Mates. Now that the ban on Bhajji has been suspended and Bucknor stopped from officiating the next test, we need to find out the circumstances under which Procter handed this judgment to Bhajji. If it was based only on the words of the Aussie players then we can claim that Procter was racist enough since he did not pass a judgment fairly and that he supported the Aussies. If this can be proved then Procter should be banned as a match referee and labeled a racist. If any of the Aussie players or officials had influenced the decision they should also be termed as racist and banned with the same judgment as Bhajji. Another allegation that can be made against these characters is that they can also influence matches in future through bookies since this judgment is also part of a influencing mode. Last but not the least, they way Ponting reacted to the Indian journalist questions on his claim of a "bump catch" of Dhoni shows his arrogant attitude which should invite the wrath of the ICC (since Cricket Australia and the Match referee feel that Aussies and Ponting are playing in the right spirit). It is high time the Aussies are given a taste of their own medicine. No questions on their power as a cricketing nation but then these players need to understand that they are also the ambassadors of not just their nation but also for the great game of Cricket.
Finally Prem, it would be great if you can find a way your article reaches the Aussie press. If not at least the Inbox o
RE:Prem Panicker ''Justice''
by Sandeep on Jan 08, 2008 04:50 PM Permalink
What Prem Panicker is trying to say is that from tv replays it seems apparent that Sachin was the only player who seemed to be within ear shot of what transpired between Bhajji & Symmonds.It is therefore extremely difficult to believe the 4 or 5 Aussie players who claim to have heard the exchange taking place despite apparently being nowhere near the scene.
RE:RE:Prem Panicker ''Justice''
by Calvin Corser on Jan 08, 2008 05:27 PM Permalink
That may well be what he was "trying to say", but it is what he did say. And that is what i replied to. There is more than tv replays at work here. And just because they don't show anything, and unlike what Prem Panicker did say. Just because Sachin didn't hear the word used, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Everyone must be able to see that. That being said I don't know what was said, neither do you. but I would like journalists who are claiming to present the facts, actually do so. There are 2 players including Gilchrist and Ponting who claim to have heard nothing. But 3 Australians do claim to have heard the remarks made. And that was sadly missing from the "facts" as presented by Prem Panicker and most articles. As was the fact that it was used by the accused in India as well, when he was informally told that word was unacceptable.
And that is what I was referring to. I am not condoning the Australians behaviour in all cases, or the umpiring, nor the way the hearing was conducted. I am trying to fill in a few vital facts that seem to be overlooked. And I would feel you would all like to be informed of the whole truth, not just be told a biased account to suit an obvious agenda. Which most, on both sides, appear to be here.
RE:Prem Panicker ''Justice''
by raj on Jan 08, 2008 05:40 PM Permalink
what abt lehmann's case then ? unless there was incontrovertible evidence, he wasnt to be punished. when he was found guilty, they took him to task. 3 aussies can get together and frame bhajji. plain and simple. its very very possible. if bhajji had a precedent of abusing symonds once. there's also a precedence of the entire aussie team getting together for sledging and hunting in packs. lou vincent gave an excellent brief about the aussie behaviour. in short, the aussie behaviour is old, they can cheat they can lie and are quite capable of framing bhajji. in fact clarke and ponting have both lied openly. this tour has been an eye opener of sorts about the true face of an average aussie crickter. liars to the core, they can deny and lie about whats on tv. what people saw live. its like insulting all those millions of people who have watched those catches being grassed
RE:RE:Prem Panicker ''Justice''
by Calvin Corser on Jan 08, 2008 05:59 PM Permalink
Lehmann was guilty and owned up and served his ban. And in his case no player heard it, nor was there any sound recording of it. He owned up, pure and simple.
I'm a little disappointed, but not surprised, someone obviously not wanting to see another option has reported my first article when I insulted nobody at all, and condoned nobody either.
RE:RE:RE:Prem Panicker ''Justice''
by raj on Jan 08, 2008 06:12 PM Permalink
bhajji was never given a chance. its kinda beating into submission. the man says he hasnt done it. the person who hears it says he hasnt done it. australians can of course claim anything they want, as there's lack of evidence.
RE:Prem Panicker ''Justice''
by binu on Jan 08, 2008 05:11 PM Permalink
hey buddy who branded monkey as race as per darwin all r from monkey not just one race...if one can be called abuses ...we term monkey as abuse not a racial issue. don't go around justifying aussies ...try view this clip youtube.com/watch?v=aMQUqky18uw&feature=related
RE:Prem Panicker ''Justice''
by shreepal surana on Jan 08, 2008 04:54 PM Permalink
First of all sir with all due respect.. In any case when their is a hearing both parties word should be listened by the match referee.
Secondly you can punish the person only if you evidence. Both the parties are going to say this happened and that mot but you cant take that as a evidence to the act.
So the way in which Harbajan was banned is not showing great colors to the people reading all this and listening on the television.
First the way in which ICC runs must be corrected and then it has the right to ban a cricket.
Thank you for clearly presenting the facts. People do not know that everything the BCCI and the Indian Team has done is well within the legal limits of rules laid down by ICC. This therefore exposes Australia's desire to control the game, which is being denied to them by the correct Indian protest.
Thank you for confirming that we have not done anything outside the law and just this protest of ours is making ICC rethink everything. Which means that they were cheating in the first place.
Dear Australians, unity is good, but not when committing a crime. And misusing positions of power and contacts to get things done your way is ORGANISED crime. Harsher penalties are reserved for organised crime. If there were a just court of law to treat this case, you could be banned from playing cricket for years, as a nation.
RE:Get over yourselves!
by ajith devakumar on Jan 08, 2008 05:48 PM Permalink
Get a grip on yourself mate! Ignorance does have its limits . . . calling one of the fastest growing nations backward and dirty and murky and what not will not really change the fact that the Australians have been carrying this sort of cockiness for too long! There is a saying "People living in glass houses, should not throw stones at other's houses". Just remember that and stop blaming Indians for all the issues. At cricket school, they told us all to play like the Aussies! Here we are . . . and look at the result!!
I know you are completely irritated with this. I have one question to you....Please take time and answer the question. The Question is
If Harbhajan called Symonds a monkey...technically the monkey should complain of racial abuse why is Symonds complaining. I pored over this question for a long time and did not get any answer. Could you be kind enough to anwer this?
RE:RE:Get over yourselves!
by Siddharth Vajpayee on Jan 08, 2008 04:27 PM Permalink
Q: What is the difference between Australia and yoghurt? A: Left long enough, a yoghurt will develop a culture.
RE:Get over yourselves!
by Bob Hair on Jan 08, 2008 04:38 PM Permalink
But not the best standard of living in the world!! (Besides, no-one admits to understanding our culture). Yes, we appear brash and arrogant to Indians, and Indians appear paranoid to us. I think it would actually be better to realise they're both fantastic - and we both play cricket. No culture is superior or inferior to another - they are different; that is all. This seems to get lost in this whole fiasco.
RE:Get over yourselves!
by rahul narayan on Jan 08, 2008 05:08 PM Permalink
It will be fun if we ban Australia. Then the only thing they will watch is Shane Warne playing with blow up dolls :) Australia has a murkier past dear friend. Your corrupt board just decided not to ban the players they found guilty of match fixing. After the way Ponting has cried like a 'Sissy', it should be fun to watch how many players of yours get banned. Indians are not gonna leave your cheating cricketers alone, everything will be reported.
RE:Get over yourselves!
by Bob Hair on Jan 08, 2008 04:51 PM Permalink
None intended. As I say, we appear brash and arrogant, but irony is central!! It would be very good if there were a little more lightheartedness in this, from both sides. I would add that I have been railing against Mr Bucknor for years, as I thought his attitude towards the Indians in the last tour of Australia was dreadful. My namesake, who I know is much-maligned on the Subcontinent, was criticised some years ago for being arrogant and dogmatic, whereas Mr Bucknor was held up as a model of gentility. I have no doubt he is a very nice, gentle man, but his diplomatic skills during that tour were deplorable (and he made many more mistakes than my namesake). Anyway, I continue to look forward to the cricket and not taking potshots at people!
RE:Get over yourselves!
by on Jan 08, 2008 05:42 PM Permalink
Not only is your understanding of the situation poor, it is unsurprising. Either you didn't read the article fully or chose not to read its more decisive parts. There are very few honest cricketers going around and there are fewer still in Australia. You obviously missed reading Prem's reference to Gilchrist and Ponting, brazen liars both on international television, the former so utterly foolish as to display puerile denial in the post match press conference about having grounded the Dhoni catch inspite of the conclusive replay shown at the ground & worldwide. Even if India were to be charitable enough to believe these two have the capacity for honesty,they have even more reason to believe Tendulkar.Which takes us back to status quo.Your reference to wife burning in a general context makes you as ignorant as Craddock so the fact that the two of you are on the same page is again, monotonously devoid of surprise.Your knowledge of cricketing history is as good as that of, should i say, an Indian monkey,lest you taken offence.Your last point is amusing in such a paradoxical vien. You silly silly school girl. Even Fosters would be willing to pay double the ad rates for an India-Pakistan game than an a decisive Australia-England game. So the doomsday scenario you paint is infact more enticing for viewers & sponsors alike. More Indians watch the Ashes than the Australians & English put together. India has no interest in dominating the game. India is the game.
RE:Get over yourselves!
by Swapnil Gupta on Jan 08, 2008 05:17 PM Permalink
Mr Anonymous,
I think you got it all wrong. You and your likeminded countrymen need to attend the following courses and re-visit what you mention above: Indian Culture 101 (Including what Sati is all about). Empathy 101 Sportsman Spirit 101 (not Australian definition of sporstman spirit which seems to have got pretty rotten over the years.) Logic 101
Last but not the least you need to reading lessons to better interpret english. Note PP did not question Australian's reverence for parent, but built his argument on the fact that this may be one of the similarities they all may share with the rest of the HUMAN world.
I have been a regular reader of your articles in Rediff and you are candid in your postings.Well thoughtout and meaningful article again.But do you believe this will change the attitude of Aussies on the field,even if they read this article? I doubt- you cannot straighten a dog's tail howsoever it or anybody tries. Best of luck.
