WHAT a difference three lucky, last-minute wickets and seven unbowled balls make.
Had Anil Kumble's men drawn the Sydney Test, you would have to wonder whether they would have sat in a luxury hotel for the past two days, refusing to continue with the tour.
Surely Kumble would have been hailed a hero for his captain's knock on the final day and the Indians would be heading to Perth with a renewed optimism that they could match the Australians for the rest of the series.
But the truth is, the Indian side lost its nerve and three wickets with two overs left.
So now umpire Steve Bucknor, who made several critical mistakes in the second Test, has been sacrificed to appease the Indians and will not officate in the third Test, and the Board of Control for Cricket in India is expected to announce today that the tour will go ahead.
Had there been a different result, in a sane world, where effigies aren't burnt and columnists didn't seek to make headlines, you would have to wonder if Ricky Ponting would be painted as such a villain.
The Australian captain has been damned for attempting to stamp out racism, rabid Indian fans have called for his death and Fairfax newspapers have called for his head.
Yesterday, Fairfax columnist and expatriate Englishman Peter Roebuck called for Ponting's sacking. His column was picked up by the Indian media as they fanned the fires of discontent on the subcontinent.
But let's get things into focus. The Indian team refused t
RE:RE:Heres an alternative view
by Che Rogers on Jan 08, 2008 08:40 PM Permalink
hah,
I posted an article that expressed an alternate view and maybe highlighted that India are not as innocent as they make out and have also in the passed particuaril in ENgland benefitted from umpiring mistakes
RE:RE:RE:Heres an alternative view
by Che Rogers on Jan 08, 2008 08:43 PM Permalink
I will take it on notice and look into it. i beliee it is when he got suspended but not sure. What has this got to do with the alternative views put forward above that all countries sometimes benefit and sometimes dont.
Are we not allowed to highlight issues above or is any alternative view punished on this forum
RE:RE:RE:RE:Heres an alternative view
by on Jan 09, 2008 08:33 AM Permalink
Australia benefits much more than any other nation while playing in Australia. Imagine the people who invented sledging cannot handle it coming back to them
RE:Heres an alternative view
by vijay P on Jan 08, 2008 08:49 PM Permalink
There%u2019s a Difference between MAAKI and Monkey... Rogers... I think u have never played Cricket in your life... Let me tell u my friend.. When third umpire decisions are going against you... u cant do much and u r bond to loose.. And when a batsman is caught clean in the slip and you have to beg the umpire to give decision (clark%u2019s wicket) then u don%u2019t have much say but to accept the defeat. I BET STEVE WONDER (the Singer) CAN DO MUCH BETTER UMPIRING THAN STEVE BUCKNOR.
RE:Heres an alternative view
by raj on Jan 08, 2008 08:26 PM Permalink
imagine a scenario - next match, when the players are going to drinks. symonds is at it again. a "friendly banter". bhajji is at the drinks trolley alone surrounded by aussie team members and no cameras nearby. suddenly symonds starts shouting, and all the aussie team members run to the umpire and claim bhajjie has shouted at him and abused him racially.
now what stops the umpire from banning permanently, since there has been a precedence in just the previous match ? now, how will people ever know if this is the case in the first palce , thats this match ? since proctor only went by the australian version, much that he says he's trying to be fair and has heard in the indian side too, its totally unfair that he choses to listen to the australian side. thats the bone of contention. its an insult to sachin, since his testimony has been ignored.
RE:Heres an alternative view
by Che Rogers on Jan 08, 2008 08:25 PM Permalink
Rest of article
refused to accept the ICC match referee's decision to ban Harbhajan Singh for three matches for racially slurring Andrew Symonds and wanted to go home, although the visitors yesterday made sure they sampled life on Australia's most famous beach, Bondi, while some of the Australian team immersed themselves in the culture of the subcontinent, taking part in the shooting of a Bollywood film at the SCG.
The Indian team did this because it knew it could. The BCCI controls cricket's income and cricket would be crippled without its co-operation.
Yet it's not the Indians' refusal to play by the rules, or refusal to play full stop, that is being condemned by some. It's the Australian captain, Ponting. What is his crime here? He has stood by Symonds, a black player, who told him he had been called a monkey. He had this confirmed by two other Australian players, as Ponting revealed in The Australian yesterday.
The Australians claim Harbhajan used the slur on the third day of the Test and revealed that he had said it during the racism-marred series in India last October. What would the pontificators have said if it were an Australian player accused of racially abusing an Indian? Hopefully, Australian cricket would have responded with respect for the process, outrage at the crime and shame that we would treat people in such a manner.
Instead, a tired and emotional Indian team spat the dummy and sat in its Sydney hotel refusing to go on.
RE:Heres an alternative view
by raj on Jan 08, 2008 08:32 PM Permalink
imagine a scenario - next match, when the players are going to drinks. symonds is at it again. a "friendly banter". bhajji is at the drinks trolley alone surrounded by aussie team members and no cameras nearby. suddenly symonds starts shouting, and all the aussie team members run to the umpire and claim bhajjie has shouted at him and abused him racially.
now what stops the umpire from banning permanently, since there has been a precedence in just the previous match ? now, how will people ever know if this is the case in the first palce , thats this match ? since proctor only went by the australian version, much that he says he's trying to be fair and has heard in the indian side too, its totally unfair that he choses to listen to the australian side. thats the bone of contention. its an insult to sachin, since his testimony has been ignored.
RE:Heres an alternative view
by Che Rogers on Jan 08, 2008 08:30 PM Permalink
and finally
When Symonds was subjected to shameful monkey chants at three one-day international matches in India, the authorities denied it was happening until shown photographic proof. It now seems that they require a sound recording of this event before acknowledging it. Sachin Tendulkar, who has sparked the controversy by contacting the board and demanding it support Harbhajan, claims he never heard the word used. Does this mean it wasn't used? Would he have us believe that Ponting, Symonds and two teammates orchestrated a fabric of lies and events and even concocted a story dating back four months? The ICC has an appeals process under way and this should be respected, although it remains to be seen whether it will be. As for Bucknor, it is easy to forget just how silent the Indians were last year when the same umpire did not give Sreesanth out in the fading minutes of the first Test against England. Most commentators believed the bowler was LBW, and had he been given out, the English would have won the Test and the series would have finished one-all. India remains silent about that.
India also remains silent about Tendulkar being given not out when apparently LBW early in his first innings in Sydney. Tendulkar made 154 not out, and nobody complained. The Indians complain about two catches claimed by Australians in the match, but remain mute about a catch that captain-in-waiting Mahendra Singh Dhoni claimed in the Test against England. The umpire gav
RE:Heres an alternative view
by Che Rogers on Jan 08, 2008 08:35 PM Permalink
and finally but remain mute about a catch that captain-in-waiting Mahendra Singh Dhoni claimed in the Test against England. The umpire gave batsman Kevin Pietersen out when Dhoni appealed, but the decision had to be changed when replays showed the ball clearly bounced first.
India remains silent about that.
Last night, the ICC buckled to India's demands and sacked Bucknor. "It is important to stress that Steve has not been replaced due to any representations made by any team or individuals," ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed claimed.
"The ICC remains the sole body responsible for the appointment of umpires and no team has the right to object to any appointment. The decision by the ICC to replace Steve for this match was made in the best interests of the game and the series."
Some newspapers yesterday posted polls damning Ponting's captaincy and the Australian team's sportsmanship.
The Australian has seen an email sent around Indian supporter groups urging them to vote against the Australians. Meanwhile, in India the nation is calling on its beaten team to return home.
"Come back home, nation tells its players," The Hindustan Times blazoned across its front page beneath a photograph of Roebuck and an extract from his column, and above a poll showing that 91 per cent of Indians wanted the tour called off.
The poll, in line with others across television, radio and newspapers, reflects searing resentment over both the umpiring in the second Test at th
RE:RE:Heres an alternative view
by Che Rogers on Jan 08, 2008 08:37 PM Permalink
kast bit (sorry from the australia) over to you
the SCG and the ban on Harbhajan, disclosing that 86 per cent of Indians believe that massive damage has been done to their pride as a nation and that the country got "a raw deal" in Sydney.
