[Archived] Indian Cricketers Taking Their Ball And Going Home!

[neekoy]

Singh is banned for three tests for racial slurs calling Symonds a 'monkey', now India is threatening to pack up and boycott last game if the ban isn't overturned.

Now the head of the Indian cricket council has said that 'monkey' isn't a racial slur because the monkey god is revered. Yet a documentary airing for the first time tonight shows Indian supporters holding pictures of Symonds with the words 'what is a monkey doing amongst kangaroos?"

Greig has shown his roots by claiming that calling someone a f***ing c*** and a n***** are just as bad as each other. Apartheid ended sometime ago Tony. He even went so far as to hint because Indians don't apparently swear , racial slurs are acceptable and should be left on the field. Shame on Symonds for reporting it to the match referee?

Of course this has spawned new rioting and calls for blood on the streets of India, even though their player is clearly in the wrong.

Also a formal complaint is going to be given for the umpiring, I counted three bad decisions for India, two for Australia hardly should stop India being able to win the test match.

When are these sub continent countries going to be sorted out. Imagine what would happen if the tables were reversed and it was said by Ponting, Flintoff or Kallis!!! They would be calling for points to be stripped, fines, bans, matches forfeited ect.

Supporters receive a lifetime ban from grounds for racial taunts, this guy gets three games.

Mods this is not a post for racial abuse, it is a serious issue that concerns cricket, I hope you see it that way and allow open discussion.

EDIT: Also 16 in a row!! One more for the record.

[Flopsy]

Neekoy - not wishing to get in the way of the antipodean self rightous fury - but

1) HS appears to have been convicted on the say so of Symonds, no other proof (which then turns into taking the word of one person against another - hardly a balance of evidence)

2) You only got 16 on the bounce due to some near criminally negligent umpiring decisions, (about 10 - 1 in Aus' favour) plus that "catch" of Gangully that Punter so graciously gave out.

3) Australia are a fantastically ruthless team, and the only one in the world at the moment who can recover from 150 odd for 6 and conceeding 500+ and still win a test match, who can take advantage of all the favourable decisions and win. But still, if you were a real cricket fan you should have a sour taste in your mouth about the way you were allowed to win that match, not from your skill but by being given all that help from the umpires. Id love to see how good a team you are without always getting the rub of the green.

4) Walking is a moot point, I dont think Batsmen should walk, but if they dont, then they shouldnt be believed when they take a catch whilst fielding.

[jim mk2]

The convicts have besmirched the beautiful game of cricket with their "sledging" yet when they are on the receiving end of abuse they have the temerity to complain ?

Read Simon Wilde here for a view of Symonds and the general smell Australia leave in international cricket

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cri...icle3137821.ece

while Simon Barnes as usual hits the nail on the head

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/col...icle3142293.ece

[Napoleon]

The convicts have besmirched the beautiful game of cricket with their "sledging" yet when they are on the receiving end of abuse they have the temerity to complain ?

That's rubbish. I'm no fan of the Aussies, but racial abuse is not sledging. Let's not forget one of their own players, Darren Lehmann, has previously been in trouble for this also.

I also think that the way the Indian side has responded to the charge is ridiculous. Pakistan set a dangerous precedent during the ball tampering incident in their last tour of England, in that if a team member gets in trouble then escalation of the situation forces the ICC to back down. If they want to pull out then let them, but then India should forfeit their right to play in official tests for some time.

[Nate]

Jesus Jim... you're like a broken record. Do you actually know how boring you are? If not, I'm officially telling you.

[jim mk2]

, but racial abuse is not sledging. Let's not forget one of their own players, Darren Lehmann, has previously been in trouble for this also.

I also think that the way the Indian side has responded to the charge is ridiculous. .

Nonsense. All forms of abuse is "sledging".

India are right to make a stand and hopefully some good will come out of all this, ie the ICC finally bans the cheating (sledging) as practised by Australia that has blighted cricket for the past 40 years.

[modes98]

1) HS appears to have been convicted on the say so of Symonds, no other proof (which then turns into taking the word of one person against another - hardly a balance of evidence)

I haven't heard that HS is arguing against the fact he called him a monkey. They wouldn't just go on that, they will have reviewed footage and other peoples accounts to reach the decision.

Either way the zero tolerance stance was agreed by all test nations and now India are throwing the toys out of the pram. They should be made to forfeit the series if they keep it up. Hardly the mature response of a massive cricketing nation. Further to that they are yet again in the streets burning images of the last test, how pathetic. Grow up and beat the Aussies on the pitch rather than throw a tantrum.

[Flopsy]

He's said he didnt, but there appears to be no TV evidence, no stump mic evidence and it is all the say so of one team vs the other, and thats really not a great idea.

For example next ashes series, Panesar comes out and says that Ponting/Hussey/Symonds/Hayden/Jaques called him a "p**i terrorist" No supporting evidence given, but it now has to be that he is believed. Thats the precedent and thats the problem.

"Grow up and beat the Aussies on the pitch rather than throw a tantrum. "

Im sure they'd love to, but if you'ld have seen the umpiring decisions that went against them, then you'ld understand why they feel they wont get the chance on the field. Id lvoe to know which decisions Neekoy thinks went to the Indians, unless its Punter's inside edge onto his pads, 30 runs after he'd smacked the cover off the ball to point and not been given out.

[Nate]

Flopsy, most Australians agree that the decisions went against the Indians. Not our problem though.

And it is hypocritical that they want to cancel their tour after the racial chanting and comments that Symonds and Australia had to put up with in India. Plenty of evidence that happened.

[Napoleon]

Nonsense. All forms of abuse is "sledging".

India are right to make a stand and hopefully some good will come out of all this, ie the ICC finally bans the cheating (sledging) as practised by Australia that has blighted cricket for the past 40 years.

I am not arguing that racial abuse against Symonds does not count as sledging, my point was that this goes beyond sledging and is worse.

And it's completely ridiculous to always make the same point about Australia with regard to sledging. They may have been the first to do it but all teams are at it now and have been for some time. To paint India as bastions against sledging when they are worse than most in terms of sledging, and good sportsmanship in general, means that I just can't take that point seriously.

[tucker]

Neekoy - not wishing to get in the way of the antipodean self rightous fury - but

1) HS appears to have been convicted on the say so of Symonds, no other proof (which then turns into taking the word of one person against another - hardly a balance of evidence)

2) You only got 16 on the bounce due to some near criminally negligent umpiring decisions, (about 10 - 1 in Aus' favour) plus that "catch" of Gangully that Punter so graciously gave out.

3) Australia are a fantastically ruthless team, and the only one in the world at the moment who can recover from 150 odd for 6 and conceeding 500+ and still win a test match, who can take advantage of all the favourable decisions and win. But still, if you were a real cricket fan you should have a sour taste in your mouth about the way you were allowed to win that match, not from your skill but by being given all that help from the umpires. Id love to see how good a team you are without always getting the rub of the green.

4) Walking is a moot point, I dont think Batsmen should walk, but if they dont, then they shouldnt be believed when they take a catch whilst fielding.

As an English cricket fan i can concede that in the 2005 ashes series England got more than the rub of the green from the umpires, just ask Damien Martyn who was on the wrong end of several incorrect decisions, havind said that I believe England won that series because they played the better cricket. So I think it is incorrect to say they consistently get the rub of the green.

Australia are the best team in the world for 3 simple reasons: They have the most consistent batsmen, bowlers and fielders.

[Flopsy]

he got three over the whole series - India got about 10 in one match, a sutble difference - although its interesting that the last series that Australia didnt get all the umpiring decisions going their way they lost.

They ahve had the rub of the green since 2005, and therefore have won. They are also the best batsman and the best all round bowling attack and great fielders, and will usually win, but they wouldnt be so far ahead if they didnt get the decisions, especially in Australia (look at the Ashes last year, we were well beaten, but we werent 5-0 worse and Strauss was crucially given a number of utter shockers)

Sangakara against Aus - 197 given out for gloving the ball behind when his hand was nowhere near the shoulder that the the ball hit. Quite likely, looking at the way he and Malinga were batting and Aus were bowling (woefully) that they would have come damn close to winning or at least saving the match, but again, given out.

Please dont get me wrong, Aus are a great team, its just looking at the way they get the rub of the green (god bless sky and you tube) its obvious that they arent as far out in front of the rest of the pack as they would like us to believe.

In one day cricket on the other hand, they are by far the best team in the world by a country mile, its just test cricket they are less so.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for Australia as a sporting nation and ive umpteen times I wish the English could copy your determination, pride and preparation.

However yes you are the best cricketing side in the world, but at home some of the decisions you get in your favour would suggest some sort of favouritism, I have a hunch that the auusies put so much mental pressure on the umpires with their constant sledging & appealing that they simply give in. As flopsy was saying yes you much better than England in the last ashes series but 5-0 better? Honestly?

In this series you have gained perhaps as many as 10 wickets that weren’t out are at best extremely dubious. Then we have ponting raising his finger to declare that a batsmen to the umpire- why wasn’t he cited?

And if Singh is proven guilty they should give a considerable ban much longer than the statutory 3-5 matches. However what proof have the ICC got at the moment? He is guilty on the say so of one cricketer over the other, this surely is insufficient

[Redrose49er]

Why do England get 'forced' to forfeit a World Cup game in Zimbabwe yet some nations (India and Pakistan jump to mind) feel they can haul the ICC over the coals for enforcing the rules of the game? If Singh called Symonds a monkey he should (and has) be banned. I'm certain all the test playing nations agreed to the code of conduct. If the BCCI feel they cannot continue to tour then surely they will have to be removed from the ICC future tours programme, presumably breaching their very lucrative TV contract. My view, they'll finish the tour, money talks - even in cricket. However, I would like to see umpires be a little stronger with the Aussies and their sledging.

[Flopsy]

redrose - he might have called Symonds a monkey, he probably did, but there IS NO PROOF that he did therefore he shouldnt be found guilty.

[Guest Dik Bleek]

redrose - he might have called Symonds a monkey, he probably did, but there IS NO PROOF that he did therefore he shouldnt be found guilty.

Does that same logic apply to the many accusations on the football field also?

[Flopsy]

if there is no proof, unfortunately, then yes it should.

For example

Diouff claims that Bentley called him a monkey, no other player heard it but Boltons captain says Diouff heard it, no video or audio recording of this is provided and the nearest player other than Diouff, Tugay says he heard nothing. The referee and linesman all within 5m heard nothing

Bentley and Tugay claim nothing was said, Diouff and Boltons captain says he did, Bentley is found guilty of racist abuse and banned.

Thats no way of holding any kind of disciplinary proceeding

[blue phil]

Does that same logic apply to the many accusations on the football field also?

...and on this messageboard ?

[blue phil]

Nonsense. All forms of abuse is "sledging".

India are right to make a stand and hopefully some good will come out of all this, ie the ICC finally bans the cheating (sledging) as practised by Australia that has blighted cricket for the past 40 years.

India are right to make a stand ......! ?

But I thought it was one of their players who is being accused of sledging and racism etc ?

In Jim's world the Asian teams can do what they want and the rest have to put up with it .

Now that's what I call racism ......mk2

[B.R.F.C]

An Asian cricket team throwing a tantrum and threatening not to play anymore cricket? Where have we seen that before?

As for the allegation Mike Proctor the match referee confirmed:

"he was satisfied Harbhajan had used the word - though neither of the two umpires heard the remarks - and that "he meant it to offend on the basis of Symonds' race or ethnic origin"."

Now if he is satisfied that he has used the word then a ban should be handed out simply. To be perfectly honest it doesn't surprise me that a player like HS has got involved in something like this because he has a mouth as big as India on him...always mouthing off and never short of a word to say. If India decide to "take their ball and go home" then they should be suspended for a period of time...simple as.

The Aussies have talked tough on the field for an age and if it gets to the opposition then they are going to keep doing it. They are tough talking, ruthless and unbeatable at present and thats something to be admired and copied.

[blue phil]

The officials Mark Benson , Steve Buckner and Mike Proctor have always commanded immense respect in the past .

It would be sad to see them go the same way as Darrell Hair simply because they upset the sub continental races with their decisions .

[Redrose49er]

redrose - he might have called Symonds a monkey, he probably did, but there IS NO PROOF that he did therefore he shouldnt be found guilty.

But there was (clear TV) proof that Symonds edged behind in the first innings yet he was not given out, possibly saving the Aussies from a large deficit. There is a danger of being selective with proof and, therefore, selective with the truth. By signing up to a discipline system that does not rely on proof, surely the national bodies are at fault, further illustarting their general incompetence. Unfortunately, this is yet another example of the glorious game of cricket being dragged down football's route, bending rules as far as possible, maybe even cheating and intimidating officials and ruling bodies. Harbajan may or may not be guilty but the whole episode is bitterly disappointing. As I said earlier, TV money will dictate that India complete the tour, they need the Aussies (and others) to tour India in the future.

[Flopsy]

The officials Mark Benson , Steve Buckner and Mike Proctor have always commanded immense respect in the past .

It would be sad to see them go the same way as Darrell Hair simply because they upset the sub continental races with their decisions .

No they havent, Buckner's been incompetant for ages, Proctor's got previous in being slightly suspect in his decision making process and Mark Benson is a spineless arse.

Still, at least he isnt Harper, who is, in my opinion as bad as buckner and koertsen

My main issues, as I see it, are this

1) Singh appears to have been tried and convicted on the testimony of two opposition players only, one of which didnt hear anything but is supporting his player. The two people closer to the incident, Tendulker and Benson, did not hear anything. Hardly a burden of proof in someones guilt

2) The disgracefully incompetant umpiring of this game has lead to the Indians to believe they are being unfairly prevented from having a chance of a fair game (they're right but I doubt its anything more sinister than Umpires being rubbish) and that the Singh allegations are just another way of allowing Australia to march on without any opposition (Ponting is seen as being Singh's bunny)

I dont know whether you watched any of the test match? But it was us that was sinned against we would be up in arms about it, although I doubt that we'd be threatening to act like purile children and stomp off in a huff.

The Indians are over reacting hysterically, and distastefully im my opinion, but it doesnt take away from the fact that they do have quite a strong case in their favour. If only they would try and get the argument over in a slightly more adult way.

Still Pontings reaction during the post match press conference when he was asked about grassing a chance he claimed was fair, is rather amusing. I think Pontings one of the best cricketers I've ever seen, as a sportsman and national captain he leaves a lot to be desired

[Flopsy]

some articles for your interest - the guardian ones are quite amusing just to see some of the Indian fans go form being rational to accusing everyone and anyone on picking on them for being Indian. Well if they will allow idiots access to computers....

Dileep Premachandran (Guardian)

Lawrence "The Spin" Booth (Guardian)

Article on that Press Conference

Peter Roebuck part 1

Peter Roebuck Part 2

[broadsword]

It's ridiculous, youy can't convict a player on another player's say-so. What sort of precedent does that set? If one player is having a good tour, let's fit him up, nice one that.

The Aussies always give it out, but they can't take it. It seems like everything is fair game for them to make a comment on, but it doesn't work both ways, we all know how upset McGrath got when someone mentioned his wife.

If you start rubbing people up teh wrong way, expect it to escalate.

Although teh best way to combat it is to do so with humour. "Every time I clumsy, hit shift + 8 again!! your wife she gives me a biscuit"