Bhajji banned for 3 tests : Tour could be cancelled

[Rajesh Sethi]

If Procter has made bad decisions, then Proctor should be held accountable, not Ponting and Symonds, just as Bucknor has been held accountable for his mistakes. Procter already admitted he made a mistake when he judged that Yuvi was shocked and disappointed, not dissenting, when he stood his ground after being given out in the last test. Now, if his judgement in the Bhajji matter is also errant as many are suggesting, we have two errors in two matches. Why then is he not under scrutiny like Bucknor? It seems to me that we are upset that all the match officials have been biased in favour of Australia and against India, yet we complain about the opposition team rather than Procter who was in charge of the game and therefore ultimately responsible.

[Chandan]

If it wasn't for those rotten umpires India may have actually been competitive and drawn the test match. Wouldn't that have been something to get excited about!!! The Australian public are morbidly disappointed with the standard of Indian cricket after we were pumped for the best series in years. Might as well cancel the tour we all know what the result is going to be!

No Mr ad. The series would have been 1-1 had the umpiring been correct. India would have got Australia all out for 200 and then would have had the lead of 332 runs in the 1st inning. So yes, cancel the tour because there is no point in playing with a team which plays at "win at all costs" mindset and ICC umpires are desperate to see them succeed in such act. We all know what the result is going to be if the officiating is like this.

[Donny]

At the same time, Clarke should be heavily fined for dissent for not walking when caught at slip (as was Yuvraj in last test)

Yuvi wasn't fined mate. He was charged with dissent but found not guilty. As Clarke and Sharma acted almost identically to Yuvi but for about half as long, I thing both were just stunned at getting out so quickly. Probably the same in Yuvi's case.

[adzamundo]

Chandan, Whats happened has happened, if you are saying that India has played their best cricket here then perhaps I have grossly over estimated them. To claim India would have bowled Australia out 200 is the same as saying Australia would have batted for 2 1/2 days to force the draw if they were its all just speculation. If your top order collapses in any innings of a test match you are lucky to come away with a draw. To assume an Indian victory on the back of everysingle decision throughout the match just adds to the anger on your side of the fence. Ifs, buts and maybes just cant be factored into the equation, I agree India were hard done by, but they didn't exactly assume control of the contest. Ask any retired cricketer, they will all tell you that with umpiring ull get some you shouldn't lose some you shouldn't but it tends to even out in the end. If the Indians can stand the heat, then maybe they should get out of the kitchen. you will never see an Australian team threaten to end a tour because of umpiring or sledging no matter how bad. Sometimes all the talent in the world is no substitute for sheer mental toughness. And at the moment India are showing all the mental toughness of a flat chested teenage girl.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[adzamundo]

Agreed....but to speculate on an Indian victory had the umpiring gone your way is the same as speculating that Australia would have gone into survival mode had they been bowled out for 200. India had control of the match early in their 1st innings, Australia early in their 2nd aside from that it was anyones game. imo result with perfect umpiring (which virtually never happens) a draw.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Rajesh Sethi]

BossBhai - don't forget Kolkata 2001.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --