty amazing growth hormones, I suspect. Eight foot tall opening bowlers…
I see, so EVER only means the last 6 years.
So do we trust the word of Tendulkar and Harbhajan who have had suspensions for misconduct or Symonds who has nothing? Or is batting average how you determine truth in cricket?
You see the Australians as flawed (which they are) but apparently overlook similar behaviour of the Indians.
Harbhajan has had multiple disciplinary charges against him throughout his career. He was expelled from the Indian cricket academy, has been fined for abusing umpires and players, but you have some fantasy that he could do nothing wrong.
Or that Tendulkar wouldn’t engage in belligerent nationalism. Did he even hear every word of the exchange?
Steve, you do not seem to understnd plain english.
Tendulkar did something out of character and has never been near there ssince hence his grwat stature in the game.
Whilst Mr Symonds has been known to go ovetrboard in getting in the face of opponents something Australians seem to have a competitive advantage in.
He did hear it and indeed told the Harbarnator ( how interesting that Aussies turn on someone that merely apes their behaviour!) he was being provoked.
Remember your own Mr Symonds should not have been involved in the first place as the orignal incident did not concern him!