Reactions after Hansen's verdict on Harbhajan case [Merged]

[coffee_rules]

Cricinfo ki --- ki Puts the headline : "Harbhajan racism charge not proven" While others go by "Harbhajan cleared of racism charges"? WTF do they mean by 'not proven'? Is it a fact that Harbjahan said those words and they couldn't prove it? I have sent a scathing feedback to that article. I suggest let CI know what Indians fans feel about this chaatu site.

[Guest Hiten.]

don't visit the site. simple as that.

[Dravid]

lol exactly.. i see ppl saying crapinfo, gayinfo, faggotinfo.. and yet all u still go there go to apna cricketnext :P

[yoda]

cricinfo ki --ki - :hysterical:

[Ram]

Good catch, Indeed, that is a strange headline. The general rule is, anyone is innocent unless proven otherwise. Cricinfo seems to have already decided Bhajji is guilty and are indicating that even though the charges were not proven, that still doesnt discount him from the guilt.

[Online]

Relax, cricinfo just paraphrased what the judge decided "Justice Hansen said he was convinced that, on all the evidence submitted before him, the charge of a Level 3.3 offence was not proven but that Harbhajan should be charged with a Level 2.8 offence." Cricinfo just quoted that - what's wrong with that?

[Rajiv]

Actually, it was pretty straight forward; IMO it shows the charges were baseless and not proven How about "Symonds accusation not proven?" "Charter Plane comes back from runway":D "Hansen provides justice"

[DesiChap]

Simple Symonds? Well, evidently not so New Delhi: The one big thing that everyone seems to have missed out in this whole Harbhajan Singh saga is the role played by Andrew Symonds. If the transcripts of Justice John Hansen’s ruling are anything to go by, it was by and large a scenario where he emerges the real villain. It becomes perfectly clear from Justice Hansen’s observations that Symonds began the whole thing. The joke is that he is the one who is trying to play victim. “It is apparent that while there was acceptance that the exchange between the appellant (Harbhajan) and Mr Symonds was initiated by Mr Symonds and was heated in that the word “f***†was used no other details of the language used was given,†Justice Hansen says in his observations. “It is apparent that the heated exchange arose because Mr Symonds took exception to the appellant patting the bowler Mr Lee on the backside. …. It is clear that Mr Lee bowled an excellent yorker to Mr Singh who was fortunate to play the ball to fine leg. As he passed Mr Lee while completing a single Mr Singh patted Mr Lee on the backside. Anyone observing this incident would take it to be a clear acknowledgement of ‘well bowled’,†Justice Hansen says. “However Mr Symonds took objection to this and at the end of the 116th over he approached Mr Singh telling him he had no friends among the Australians in foul and abusive language. Mr Singh became angry and responded in kind. It was accepted by Mr Symonds that some of Mr Singh’s response was in his native language,†the transcript adds. Subsequently, the Judge also makes several mentions to Symonds’ overall behaviour and attitude, and it can be safely said that the New Zealander is less than impressed. “Mr Symonds appears to be saying that he finds it unacceptable that an opponent makes a gesture that recognises the skill of one of his own team mates. In the transcript he stated: “MR (VR) MANOHAR (Harbhajan’s defence lawyer): You had any objection to that patting on the back? MR SYMONDS: Did I have an objection to it – my objection was that a Test match is no place to be friendly with an opposition player, is my objection.†Then Justice Hansen goes on to make a telling observation: “If that is his view I hope it is not one shared by all international cricketers. It would be a sad day for cricket if it is.†Moreover, Symonds had, as the Judge perceived, violated an agreement he had made with Harbhajan, after the India series, about how they deal with each other on the field. “It makes sense to me and it would be more likely that it was a two-way agreement that they would not speak on the field and this was initially breached by Mr Symonds’ provocative abuse.†Justice Hansen also puts a question mark against Michael Clarke’s testimony in the matter. “In my view there remains the possibility of a misunderstanding in this heated situation. As well it is not without significance that the Australian players maintain other than Mr Symonds that they did not hear any other words spoken only the ones that are said to be of significance to this hearing. This is a little surprising in the context where there was a reasonably prolonged heated exchange. Indeed Mr Clarke went so far as to say that he did not hear Mr Symonds say anything. Given Mr Symonds’ own acceptance that he initiated the exchange and was abusive towards Mr Singh, that is surprising.†All in all, as things now pan out, the ruling does not show the Australians, particularly Symonds, in very good light. While there is no doubt that a lot was said, Symonds seems to have gotten away with more than what can be passed off as just sledging. Given the circumstances, and that these findings came for an International Cricket Council-nominated commissioner, surely there was a case for Symonds being hauled up. But that does not seem to be happening. As of now, all seem to be happy to let all of this go by, and carry on like nothing happened. Till the next time, that is. http://www.cricketnext.com/news/simple-symonds-well-evidently-not-so/29309-13-single.html

[DesiChap]

Aussie media 'demeaning' Appeals Commissioner's office Mumbai: The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) on Wednesday described the Australian media's attack on the 'reprieve' to Harbhajan Singh in the racial abuse case as "demeaning and insulting" to the office of the appeals commissioner while insisting that it was a "fair trial". BCCI Secretary Niranjan Shah expressed his utmost disappointment at the Australian media reports. "We are very disappointed at what has appeared in the Australian media," Shah said. "Whatever has appeared in the Australian media is bulls**t. I will not agree with this. "India has a very good relation with Cricket Australia. It was a very fair trial and no money power was used as claimed. There was no pressure on anyone," he said. BCCI Chief Administrative officer Ratnakar Shetty also expressed his displeasure. "As far as BCCI is concerned we went according to the ruling of the ICC. The ICC had appointed Appeals Commissioner Justice John Hansen who is a respected High Court judge in New Zealand. So to find fault and criticise his decision is demeaning and insulting to the office of the Appeals Commissioner," he said. The Australian media called it a 'Cricket's day of Shame'and reported that Cricket Australia caved in to India's muscle flexing as it was anxious to save the tri-series. Reports also claimed the Australian players were "frustrated" and dismayed after Harbhajan got away with a fine. "If India wanted to use its money power there would have been other ways to follow instead of following the procedure set up by the ICC," Shetty said. "The Judge's decision was based on the fact that there was no video or audio recording of the offensive words supposed to have been uttered by Harbhajan. Mike Procter's finding that Sachin Tendulkar could not have heard Harbhajan was also disapproved," he said. BCCI Vice-President Rajiv Shukla also rubbished the Aussie media allegations and said the decision was taken on the merit. "It is completely rubbish. How can justice be purchased? They are casting aspersions on an Appeals Commissioner," Shukla said. "There is no question of wealth power or money power in pushing any decision. It (The decision) has been taken after complete hearing of the case by the appeals commissioner," he said. "Despite a joint letter by the Indian and Australian cricketers, the Appeals Commissioner did not give any importance to that letter and heard the full case. It was on the basis of merit that he dropped the charges of racism," he added. http://www.cricketnext.com/news/aussie-media-demeaning-appeals-commissioners-office/29320-13-single.html

[DesiChap]

Indians laugh off chartered plane reports Melbourne: The Indian team Wednesday rubbished media reports here that it had chartered a plane to fly back home in case Harbhajan Singh was not cleared of racial abuse charges. The team which arrived here Wednesday afternoon to play a one-off Twenty20 match against Australia on Friday ahead of the ODI tri-series also involving Sri Lanka, rubbished the reports. The team's media manager M V Sridhar said the visitors had not even thought of such a move. "I don't know where that came from. There was no thinking like that at all," Sridhar was quoted as saying in The Age. Sridhar said the Indians were satisfied with the lifting of three-Test ban on Harbhajan and looking forward to get on with the game. "After what happened yesterday, we're going forward so that the game goes on," he said. The team is scheduled to train at the Melbourne Cricket Ground Wednesday evening. http://www.cricketnext.com/news/indian-team-laughs-off-chartered-plane-reports/29304-13.html

[DesiChap]

Right decision was made: Harbhajan Melbourne: Harbhajan Singh appeared upbeat on arrival here on Wednesday afternoon and is relieved that he has been freed from the "racial" charge laid against him. "I am very happy, the right decision was made. I am glad it's over," said Harbhajan. But sensing that Harbhajan could be subject to taunts and insults in Australia now, the Indian off-spinner was afforded extra security ring with four personnel giving him protection. However, Australian captain Ricky Ponting, it is learnt, was far from happy. It is learnt that Ponting decided on his own to have the racial abuse charge against Harbhajan downgraded after a series of secret meetings with lawyers during the Test in Adelaide last week. But he wasn't happy when Harbhajan escaped with just a 50 per cent fine of his match fee. Ponting agreed to go with the deal effected between Cricket Australia (CA) and Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) after he, and Symonds, realised there was no actual evidence of Harbhajan Singh having used the word "big monkey". It is learnt Symonds, after the judgement, stated "I can't believe this is happening". "I'm telling you the truth. That's what I always do. I know what I heard. You know I am a team player". Cricket Australia had clearly told Ponting that Justice John Hansen wouldn't take Andrew Symonds' words to make a decision or those of his team-mates Michael Clarke and Matthew Hayden. New evidence from Channel Nine's stump microphone failed to pick up Harbhajan's comment, only the one of Symonds "Go and yell at your teammates... you called me a monkey again". Once Ponting agreed to lower his stance in Adelaide, Harbhajan was happy to plead guilty. http://www.cricketnext.com/news/right-decision-was-made-harbhajan/29317-13.html

[DesiChap]

Symonds initiated brawl with Harbhajan: Hansen PTI PrintSaveWrite to EditorMail Adelaide, January 30: It now transpires that it was Australian all-rounder Andrew Symonds who initiated the abusive exchanges with India's Harbhajan Singh during the Sydney Test that brought international cricket to a flash point. It all started during the 116th over on the third day of the Sydney Test on January 4 when Harbhajan made "friendly contact" with Australian fast bowler Brett Lee by patting him on the backside as if to say "well bowled", according to the 22-page order by Justice John Hansen, the ICC Appeals Commissioner who cleared the off-spinner of the charge of racial abuse. A "statement of agreed facts" submitted to Hansen by Harbhajan, Sachin Tendulkar, Australian skipper Ricky Ponting, Symonds, Adam Gilchrist, Michael Clarke and Matthew Hayden quoted in the order, states that "Symonds approached Harbhajan and told him he had no friends among Australians". Symonds admitted using a four-letter word to which Harbhajan used similar language and neither took offence at that stage. However, the exchange caused Harbhajan to become angry and he motioned to Symonds to come towards him. Harbhajan then said something to Symonds. There was a dispute as to what was said. All the players who gave evidence to the hearing before Match Referee Mike Procter were of the view that in the circumstances, Harbhajan used offensive language against Symonds. After the heated exchange between them, Clarke spoke to umpire Mark Benson and complained about Harbhajan's behaviour. He then told Ponting what he had heard and the Australian captain complained to Benson. On his way back to the slips position, Ponting spoke with Harbhajan before Tendulkar asked him to allow him to manage the situation. During the 117th over, Matthew Hayden informed Ponting that he had heard Harbhajan use offensive language towards Symonds at the conclusion of the preceding over. At the end of the over, Ponting went of the field and told the Australian Team Manager (Steve Bernard) about the incident. The Commissioner said the exchange between Harbhajan and Symonds was initiated by the Australians. Hansen, a New Zealand High Court Judge, said he was not prepared to accept the agreed statement of facts and wanted the witnessed to be called for the hearing. Before the witnesses gave their evidence they all viewed the video. It was an analysis of all available camera angles and included audio from the stump microphone. "It was also accepted by counsel that neither umpire heard anything of relevance and their evidence was not required. Finally it was agreed that there should be no evidence from Anil Kumble who although present in front of Procter was not a witness to the events. Rather he was there in his capacity of captain of the Indian team," Hansen said in his order.

[DesiChap]

Sachin's word influenced the decision: Hansen AFP PrintSaveWrite to EditorMail ADELAIDE, January 30: Indian off-spinner Harbhajan Singh was cleared of racially abusing Australia's Andrew Symonds due to lack of evidence, rather than any external pressure, appeals commissioner John Hansen said on Wednesday. Harbhajan was cleared by the New Zealand judge at an International Cricket Council appeal hearing on Tuesday, ending weeks of speculation over whether India would cancel their tour if the suspension stood. The decision was followed by media reports that Cricket Australia and the Board of Cricket Control for India had brokered a deal that would see the charges downgraded. Hansen downgraded the racism charge to one of using general obscene, offensive or insulting language, overturned a suspension and fined Harbhajan 50 percent of his match fee, but said it was because he could be not be certain that he called Symonds, Australia's only black player, a "big monkey". "I have not felt under any pressure because of such media reports and I would never be influenced or succumb to such pressure, real or imagined," he said. "It is incorrect to suggest that there was some sort of an agreement reached between Australian and Indian cricket authorities that I simply rubber-stamped. "I also wish to add that while I was aware of the media furore surrounding this matter, no-one has attempted to apply direct pressure to obtain an outcome." Hansen said it was clear the Australians -- Symonds, Michael Clarke and Matthew Hayden -- were sure the comment had been made, but noted Indian star Sachin Tendulkar was equally adamant it hadn't, and pointed to complicating factors that cast doubt on the trio's evidence. The judge noted they could not recall other comments made during the incident, and said the complicating factors of "different languages, accents and cultures" cast doubt over what transpired, especially with Harbhajan immediately denying the claim to umpire Mark Benson. "I need to be sure and if I am left with an honest and reasonable uncertainty, then I must rule in favour of Mr Singh," he said. "There was a direct conflict as to whether the word was used. There are cultural accent and language differences and it is accepted some of Mr Singh's remarks were in his own language. "There remains a possibility of a misunderstanding in this heated situation. "I have to be sure the words were said -- I have not been persuaded to the necessary level required the words were said." Hansen pointed out that Symonds had aggressively and unnecessarily instigated the verbal clash with Harbhajan. He added he was surprised the Australians could not recall other words exchanged with Harbhajan during the incident, given their recollection of the alleged comment. But Hansen said Harbhajan was lucky not to escape a stiffer penalty, possibly a suspension, after ICC blunders meant the spinner's suspended one-match ban in 2001 for showing dissent at an umpire's decision only came to light after the hearing. "At the end of the day Mr Singh can feel himself fortunate that he has reaped the benefit of these database and human errors," Hansen said. Harbhajan played the final Test pending a decision on his appeal. World champions Australia won the series 2-1. India and Australia - between whom there was animosity throughout much of the series, even before the Symonds-Harbhajan confrontation - face each other on Friday in Melbourne in a Twenty20 match. http://cricket.indiatimes.com/Sachins_word_saved_Harbhajan/articleshow/2742992.cms

[arkay]

Harsha Bhogle: Indian position No evidence equals no case to answer This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/01/30/1201369229149.html This certainly calls for a separate thread. If you want to merge this to Harbhajan thread, please do this later. Harsha Bhogle January 31, 2008 WHAT a hullaballoo all of us have created! Have India and Australia, bound together by our still-noble game, gone to war? Words are flying like missiles; positions are being taken as if bunkers were being built. What has happened? An allegation was made and judgement was passed to the contrary. It happens every day. Australia thinks India is flexing its muscles, or should one say rupees, unfairly. India thinks Australia has had things much its own way for too long and the time is nigh for retribution. Newspapers are selling more copies, news channels are filling time and simple minds are being influenced. Let's take a backward step — not a great idea on a playing field, especially if you adorn the Aussie coat of arms, but a necessary action off it. Is India flexing its muscles? Three examples have been given. One, that Steve Bucknor was asked to leave. That happens. Employers sack employees, selectors drop players when they are not performing. Umpires have been asked to leave the elite panel in the past. Two, Harbhajan Singh was allowed to play on. That is part of the International Cricket Council's rules; pending an appeal a cricketer can play. Three, Harbhajan has got away with a slap on the wrist despite three players claiming he racially abused Andrew Symonds. Maybe he did, but maybe he didn't. The players who think they heard what he said might feel disappointed but that is not how the law works. If judgement was to be handed out based on what one person said versus what another did, the world would become unliveable. People have got off death row for lack of evidence. I'm afraid that cricketers, irrespective of where they are from, have long forfeited the right to have their word trusted. Anybody who appeals knowing a batsman is not out, and in doing so leads an umpire towards making a mistake, cannot ask that his word be taken. What about India asking a chartered plane to stand by? There was absolutely no way India was going to use that plane, and if I was Judge Hansen, I would have said "keep it there as long as you want because all I'm concerned with is the evidence". If, as we now know, there was no evidence, the plane wouldn't have been needed anyway. If there was evidence, presented in a judge's court before eminent lawyers, India would have had no case to protest. If it had still gone home, it would have lost the right to play cricket and that would have been in the fitness of things. The world rebounded from the depression of the war, and the game would have recovered. It has seen more periods of economic boom and bust than you and I have. Had India seen and heard Harbhajan calling Symonds a "big monkey", there would have been voices in India asking for his head. This voice would have been one of the first. Are prospects of Australian players playing in the IPL weakened? For a day, maybe, or for two, at best. Respected corporate houses have paid serious money to buy franchises because they want their team to win. If Ricky Ponting makes 60 from 38 balls in the first game and leads Kolkata to victory, nobody will complain. Didn't Cristiano Ronaldo play alongside Wayne Rooney for Manchester United after the last World Cup? Heard any Englishmen complaining about him recently? This game is bigger than those that make pronouncements about it, its devotees are more astute than made out to be. So why is India so sensitive about what is happening in Australia? Since I was a child, my abiding memory is of visiting journalists and cricketers coming to India and making fun of us. We were a country finding our feet, we were not confident; we seethed within but we accepted. The new generation in India is not as accepting — it is prouder, more confident, more successful. Those bottled up feelings are bubbling through. This is the great dawn of acceptance. It is a phase both countries must understand. This is the storm before the lull. Let's play cricket. We're only a small family.

[kumble_rocks]

Greats comments by Mr Bhogle , he is spot on here -

The new generation in India is not as accepting — it is prouder, more confident, more successful. Those bottled up feelings are bubbling through. This is the great dawn of acceptance. It is a phase both countries must understand. This is the storm before the lull. Let's play cricket. We're only a small family.

[Lurker]

So why is India so sensitive about what is happening in Australia? Since I was a child, my abiding memory is of visiting journalists and cricketers coming to India and making fun of us. We were a country finding our feet, we were not confident; we seethed within but we accepted. The new generation in India is not as accepting — it is prouder, more confident, more successful. Those bottled up feelings are bubbling through. This is the great dawn of acceptance. It is a phase both countries must understand. This is the storm before the lull. Let's play cricket. We're only a small family.

Thats BS. It has little to do with Indian generations and more to do with the trashy sense of nationalism that has developed into Indian cricket fans today. Somehow many of us today beleive that India runs the world cricket, atleast we run it financially and hence anytime there is even so much as a little controversy by default it should go in our favour or else..... This morning I saw a video of how the Head of State of Australia(Governor General, much like our President) spoke of how sledging is unAustralian and doesnt belong in cricket. There has been ample ridicule of Aussie team by some of the greatest Australian sportsmen(and Australia is the best country in the world of sports pound for pound). And what do we have in India?? Which former great, President, PM etc etc has chided our team? This is frankly appaling that we have become so blindsighted that we beleive all the faults lie with the Aussies. It doesnt. xxxx

[coffee_rules]

Thats BS. It has little to do with Indian generations and more to do with the trashy sense of nationalism that has developed into Indian cricket fans today.

That's not true. The next gen is definitely much different, confident, prouder than the 60s or 70s gen. I see it in my own family/extended family. Esp people in IT, they have sense of pride which I felt was missing in my generatiom.

[Lurker]

That's not true. The next gen is definitely much different' date= confident, prouder than the 60s or 70s gen.I see it in my own family/extended family. Esp people in IT, they have sense of pride which I felt was missing in my generatiom.

My comment was in the context of this whole Harbhajan issue CA. It has snowballed into such a big deal because of nationalism creeping into Indian mindset, not because young guns are confident or anything. Also I disagree that pride factor was missing before though it is a whole different debate(I would like to pursue it in General discussion if you'd like).

[Mandrake]

Thats BS. It has little to do with Indian generations and more to do with the trashy sense of nationalism that has developed into Indian cricket fans today. Somehow many of us today beleive that India runs the world cricket, atleast we run it financially and hence anytime there is even so much as a little controversy by default it should go in our favour or else..... This morning I saw a video of how the Head of State of Australia(Governor General, much like our President) spoke of how sledging is unAustralian and doesnt belong in cricket. There has been ample ridicule of Aussie team by some of the greatest Australian sportsmen(and Australia is the best country in the world of sports pound for pound). And what do we have in India?? Which former great, President, PM etc etc has chided our team? This is frankly appaling that we have become so blindsighted that we beleive all the faults lie with the Aussies. It doesnt. xxxx

We may not be as successful a team as Australia but there is no doubt that we have played the game in much better spirit. When have you seen a sachin or a Dravid or Kumble do anything dramatic when handed a wrong decision.? When have our players routinely sledged the opposition without provocation? Infact the Indian team has been much ridiculed for being 'nice'. What the Aussies have done deserves ample criticism. You would have a reason to complain if Bhajji was found guilty and still the BCCI and the fans supported him. Has that happened? No, then why do you think the team should be ridiculed?

[coffee_rules]

My comment was in the context of this whole Harbhajan issue CA. It has snowballed into such a big deal because of nationalism creeping into Indian mindset, not because young guns are confident or anything. Also I disagree that pride factor was missing before though it is a whole different debate(I would like to pursue it in General discussion if you'd like).

Yes, please if you may. But the OP's context in bringing the pride factor of Gen-Y was not in the backing of Harbhajan context. It was more about why India is sensitive to Australia's brand of cricket of late.