As an Australian born Indian lawyer, I found the Proctor decision impossible to understand. He said he was convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt" yet all we have heard is the word of 3 Australians who say they heard it versus 2 who say it wasn't said. I'm glad that it has been clarified that Harbhajan did racially abuse Symonds in India, but that they discussed it privately and he agreed to not repeat it. So it's quite clear cut. On the disclosed facts, Proctor couldn't possibly find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt unless a) he's biased, b) he only found guilt "on the balance of probabilities" (ie 4 vs 2) or c) there is other evidence.
If the BCCI wants to prove their point, they should authorise Sachin and Harbhajan to come out PUBLICLY AND EXPLICITLY confirm that the words "big monkey" never came from Harbhajan's mouth. Then let the ICC deal with the resulting ultimatum.
Some commentators said they would be interested to see what Sachin would say in a quasi-judicial environment (ie a hearing), and I'd love to know whether he chose his words carefully. There is a big difference between "I didn't hear anything said by Harbhajan" and "I can definitely confirm he did not say "big monkey".
Only time will tell, though my views on the BCCI position will follow shortly.
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by Adnan on Jan 08, 2008 06:42 PM Permalink
This is not ROCKET SCIENCE: PROCTOR IS NOT PROFESSIONAL THE 2 UMPIRES ARE NOT PROFESSIONALS PONTING EITHER DOESN'T KNOW HOW A CATCH IS CLAIMED OR HE IS A CHEAT!
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by on Jan 08, 2008 06:49 PM Permalink
It's funny... Proctor is not an Australian. And God knows, Sth Africans have little reasons to love Australians. Bucknor is not Australian. This must be just one big conspiracy against India. All of the indepenent umpires, the ICC, and everyone else in the world are just out to get you poor Indians. Grow up you twit. Harbhajan is a guy who has thrown this slur at Symonds before. Why is it so hard to think he would have done it again?
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by on Jan 09, 2008 08:38 AM Permalink
Listen you twit there is no proof that Harbhajan used that term - just Symonds word against his. Procter has a history of bias against Asian teams Bucknor has a history of bias against India Why don't you get your peanut brain around the real facts
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by Adnan on Jan 08, 2008 06:53 PM Permalink
This is not ROCKET SCIENCE: PROCTOR IS NOT PROFESSIONAL THE 2 UMPIRES ARE NOT PROFESSIONALS PONTING EITHER DOESN'T KNOW HOW A CATCH IS CLAIMED OR HE IS A CHEAT!
I THINK YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORD UNPROFESSIONAL MR.LAWYER!
PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PROFESSIONAL, DO NOT CONSPIRE...THEY ARE JUST INCOMPETENT!
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by raj on Jan 08, 2008 06:56 PM Permalink
"Harbhajan is a guy who has thrown this slur at Symonds before. Why is it so hard to think he would have done it again?"
exactly the reason why he was framed. cant think too much of your captain who lies infront of the camera, and says he held a catch cleanly. same with clarke who clearly grassed it.
we dont need to be reminded of the nationality of those gentlemen. bucknor's been consistent with his bad decisions to india. its like we dread when bucknor's around, and its almost inevitable that he has to give a lot more bad decisions to india. the worst was in the last test. bucknor even mimicked dravid on air. now we dont need to say anything more about his neutrality. about proctor, his decision might be consistent with vague icc rules. there's simply no evidence for him to prove, when only sachin, the other person who's heard it. the aussie team can claim anything in the next test, because bhajji's now be convicted twice!!!
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by on Jan 08, 2008 06:55 PM Permalink
Well put. Ponting has only said he believes his player and would like the appropriate body to deal with the situation as they see fit. If the ICC then botches it this is not his fault. It is worth remembering the Procter grew up in apartheid S. Africa, he has possibly let other issues cloud his judgment, an appeal is the way to resolve the issue and I would be very surprised (on the evidence we have in the public) if they did not say we can't prove it either way, so no ban, but you be very careful about the M word in future. Which would be fair.
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by raj on Jan 08, 2008 07:00 PM Permalink
i'd say ban bhajji if they have the evidence. ban him for 5 matches. if not let him go, and get that blasted symonds for character assasination. that chap is no saint. he's the head of the pack of dogs that the aussies have transformed into. i dont like any of the sledging that aussies do.
if sledging is the bone of contention. let it be banned.
RE:What is the (educated) world coming to?
by on Jan 08, 2008 07:02 PM Permalink
Lack of evidence to convict is not the same as Symonds making it up. If we were in a room alone (or where nobody else could hear) I could call you what I like until I was blue in the face. If you reported me I could hide behind my 'trustworthy profession' and would never get convicted as it would be my word on yours and that is not enough proof. Wouldn't mean I didn't say it though.
