-
Jan 086('
’Australia wins the second test match at Sydney, ironically enough cricket loses.
What else can you conclude when a team is subjected to a series of umpiring mistakes one after the other all going against it, and as a result of which the team loses. The Indian team played well under all adverse conditions which were non-sportive in nature and lost.I have no complains about the Australian team for it is their right to appeal irrespective of whether its an out or not. Its all a part of the game and we all do that. The decision finally lies with the umpires.
And we have loads of complains about these two/three not so gentlemen who did the umpiring there. One or two umpiring mistakes are totally acceptable in any game because finally even umpires are humans and are bound to err, which is why today we have sophisticated technology and third umpire sitting out there to help out the umpires on field.
But when umpires commit mistakes after mistake, and both umpires on the ground do it, and then even the third umpire does it again, it is definitely unacceptable and the intentions are to be doubted. This happened in the previous first test at Melbourne also, but we let it go assuming it to be human error. But look at the list this time. If you plot a graph of umpiring blunders its steadily on the rise. Its better not to play cricket at all, than to play under such biased umpires. Look at the list in this match alone.
Ricky Ponting was not given out by umpire Benson when he was batting at 17 in the first innings. It was a clear caught behind. There was a clear nick and the graph clearly showed a rise. Ponting went on to score 55. When a batsman is appealed for caught behind, the first person to know about whether he is out or not would be the batsman himself because he would have clearly felt about the ball touching the bat or not. Ponting stood ground inspite of this.
We have scores of examples where batsmen have walked out without waiting for the umpire when they realised that they were caught behind. Ponting didn’t. But thats ok, because we also have scores of examples where batsmen have not walked out when the umpires didn’t give them out, even when they knew they were out. Its all in the game because umpire is the final authority.
Again when Ponting was finally given out by the same Benson at 55 for an lbw, it was a clear NOT OUT. Ponting was actually not out when he was given out. Its like converting a cricket series into a cartoon series.
Andrew Symonds was given not out at 30 when there was a clearly audible outside edge, then again in his 40’s he was clearly stumped as his foot was above the ground and the bails were off and yet this time the third umpire – Bruce Oxenford did not give an out. He went on to score an unbeaten 162. A third umpire who has ample time to give his decision and has all the visuals replayed right in front of his eyes again and again, and for him to declare a not out when the visual replays show otherwise makes it undoubtedly clear that he is biased.
Again later the second day when a stumping appeal was made for Symonds when he was in his 140s, Bucknor this time refused to call for a third umpire, even though the replays clearly showed that Symonds was short of crease! How come Bucknor was so confident not to call for the third umpire, because replay showed otherwise?
Waseem Jaffer was given out for a possible no ball from Bret lee! At least as per standard umpiring practices, the benefit of doubt should have gone for the batsman.
Peter Roebuck wrote in Syndney Morning Herald about Bucknor saying Clearly, the sweet-natured Jamaican is past his prime. Indeed, he was expected to retire after the World Cup. Those responsible for allowing him to linger were also partly responsible for a decision that changed the course of the day and possibly the match and series
Then came the final blow for Indians when Indian batsmen were given a series of outs for clear not outs. This complete the picture proving the umpire’s intentions.
Rahul Dravid was declared out by Steve Buckner when the replays clearly showed that Dravid was not out. Dravid who is always a very dignified player who is never seen to react on the ground, even he was so unhappy about the wrong decision that he reacted strongly before leaving the ground in disappointment.
Next comes Ganguly’s catch. It looked like the fielder had grassed the ball, and I was rolling on the floor laughing when Ganguly was declared out. A school kid in my neighborhood who saw this catch of Clarke said this is a pitch catch, not a full catch
The most funny part here was that the catch was NOT visible to the umpire Benson who gave this out, and how did he conclude that it was a valid catch? He asks the captain of the fielding team as to whether it was an out, and this new fourth umpire Ponting confirms the catch and lo the umpire declares it out. What kind of umpiring is this?If the umpire had a doubt there he should have gone to the square leg umpire to clear his doubt, and if even he was unclear then he should have gone to the third umpire, instead here he asks the captain of the fielding team about whether his team mate Michael Clark took the catch or not!! This is cricket played at its lowest level. If this is going to be the way umpires decide, then why do we need umpires in the first place, let the fielding team itself be the umpire always
All these days I used to think that the difference between a war and a sport is that in sport you follow the rules to win
Indian Cricket Board BCCI should take some serious action against these umpires instead of let going things as usual saying forgive and forget. This is not the first time Bucknor is acting like this, he had done this to India in earlier matches too. Finally BCCI has decided to complain to ICC (International Cricket Council) about the quality of umpiring
Kumble should have asked his team to walk out of the game when the umpires continued the trend one after the other. Accepting injustice is the same as doing injustice. If I dont feel that a natural game is on, whats the use of playing it? To hell with all the one sided international norms. When a player errs he is immediately penalised. What about when the umpires err? The ICC should take suo moto notice of this and take actions against the umpires.
The position of an umpire has the same dignity as that of a supreme court judge. Its bad for a game to allow this position to become a controversial one. If I were the BCCI chairman I would have made it very clear to ICC, no more cricket with ICC till these three umpires are removed. Friends say, thats why I am not
BCCI should also immediately call back the team from Australia, not just out of mere symbolic protest, but given the fact that these same bunch of jokers will be doing umpiring in the third test match too.
A new term has to be be added to the dictionary of cricket- Bucknored meaning given out when you are not out OR given not out when you are actually out!
Finally I have one question unanswered. Why? Why do the umpires do this?
Australia might have won today, but Cricket has definitely lost.
Related posts:
34 Responses to “Australia wins – Cricket loses”
-
National game or national shame of Australia? says:
Its a multidimensional picture here
1. Bucknors and bensons on the field make mistakes after mistake. Its not merely about how many were given wrong out. Its also about WHO all were those who were targets of biased umpiring. There is a difference between Ganguly/Dravid being given out to Irfan/Harbhajan being given out. The former are match winners.
2. Pontings on the field become fourth umpires.
3. The team which introduced sledging into cricket, the one which plays mind games with an intention of winning using every hook and crook method, they unnecessarily target a player on the other side, accusing him of racism!
4. On the other hand, the same Aussies call Indian players ‘bastards’!
5. Match referree gives a biased decision on accusations of racism, without any evidence to support his decision.
6. No investigation is held into the conduct of the umpires who gave those stupid decisions. Why no one talks about it?Can world cricket ever forget the under arm delivery incident which these very same aussies used against England, with the sole intention of winning a game AT ANY COST?
Ask any cricket player in the subcontinent and he swears in the name of God, that aussies have abused him on the field in every match.Starting from the test match at Perth, in every match in the future, the aussies mouths should be sealed with stickers, to prevent them from abusing the other team. And I bet, Aussies wont win any match after that. They simply cannot win a match without abusing the other team. And they call it ‘their style’ of playing cricket.
-
Move on to Perth Test says:
How quickly Indians are to get a cheap shot at Australia cricket. The umpiring was horrible and the Indian batting side got wrong decisions which were amplified due to the match and the point in the game at when it happened. Don’t be so hatred to Australia, they produce a lot of chances when bowling.
Facts: Dravid was not out in second innings
Ganguly 50:50 on field given out. Third Umpire would have benefit of doubt like the symonds stumping.
Every other Indian batsman was out legitamatly and clearly.
Ponting given not out when was and out when wasnt, Symonds given not out when was. Having said that, Two Indian batsmen were given not out lbw when hawkeye clearly says PLUM PIE. One 50:50 catch, pad then possible glove (I’ve seen these decisions given out) not out Indias way.Analyse the whole game all 4 innings and 428 Overs, not the 2 Indian innings and 5 balls depecting Australia out and India not out
-
Yes Arun I agree with you that the next test will be a real interesting one. Hope all play decent cricket and entertain us and nobody (neither Indians nor Aussies) cross the boundary line of decency.
Ask Ponting and co to behave – ICC tells CA
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/ask-ponting-and-co-to-behave-icc-tells-ca/55949-5.html -
Arun says:
Recent Survey in Sydney herald showed that ponting i loosing his popularity, Dont know whether the indians in australia did all the voting
The sports minister and the prime minister commented about the match and it was in favor of india. Its good to see the whole world supporting india now.
I think we should continue playing there. That needs courage rather than running away. We should play and should do more sledging than what they might expect.
We should have a sledging coach and a strategic plan for sledging. What do you think?Every match one person should be included in the playing 11 and his job should be just to irritate the opposition and play the mind game.
It would be a great match to watch at perth.
And i hope to see Laxman and Sachin firing and making centuries.
Good Luck Team India -
Gaurav
what do you mean by fluke? 20-20 was not one single match. It was a world cup series that India won after winning all except one match in the series. India didnt go directly to final and win the match. If 5 consecutive games are won, nobody on this planet calls it a fluke. Six continuous sixers in an over by Yuvaraj against England, fluke is it?What a comparison! you are comparing an entire series with single matches between teams like some isolated Bangladesh-Australia match!
As for India being or not being a world champion in the next 20-20, you dont even know who will be there in the Indian team then, nor do you know how other teams will be then, and yet you passed the judgment! Well done, bookies should come to you for advice next time.
Who on earth now said that India didnt lose the first test. Yes it did lose the first test, so what? Are you talking about a sport or a war? In a sport there is always winning and losing. India lost first test doesnt mean in second test umpires and aussies start acting crazy. Any person who follows regular cricket knows that if the umpires and aussies had played a fair game, the second test would have most probably been a draw.
What do you mean by “”The format of 20-20 allows a team to just play good for a short period of time and they win!”"?
Isnt that a form of sport/cricket? Cant Aussies or others play good for a short period of time? Indians get on to drugs and play 20-20 is it?
Going by your definition, whoever wins marathon is an athlete and those who win 100 mts running are fluke! Because its short! whoever swims across atlantic ocean is a swimmer, and all those who win in normal swimming championship are fluke is it? What a logic! YOU ACCEPT the fact that in 20-20 cricket India ARE the current world champions. Even if you dont, it continues to remain a fact. -
Gaurav says:
That 20-20 win was obviously a fluke. The format of 20-20 allows a team to just play good for a short period of time and they win! It is only in Test matches where you need to play good for continuous periods that your real abilities are tested. If India are so good, why did the lose so badly in the first test? Accept it, even if the wrong decision against Dravid and Ganguly had not occurred, India would have still lost that test. And I can guaran-damn-tee you India will not win the next 20-20 cup. Please don’t consider a fluke to be the sign of world champions. Even Bangladesh have beaten Australia (and India for that matter!) once.
-
Arun
About 70% of cricket revenues are from India, not 90%.Yes I do agree with you on BCCI, as for the Indian team, they are playing good cricket, after all no team can win all the matches always. Lets not forget their good performance at 20-20 world cup where they won the first ever 20-20 world cup.
If the Australians are one-day champions, Indians are 20-20 champions
finally its a sporting event. Lets watch it, enjoy it, take everything like a sport, as long as it doesnt turn ugly like the sydney test. Sydney test was no cricket by any standards, it was a complete mockery of cricket, and if you ask me, the Sydney test should be annulled, obviously not because Australians won, but because they won the way they won. -
Well i am too concerned about our teams performance…
We need to improve our bowling and make sure that none are sidelined due to injuries.
Balaji and Nehra has not seen a come back after the injuries.Australians have done this time and now with West indies, India and Sri lanka…
90% of revenue generated in cricket is only due to india playing matches.
What is BCCI doing. Cant they be strong and stern on decisions.
Sunil Gavaskar is the chairman of the technical commitee and of the Elite panel of umpires
Why we dont have an indian umpire in the elite panel. Why is buckenor still umpiring.I cant just digest these facts. There is a Board which claims that they are independant body and not a government organization. They have made billions of money in this game. They claim they represent India.
We have other sports like hockey and football which is under SAI, and whose budget is may be 1% of the teams salary. Still we people see cricket, cry about what happened and takes it as an insult for the country.
BCCI is still sleeping. Had we taken such a strong step in south africa series against buckenor this day wouldnt have come….
Its all part of the game.
-
‘Beyond comparison, it was the ugliest performance put up by an Australian side for 20 years. The only surprising part of it is that the Indians have not packed their bags and gone home. There is no justice for them in this country, nor any manners,’ -Peter Roebuck, former opening batsman and Somerset captain
Read today’s Sydney Morning HeraldFirst cricketer to be banned for racist comments:
Darren Lehmann of Australia was suspended for five-day ODIs over a racial remark against Sri Lankans during the 2002-03 cricket series.
Read more about Racism and Australian CricketIn September 2003 Pakistan Bangladesh series, Pakistani captain Rashid Latif was suspended for five games for claiming a catch, when the ball had touched the ground. The match referee while handing out his sentence said: “”As captain a lot of responsibility falls of Rashid Latif and he committed a serious offence by claiming that (unfair) catch”"
Who was this match referree who was so strict in 2003? surprise, surprise — Mike Procter, the same referree of the current India versus Australia series, who this time took no action against Ponting for a similar offence!!
Does the punishment depend on which team you are captaining? -
anonymous says:
if a monkey is called as symonds (or human), will the caller be termed as racist
-
Yes Abhilash you are right. What I meant is along with making full use of technology, even this human umpire called third umpire should be told very clearly, if you cant even see slow motion replays properly, then you are OUT
-
Abhilash Menon says:
Gurudev,
True. Even the third umpire erred in this case. But I believe that the frequency of “”mistakes”" made by the third umpire will be much much lower than the field umpires. -
Very well said Abhilash, yes the game should make the maximum use of technology to ensure fair play, but as in this case where even the third umpire with all the technology erred, the umpires should be clearly told that they are NOT above the game, and will be penalised and packed back if they are at fault.
Arun, we are not saying that India would have won if the umpires hadnt erred, but in cricket one never knows, australians got about 200 runs bcos of umpires erring and our top batsmen became victims of umpiring err! So the game could have gone either ways.
In every match there are always some players who play and some who dont, dont forget about those players who hit two centuries! So thats an altogether a different issue and they will be taken to task in case of poor performance, but here one should not remove the focus out of the need of the hour and mess up everything.We should also understand how difficult it is to play when you know there is a biased umpire standing there. You will be cautious not even to give a chance to the umpire to think about an out, sledging doesnt happen just because players hate each other, its a mind game played on the ground to remove concentration of the batsman, and the current australian team are very well versed in that
-
I dont understand why we should heave a huge sigh and accept glaring mistakes from umpires on the grounds of human error when the fact is as clear as daylight in front of us. International games like Cricket, Hockey, etc. are much more than just entertainment for us now (at least for Indians). So why should we live with this when we dont have to? ICC allows technology to be used in some cases and the same technology is shunned at in other cases. Why???
The main arguments against the use of more TV technology are
The human value will go from the game How? The final decision is still made by a human (third umpire). He uses technology as an aid only. Technology itself does not make any decisions.
Umpires value will go down and it will be robot umpiring So? Players are not playing the game or spectators are not seeing the game to glorify the umpires. Ultimately everyone wants a fair game. The umpires decision had to be held final in times were there was no TV technology, just to ensure fair play. Today in matches that are not covered by TV, the field umpire is and should be the ultimate decision maker. I dont think sentiments towards umpires will console the millions of fans whose teams lose due to those umpires.
Technology is not perfect Is an umpire perfect? Use technology only when it shows things clearly.In order to incorporate technology effectively into Cricket and at the same time not to make it a circus of to and fro appeals, I propose the following new rules in Cricket. ICC please note
A batsman should be given the option to challenge the decision of the umpire in the case of
1. Caught : If the batsman is absolutely sure that he has not nicked the ball. This should be applicable only for catches by close in fielders or wicketkeeper.
2. LBW : If the batsman is absolutely sure that there was an inside (or outside) edge before the ball went on to the pads. The batsman cannot challenge the LBW decision for reasons other than edges.The challenge should be attended to by the third umpire using the TV replays, snickometer, etc. and he should decide one of the following.
A. Not Out : If it is absolutely clear that the batsmans claim was correct.
B. Out : If it is absolutely clear that the batsmans claim was not correct. Now in this case there should be harsh penalties for the false challenge (like 75% match fees of ban from the next match). The severity of the penalties should increase with the number of such false challenges. This is required to prevent every batsman from fallaciously challenging the umpire and reducing the whole thing into a farce.
C. Not Clear : If the above 2 decisions cant be made, i.e., if there is any doubt from the replays, the third umpire upholds the decision of the field umpire. There is no concept of benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman here.The bowling team should be given the option to challenge the decision of the umpire in the case of
1. Turned down catch appeal : If any of the close in fielder or wicket keeper is absolutely sure that the batsman has nicked the ball.
The challenge should be attended to by the third umpire using the TV replays, snickometer, etc. and he should decide one of the following.
A. Out : If it is absolutely clear that the batsman has touched the ball with his bat or glove.
B. Not Out : If it is absolutely clear that the batsman has not touched the ball with his bat or glove. In this case there should be harsh penalties for the fielder who made the challenge. The severity of the penalties should increase with the number of such false challenges.
C. Not Clear : If the above 2 decisions cant be made, i.e., if there is any doubt from the replays, the third umpire upholds the decision of the field umpire.One more rule Id like to suggest is that if a referral is made to the third umpire, the third umpire should have the authority to make the final decision if the TV replay give conclusive proof, irrespective of what the third umpire referral was for. I am saying this because I remember seeing a ridiculous decision in a match in the world cup where a catch by a close in fielder was referred to the third umpire to judge whether the ball was grounded or not. From the replays it was clear that the ball did not touch the bat but came off the pad. However the batsman had to be given out since the ball was not grounded before the fielder caught it!
ICC please try the above rules in the champions trophy
-
anonymous says:
got an email below
New ICC rules:
After watching the test match, some rules have to be incorporated by ICC to give the other teams a perfect clarification(1) Ricky Ponting (THE TRULY GENUINE CRICKETER OF THE CRICKET ERA AND WHOSE INTEGRITY SHOULD NOT BE DOUBTED) should be considered as the FOURTH UMPIRE. As per the new rules, FOURTH UMPIRE decision is final and will over ride any decisions taken by any other umpires. ON-FIELD umpires can seek the assistance of RICKY PONTING even if he is not on the field. This rule is to be made, so that every team should understand the importance of the FOURTH UMPIRE.
(2) While AUSTRALIAN TEAM is bowling, If the ball flies anywhere close to the AUSTRALIAN FIELDER(WITHIN 5 metre distance), the batsman is to be considered OUT irrelevant of whether the catch was taken cleanly or grassed. Any decision for further clarification should be seeked from the FOURTH UMPIRE. This is made to ensure that the cricket is played with SPORTIVE SPIRIT by all the teams.
(3) While BATTING, AUSTRALIAN players will wait for the ON-FIELD UMPIRE decisions only (even if the catch goes to the FIFTH SLIP as the ball might not have touched the bat). Each AUSTRALIAN batsman has to be out FOUR TIMES (minimum) before he can return to the pavilion. In case of THE CRICKETER WITH INTEGRITY, this can be higher.
(4) UMPIRES should consider a huge bonus if an AUSTRALIAN player scores a century. Any wrong decisions can be ignored as they will be paid huge bonus and will receive the backing of the AUSTRALIAN team and board.
(5) All AUSTRALIAN players are eligible to keep commenting about all players on the field and the OPPONENT TEAM should never comment as they will be spoiling the spirit of the AUSTRALIAN team. Any comments made in any other language are to be considered as RACIALISM only.
(6) MATCH REFREE decisions will be taken purely on the AUSTRALIAN TEAM advices only. Player views from the other teams decisions will not be considered for hearing. MATCH REFREES are to be given huge bonus if this rule is implemented.
(7) NO VISITING TEAM should plan to win in AUSTRALIA. This is to ensure that the sportive spirit of CRICKET is maintained.
(8) THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE: If any bowler gets RICKY PONTING – THE UNDISPUTED CRICKETER WITH INTEGTIRY IN THE GAME OF CRICKET more than twice in a series, he will be banned for the REST OF THE SERIES. This is to ensure that the best batsman/Captain will be played to break records and create history in the game of CRICKET.These rules will clarify better to the all teams VISITING AUSTRALIA.
-
sainath says:
one more eg: of partial behaviour….
yuvraj sing was charged for showing dissent towards umpiring decision, but Ricky Ponting was not charged and called for showing dissent towards umpiring dissent evenif he stood at the crease looked at umpire and said something.
-
Ray Dixon,
Australia is the best team on the whole.
Australia would beat India 7 times out of 10.
Nobody is questioning that.Indians are only unhappy about the umpiring mistakes in this series, especially when these mistakes are 95% of time advantage Australia.
There was high probability that if Dravid and Ganguly were allowed to carry on, the match would have been a draw. There was also good chance that if Symmonds was out on 30, India could have won!
Congratulations to Australia for equalling the world record. But this success would have been sweeter if it was achieved by fair means.
Tell me something if Aussies were touring India and they lost a match due to (lots of, one sided) umpiring errors, would you keep quiet and accept it as humane?
-
@gurudev,
I am not supporting bad umpiring at all..
i am just putting up a point that, in this light, many things went unnoticed, like poor batting by some of our batsmen.
that was my point.Well, to make the match draw, there were only 2 decisions in the last innings which really went wrong for us….
that too was of rahul dravid and saurav.
I am not talking about the other 8-9 decisions in the whole match, if that had gone with us, then the result would have been different.My point is that, when we were playing to save a match, atleast people like dhoni, yuvraj could have played well to save it rather than blaming umpires.
The whole umpiring issue just overshadowed the performance of several players after all…
Umpiring, ofcourse is bad and banning of harbhajan is ridiculous.
-
Even Australian media is supporting the Indian team! Here are some excerpts from today’s Australian newspapers.
The Australian national newspaper criticised the behaviour of the home team and said Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson should be called to account for their poor umpiring.
“”It is shameful this splendid test match, won in such a remarkable fashion by the indomitable Australians, has left such a bitter taste,”" wrote Mike Coward, veteran cricket writer.
“”The standard of play often was outstanding and occasionally exceptional but the standard of players’ behaviour was questionable and, at times, unacceptable. And the standard of umpiring was poor.”"
“”Test cricket is not robust enough these days to withstand these failings and the protagonists and umpires Steve Bucknor, in particular, and Mark Benson should be called to account,”" he said.
Peter Roebuck was more stinging in his write-up for the Sydney Morning Herald, saying only “”rabid nationalist”" will relish such a “”rotten contest”".
“”India has been dudded. No one with the slightest enthusiasm for cricket will take the least satisfaction from the victory secured by the local team … that entertained spectators, provided some excellent batting but left a sour taste in the mouth,”" wrote Roebuck.
-
NITESH says:
IF WOMAN TEAM WITH PARTICULER 3 UMPIRE PLAY WITH AUS………
100% WOMAN TEAM BEAT AUS.TEAM…..
AUS.TEAM 11+3 UMPIRE = 14
INDIAN TEAM 11.
RESULT : AUS WIN. (27 WICKET)
INDIA LOESE ONLY 8 WICKET DISSISION RIGHT 12 WRONG …WHAT A CRICKET…………..
SAME AUS…..SAME..
-
come on, for cricket’s sake please dont support such a bad umpiring. Nobody is questioning the quality of australian team here. Its definitely one of the best cricketing teams. So is India.
But dont you think that if not for these many wrong umpiring decisions, (about 8 of them!) the second test would have been a draw? How fair it is to allow wrong umpiring to alter the course of a game completely, especially when umpires make stupid mistakes like asking the player himself whether his team member took the catch or not! Real funny. Whos the umpire there? Ponting or Benson or both? Thats definitely not quality cricket.
If the umpire declares the taste of the grapes without himself tasting it, what else can one say?
-
What happened is really a shame for cricket.
But i would like to ask one thing here:1. What did our batsman did to save the match.
Talk about Yuvraj singh, what is he doing all these 4 innings he played. Thinking about his girlfriend deepika, arranging for her birthday bash.
Wasim jaffer, a series of mistakes all the time.
Dhoni, what is he doing after all….2. Bowlers
Do we have strike bowlers other than Kumble. What are our fast bowlers doing, where have they gone.
After kapil dev, shrinath took over the charge, after him, nobody in the picture to spearhead our bowling attack.I think, in this discussion of umpiring, we actually forgot about the weakness of our players, with some being an exception.
Dhoni and Yuvraj could have saved the day for india.So its not only poor cricket from the indian team, but also poor umpiring.
Hence while we spend time blaming umpires for bad umpiring, we should take some time for retrospection on how our bowlers and batsmen performed.
I would have been a better day to see a drawn match than to see a lost one.
-
This is the first time there have been more than 3 umpiring mistakes and that too clearly intentional ones.
You guys take the cake for sour grapes, that’s for sure.
-
Sbikh
A very good analysis. The bottom line is that this time the Aussies were completely taken aback when they saw that even Indians had started replying back, and that didnt go really well with them, since they had never expected this!
I remember Harbhajan saying before they left to Australia that, “”I am going there to play cricket. But if people start talking about other things, I am not going to simply take it and be quiet”"! -
Raydixon
Please read the article once again before jumping to conclusions. We are talking about multiple wrong umpiring by all three umpires, and you are taking it as comparing teams!As if India does this every time! This is the first time there have been more than 3 umpiring mistakes and that too clearly intentional ones. And when India has raised an issue against umpiring, its surprising that australians are taking it to be against their team!
Dont forget that even Australia has lost to India in the past. Its not as if only India has lost always. Let me give you an example. http://hitxp.wordpress.com/2007/09/24/they-came-they-saw-they-conquered/
20-20 world cup cricket which started last year, India won the first 20-20 world cup if you remember it, and this is what Australian cricketer Andrew Symonds had to say about it ‘20-20 is not the real form of cricket, it allows an inferior team to win over a superior team’!What kind of attitude is this? Superior in one form of the games doesnt mean superior in all other forms also, right? You have to perform in other forms too to prove your superiority. Just because Australia lost 20-20 world cup to India he says its not a ‘real form’ of cricket! If that were the case why did they play it in the first place? And once they played and lost, why not simply accept that “”they are facing a far superior and commited opponent (India)”" in 20-20?
Its surprising that you are brushing off these many wrong umpiring decisions. If the umpires had not erred, everybody would have accepted Australia’s win. Wrong umpiring reduces the quality of the sport. As I have said in the article 1 or 2 wrong decisions is fine since even umpires are humans and are prone to err. But so many?? Come on, this was definitely not a fair game. Even a kid in India knows that if not for the wrong umpiring decisions the second test would have been a draw.
Yes, if all these wrong decisions had instead gone in favor of India, what would have Australia done then? Wouldnt they have complained?
-
The important thing is that the rules should be the same for both the sides and they should be made explicit before the game starts.
So if Virender Sehwag is suspended in South Africa for appealing for a taking a catch which wasnt then should Ricky Ponting, Adam Gilchrist, Andrew Symonds and Michael Clarke be. Or are the rules different for different sides.
If most sledging is OK but some terms are deemed racist therefore some forms of sledging are not acceptable while others are – then let the ICC publish the rule book of sledging – what sledging is OK and what is not with illustrated examples, a dictionary etc. (for instance it is apparently OK for Glenn McGrath to ask a West Indies batsman what a certain part of Brian Laras anatomy feels like because it was non racial macho thing to say basically gutter level personal abuse if OK in the gentlemans game but not anything to do with race). Why should action not be taken against both forms of abuse.
For the record let me state calling someone a monkey does not have racist connotations in India in fact a monkey is a revered animal in India and one of the major Indian Gods is the monkey God Hanuman. However that is no defence since calling a person of African descent a monkey does have racist connotations and should not be done but maybe many in India do not understand the sensitivity of the matter.
The joke doing the rounds in India is that when an Australian child learns to say the word Mother for the first time the parents say Two cheers. Junior has learnt half a word. For the Australian team to complain about sledging and occupy the moral high ground on this issue is a bit much.
I guess they were getting a taste of their own medicine in the World Cup 20-20 and India and were suffering from some not inconsiderable digestion as a consequence.
Harbhajan made a mistake if (and only if) he referred to Andrew Symonds as a monkey. Wrong choice of animal mate – you should have tried some other noteworthy mammal to respond to Symonds abuse – swine or dog come to mind as possible candidates – they pure insults carry with them no racist overhead. It gave the Aussies a handle to turn the tables on the Indians by raising the racism issue. The Indians need to refine their sledging strategy. It needs to be more nuanced – someone in the Indian camp needs to think this through. India needs a specialist sledging coach (anyone for Gregg Chappell for this position – he is Australian and they are the best at this).
But be happy India – in colonial times it took the word of ten Indians to overrule the word of one white man in India. Today you need to have two white witnesses to overrule the word of one Indian. The world is indeed flattening.
Feels a bit odd though – white people accusing Indians of racism.
But we havent heard the last of this. This is only the beginning.
We have a situation where a white match referee (from a country that till very recently practised the worst form of racism as state policy) takes the word of two white witnesses (who are not neutral) over that of one Indian witness (who is not neutral) and without any independent witness or corroborating evidence (no video, no audio, nothing heard by the umpires) bans an Indian player (who the white Australian captain finds himself incapable of playing and so will benefit from this ban, and it was this Australian captain who insisted that the racism charge be laid at Harbhajans doorstep).
Hmm. Food for thought
-
Whatever may came
BCCI is does not means the meaning of self respect.
It is that woman, that even with a loaded gun, will allow herself to be raped just because she is powerless woman. -
Why don’t you just get better at playing the game instead of complaining about umpiring decisions and making ridiculous assertions about the integrity of the Australians?
According to you India is by far the best team in the world and the only way Australia can beat them is to cheat!
That’s the bottom line of what you’ve said – if all those decisions you refer to went the other way. Get over it, every side cops bad umpiring now and then.
How ridiculous. India should just accept that theyare facing a far superior and commited opponent.
Maybe the Indian side needs to get fitter, so they can play out a full 5 days? And if they played better they – and you – wouldn’t be whingeing so much.
-
Amit says:
This is been very much ashamed for the australians as they are the best team in the world and playing as such cricket.India must leave the tour and come back to home,there is no need to play further.
-
Thomas says:
Its better to lose a sport with dignity, than to win by foul means
-
Nikhil Ghag says:
Auzi’s should be ashamed of their act. This is no way a world champions should have acted. It just proves that Auzi’s are too scared of India to win ethically. Launch of baseless complain against Harbhajan is a act out of total frustration that Ponting if facing on the field due to him. It is obvious that Auzi captain is nowadays getting nightmares of bhaji
Moreover he has guts to proclaim his integriti for the game. Way to go Mr. Ponting. This way you would be able to go much beyond 16 wins in a row -
chappell says:
In view of the farse in the second test match and ugly cricket played by the austrialians, Indian board should pull back their team from australia and severe all cricketing realtionships with theam. Australians must be banned from playing cricket for next two years in all international level by ICC. Austrilians should not be allowed to bring the glorious game of cricke to any more disrepute. They must be taught moral lessons and righteousness and asked to do public service like public toilet cleaning. Cheaters are punished under law. And if you are cheating in the full view of 100 crore people we can’t allow it. They are Australian crickets are criminals in the view of hundred crore Indians. If they go out of the stadium they could be arrested for con’ing the Indian team and the whole world.
Also umpires should be criminally procecuted and later publically executed.
Leave a Reply
