Much has been said and written about the poor performances of umpires Steve Bucknor (West Indies) and Mark Benson (England) in the Second Cricket Test Match played between Australia and India at the Sydney Cricket Ground (January 2 - 6, 2008).
A number of very dubious (no, make that downright wrong) umpiring decisions favoured the home team. Ironically, Australia's Andrew Symonds who was a prominent member of the cast in the umpiring controversies was named Man of the Match. Many experienced cricket-goers are convinced Steve Bucknor was easily THE man of the Match. Well, he did make a very big impression on it!
Bucknor's time in the centre must now be drawn to a sad and sorry close. Honestly, he should have stepped aside at a time when he was on top of his game and been remembered for the fantastic contribution he made to the game.
A full report of the game and its score card is at:
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/baggygreen/engine/match/291352.html
2 comments:
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.
Enough has been said about the umpiring and the Aussie attitude in the test series.
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 wasn’t 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. "Sledging for Dummies" or "Sledging - a Users Manual" are two possible titles for the tome.
For instance - it is apparently OK for Glenn McGrath to ask a West Indies batsman what a certain part of Brian Lara’s anatomy feels like because it was non racial macho Aussie thing to say – basically gutter level personal abuse is OK in the gentleman’s game but not anything to do with race. We in India need to be educated in the tradecraft - we are but beginners in the subject.
Or should action be taken against all 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 defense since calling a person of African descent a monkey does have racist connotations and carries with it offensive historical baggage relating to the way people of African origin were regarded by their white colonial masters whose descendants today are railing against racism (the very foundation of the colonial age was built on a notion of race superiority - ask the Tasmaninian Aborignes) and therefore this should not be done – but maybe many in India do not understand the sensitivity of the matter. Is there a cultural gap here.
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 thick.
I guess they were getting a taste of their own medicine in the World Cup 20-20 and in India and were perhaps suffering from some not inconsiderable indigestion 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 used a reference to some other noteworthy mammal to respond to Symonds’ abuse - swine or dog come to mind as possible candidates - they are pure insults and carry with them no racist overhead. For good measure add on “non-monkey”. After all you cannot possibly be called racist if you say someone is not a monkey. “You mother*%$#ing, snivelling, lilly-livered, non-monkey, son of a swine” logically ought be acceptable sledging in the ICC and Australian lexicon.
This error by Harbhajan (if he indeed called Symonds a monkey) gave the Aussies a handle to turn the tables on the Indians by raising the racism issue. The Indians need to learn from this and refine their sledging strategy. It needs to be more nuanced and must take into consideration the subtler shades of meaning of various insulting and abusive terms and what they mean in different cultural contexts - someone in the Indian camp needs to think this through. India needs a specialist sledging coach (anyone for Gregg Chappell for this position - after all he is Australian and should be good at it).
But be happy India - in colonial times it took the word of ten Indians to overturn the testimony of one white man. Today you need to have two white witnesses to overturn the testimony of one Indian.
The world is indeed getting more and more flat. Indians have been accepted as honorary whites - capable of racism against people of African origin, which was earlier the preseve of whites only.
Feels a bit odd though - white people accusing Indians of racism.
But have we heard the last of this.
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 – can’t blame the umpires though they seem to be deaf as adders and blind as bats and just in case this is a racist slur I voluntarily ban myself from selection for the Indian team for the foreseeable future) 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 Harbhajan’s doorstep).
Hmm. Food for thought perhaps
Post a Comment