Aussies had it coming: Boycott

[DesiChap]

Too late to draw line in sand By Simon Barnes January 09, 2008 THE present row has been brewing for damn near 50 years. Ever since sledging became widespread, it was always going to escalate to a point where two teams could no longer bear to be on the same pitch and the whole structure of cricket would totter. The gloriously ironical part is that it is the Australians who are swooning like virgins and saying that sledging has gone too far. This from the nation which invented sledging, this from the nation which gloried in sledging, this from the nation which believed that sledging was irrefragable proof of national machismo. It was Australia which coined the term sledging - meaning a remark of sledgehammer subtlety - and it was Australia which dignified it, with the declaration by Steve Waugh, the captain from 1999 to 2004, that sledging was "mental disintegration". The point everybody missed is that cricket is not an insult competition, any more than it is a spitting competition. But, hey, the Australians are world champions and so everything they do must be right. So for years, every cricketing nation has tried to be as much like Australia as possible: to hire Australian coaches, to establish Australian-style academies, and to use playground insults on the cricket pitch. Sledging is part of the game, Australians say. That's true, just as kicking people in the shins is part of football and punching people in the nose is part of rugby. Both these acts are punished. Offenders concede fouls and get sent off. Punishment doesn't stop it, but it keeps it under control. But sledging has been out of control for years. What's said on the pitch stays on the pitch. It's all part of a man's code. Anyone who complains is a poofter. Thus, Australia brought this childish practice of sledging into cricket, with the result that all the other international teams feel obliged to do the same. Last summer, England players threw jellybeans on to the pitch to insult Zaheer Khan, of India. I mean, how pathetic is that? India were furious about that, too. The Asian teams come from a culture in which politeness is more respected than it is in Australia or England, but many Asian cricketers have thought it appropriate to fight back in kind. Continuing escalation is inevitable. If I called you an idiot, again and again and again, you would eventually call me a bloody fool. What would you think if I then staggered back in horror. "He called me a fool! He said bloody! This mustn't be allowed!" That is what has happened. Australia led the way in insults and now, claiming that an India player used a racist term, it is saying that rude behaviour on a cricket pitch is terrible, rotten, awful, mustn't be allowed. If Harbhajan Singh did call Andrew Symonds a monkey as a racist insult, it is pretty nasty. As nasty as when Darren Lehmann, the Australia batsman, called the Sri Lankans "black c----s". Many Australians defended Lehmann's outburst because it was "in the heat of the moment". It was pretty nasty, no matter what the moment's temperature. There are a million complications in this row, to do with ever-rising Indian nationalism, ditto Indian prosperity, the changing centres of power in cricket and a million issues of culture, politics and self-worth. Such things are normal in international sport, part of its endless fascination. The reason the row has got out of hand is not because of racism. It is because too soft a line has been taken on the practice of sledging for far too long. No one in authority wanted to be seen to be picking on the Australians; none of the players wanted to complain because he would look soft and insufficiently masculine - and, what's more, he would get sledged 10 times worse next time. Cricket should not have set racism as the final frontier of unacceptable behaviour; a line should have been drawn years ago at the point when banter becomes bitter invective. Cricket has been soft on a serious matter for decades and now cricket is in crisis. Australia has long promoted mental disintegration; as a result, we are facing the disintegration of the game of cricket. - From The Times of London http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,23025912-23212,00.html

[dial_100]

Good read..:two_thumbs_up:

[yoda]

Continuing escalation is inevitable. If I called you an idiot, again and again and again, you would eventually call me a bloody fool. What would you think if I then staggered back in horror. "He called me a fool! He said bloody! This mustn't be allowed!" That is what has happened.

:giggle:

[guju24]

thx for the article...

[Sachinism]

If Harbhajan Singh did call Andrew Symonds a monkey as a racist insult, it is pretty nasty. As nasty as when Darren Lehmann, the Australia batsman, called the Sri Lankans "black c----s". Many Australians defended Lehmann's outburst because it was "in the heat of the moment".

.........

[DesiChap]

Shaking the tree for the game's sake Shaking the tree for the game's sake January 11, 2008 My criticisms of Ricky Ponting's captaincy and call for his dismissal touched a nerve, but remain valid, writes Peter Roebuck. FROM a distance the SCG Test match was a beauty. Five contrasting hundreds, plenty of wickets, fine weather, large crowds and a thrilling finish - cricket at its best. Why then did a state selector walk away in disgust? Why did a club official send an email protesting about the behaviour of the national side? Why was a highly regarded opposing captain so upset that for only the second time in 130 years an international team was condemned as unsporting? Why have great Australian sportsmen condemned the conduct of the team? Do they still think it is a media beat-up? Throughout its course it was clear the Test was hovering on the brink of calamity. A Test match has a history, a mood, a progression that requires constant attention. Indeed, that is the only justification for investing so much time in a single contest. It is a tale of revealed humanity. And this Test had a death wish. Throughout its course it was clear the Australians were oblivious to the mounting dismay they were generating in their own community. After taking the last wicket the players celebrated rapturously. Meanwhile many lovers of the game felt empty and wondered whether they were alone. They cared about the game and their country and the national team, and resented having to choose between them. Politicians apologised to the Indian high commissioner. Patently the players had lost touch. Afterwards they were stunned by the reaction. No one had told them. But you do not see many children running around in Ricky Ponting T-shirts. It is all David Beckham. The debacle began on the opening day and owed something to bad umpiring. Everyone had been looking forward to a worthwhile contest only to be denied by umpiring blunders. The only people unable to study the merits of an appeal are those called upon to make the decision. Already the unsettled state of the Australians had been exposed, with the captain losing his rag and his protege making an unaccountable error. India rallied and it seemed possible the match might survive. The third day stymied any such hopes. By stumps it was obvious that the tour was in danger. From the moment Andrew Symonds and Harbhajan Singh fell into argument the position was perilous. Actually it was not so much the row as the response that has been the problem. It is not much of a tale. Harbhajan patted Brett Lee on the backside with his bat, to which the bowler did not take exception. Symonds felt called upon to make some remark. According to the Australians, Harbhajan responded with a racist remark. It is plausible. Previously he had been told that words of this sort give offence. Now the Australians faced a critical choice. Already the match had been highly contentious. Already their opponents were feeling aggrieved. After the Haneef case, an entire community was feeling disaffected. Moreover, India had a new man at the helm in Anil Kumble, an intelligent and respected figure who had not been given a chance to deal with incidents of this sort. Harbhajan had immediately apologised and his esteemed partner had tried to calm things down. It had all come out of the blue. Nevertheless Ponting and his kitchen cabinet decided to put the wheels of justice in motion. Australians like to think they play hard and fair. In fact, they define these terms domestically. Multiculturalists believe this lies behind the narrowness of the local game. The rest was inevitable. The Indians felt the anger was manufactured and a mountain had been made out of a molehill. Australia's excesses on the final day, the pursuit of victory at all costs, the failure to embrace opponents at the end, the indignation when their words were questioned, reinforced the resentment. The hosts seemed no longer to care about anything except victory. The Indian felt slighted. Australia's leaders are accountable. It is one of the laws of the game. My job was to provide an individual response to events. I felt empty and tried to examine an apparently contrarian response. I did not expect the column to be popular. Deadlines meant that it was sent before Anil Kumble's enraged news conference. Later colleagues rang to say the news conferences had been testy and expressing concern about relations between the two press corps. What price relations between the teams? Next day past players rang to express sorrow about the events. Sources revealed the angst in the Indian camp and confirmed they were closer to going home than anyone imagined. And the senior players were the most enraged. Then a call came from a woman with the Order of Australia complaining about the profanities used in front of children by a withdrawing Australian batsman, part of the leadership team. Relations between two beloved countries were breaking down and the home players either did not know or did not care. Sections of the Australian sporting community were rejecting their own side and the players did not seem to understand. Time to shake the tree. Sacking the captain was the only story remotely dramatic enough to bring everything out into the open. And so the article was written. It had almost been sent earlier in the match but a fever had taken hold and the thought occurred that mood might have been affected. But the point was valid. The leadership had failed. And so the debate began. And so Australia set about reclaiming its cricket team. Of course the players were angry, even shocked. Some of the column was too forceful. The comparison with wild dogs was unfair. Just that I have six dogs in Africa, likeable canines until they form a hunting pack. The reaction was startling, phones ringing, offers of money to go on television, threats, compliments. But the journalist is not the story. A nerve had been touched and the important matters were going to be addressed. Can the tour be saved? Can Ponting take the team to India in October? The next few days will decide. Australia must take the initiative. Ponting could contact his counterpart to suggest drawing a line in the sand. Forget about Sydney and all its fevers. Without prejudice withdraw all charges against Harbhajan and Brad Hogg. Arrange to meet at stumps every day to sort out differences. Work out a common practice about walking, low catches, words and so forth. Kumble is a straight-shooter but also as fierce a patriot as his counterpart. Perth and Adelaide can still be fun but it is going to take a lot of effort from all concerned. It was not the article that caused the problem but the conduct therein described. Ponting must produce a team that reflects the entire nation, not merely its cricket community, a team that plays with grace and without recrimination. He has some men eager to respond, Lee, Stuart Clark, Adam Gilchrist. Of course the same applies to the Indians. One player rose above it all. His name is Ishant Sharma and he served his family and nation proud by regularly running across at stumps to congratulate opponents for their batting, and never mind that he had been robbed of their wickets earlier in the day. He is 20 and his dad sells air-conditioners in Delhi. http://www.smh.com.au/news/peter-roebuck/shaking-the-tree-for-the-games-sake/2008/01/10/1199554833069.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

[DravidDaBest]

Wow. A very good one! The following will bring sanity to the series and the cricket

The next few days will decide. Australia must take the initiative. Ponting could contact his counterpart to suggest drawing a line in the sand. Forget about Sydney and all its fevers. Without prejudice withdraw all charges against Harbhajan and Brad Hogg. Arrange to meet at stumps every day to sort out differences. Work out a common practice about walking' date= low catches, words and so forth. Kumble is a straight-shooter but also as fierce a patriot as his counterpart. Perth and Adelaide can still be fun but it is going to take a lot of effort from all concerned

[DesiChap]

Aussies had it coming: Boycott

Calcutta: Former England captain Geoffrey Boycott has slammed the Australian culture of aggression and said that Ricky Ponting and Co. have no right to cry foul over on-field abuse since they have dished out worse treatment to teams over the years. In his column for The Daily Telegraph, the former opener said Andrew Symonds deserved the lack of sympathy being shown to him. “I can’t help noticing what a resounding lack of sympathy there has been around the world and even in Australia for Symonds and his sad little protestations of racial abuse. “So Harbhajan Singh called him a monkey. So what? The Aussies have been dishing out far worse for years, as anyone in the cricket world will tell you.†Boycott said Australia could not pose as if it was their right to lord it over every opposition. “For some reason, the Australian team think it’s their right to lord it over every opposition team, to disparage them and mock them. Yes, Australia are the world champions. Yes, they’re an exceptionally talented and consistent side. But that doesn’t give them the right to behave like gods who are outside the normal standards of behaviour.†Boycott said that Cricket Australia should tell the players to cut out the nonsense. “…They should keep a closer eye on their team all the time, and not just when there is a nasty scene that makes the news. The administrators must have known that their players were developing a reputation for abusive language.†Boycott said the Australians should have realised that sooner or later they would be paid back in their own coin. “If you keep abusing people, sooner or later someone is going to turn around and talk back to you. My message to Symonds — and to his captain Ricky Ponting, who reported Harbhajan to the umpires — is ‘Don’t be a cry-baby’. If you dish it out, you’ve got to be prepared to take it in return, and not go running to teacher.†He said he wasn’t surprised to hear that the Indians had threatened to call off the tour. “Frankly, I’m not surprised that the Indians threatened to call off the tour. They see this whole affair as a slur on their country. You’ve got to remember how big the cricket team is over there: they are at the heart and soul of India’s national identity. “And cricket still has these long-standing associations with sportsmanship and gentlemanly conduct, though I wonder how they have survived with everything that’s been going on.â€

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080111/jsp/sports/story_8769340.jsp

[Andrew]

Once again we have someone of significant repute not complaining that we win, but the way we win. And once again, between the lines, at the heart of the matter, seems to be the problem of bullying.

[aussiefan]

one again, we have ex ( read over the hill ) commentators, who all lost to australia, putting the boot in.... perhaps a little bias and sour grapes? and gee, they do have to fill those columns up somehow.

[Desi Cartman]

about time we all move on

[DesiChap]

about time we all move on

You finish the task and then move on No need to bend over backwards. They will screw you all over again.

[Mr. Wicket]

one again, we have ex ( read over the hill ) commentators, who all lost to australia, putting the boot in.... perhaps a little bias and sour grapes? and gee, they do have to fill those columns up somehow.

This is Geoff Boycott we're talking about. Played 38 tests v. Aus, won 13. Lost just 9. Sour grapes? Hmm. Maybe that can be said of some who never did well v. Aus, and kept perpetually losing to them. Boycott had a fine record vs. Aus, averaging over 47 with close to 3000 tests runs against them, so I doubt performance v. Aus is that big a factor in his criticism.

[Guest HariSampath]

^...and that was against a far better Australian side under Ian Chappell against Lillee, Thommo and Pascoe

[Guest HariSampath]

I still remember that banner on Sydney hill " Boycott is a bastard, all Poms are bastards"

[veer]

This is Geoff Boycott we're talking about. Played 38 tests v. Aus, won 13. Lost just 9. Sour grapes? Hmm. Maybe that can be said of some who never did well v. Aus, and kept perpetually losing to them. Boycott had a fine record vs. Aus, averaging over 47 with close to 3000 tests runs against them, so I doubt performance v. Aus is that big a factor in his criticism.

hahahh done and dusted aussiefan... :cantstop::cantstop: reality bites ehh?? as someone said.. aussies cant take it if going gets tough.. freaking chickens..

[DesiChap]

Veer now what have you done Do NOT call them "chicken" It might be offensive. You can call them bastards for sure

[Andrew]

Veer now what have you done Do NOT call them "chicken" It might be offensive. You can call them bastards for sure

Chickens post comments in forums where everyone will agree with them. Aussiefan posts comments in a forum where (odds are) 1.095bn people will violently disagree with them... and then burn his effigy. :hatsoff:

[Andrew]

Veer now what have you done Do NOT call them "chicken" It might be offensive. You can call them bastards for sure

Chickens post comments in forums where everyone will agree with them. Aussiefan posts comments in a forum where (odds are) 1.095 billion people will violently disagree with him... and then burn his effigy! :hatsoff:

[CC1981]

one again, we have ex ( read over the hill ) commentators, who all lost to australia, putting the boot in.... perhaps a little bias and sour grapes? and gee, they do have to fill those columns up somehow.

Get your yellow-tinted blinkers off mate. Boycs lost even worse to the West Indies- when was the last time you heard him take umbrage to the WI's sporting conduct- in the past or present ? Just about EVERYBODY is telling the Aussies that their attitude STINKS....its better to listen than be a blind supporter of loutish behaviour. Besides, Salil has already outed your non-existent point and i am guessing you will disappear from this thread too or ignore the point!