Tag Archives: Sledging

Cultural misunderstandings…

It now transpires that Harbhajan Singh said, in his native Hindi/Punjabi, “abey teri maan ki ”.

At least, that’s what he and his team are saying.

And, as reader 10YearsLate says in the comments section of this Blogsite, for the uninitiated and the linguistically unaware, the Hindi/Punjabi swear phrase above roughly translates to: “ Hey, your mother’s …”.

“maan ki” is commonly (and unfortunately) heard in India — particularly North India — and sounds like “monkey”. Symmonds, no doubt, drew the monkey conclusion.

Well, that’s the case of the Indians anyway!

As 10YearsLate says, “Given that demeaning references to mothers, sisters and wives are kosher in the Australian sledging lexicon, this may be considered legit.”

I think it is worse than that.

[Tongue-in-cheek mode ON]

I actually think that Harbhajan Singh may have wanted to get closer to the Australians! His pre-tour cultural-briefings may have told him that there are three sure-fire ways to achieve this objective:
(a) tap someone’s bottom — a sure sign of mateship,
(b) say something nasty about someone’s mother or sister — only mates have sledge-rights on mothers and sisters,
(c) wait for the post-day drink-frenzy to make friends over glasses of beer.

Such sharing of beer and war-stories, visiting teams are told, are to be compulsorily had after the “what’s said on the field is left on the field” type “hard but fair” Australian way of playing!

He was a bit tired of all the beer that had been consumed in the tour up until then. Every word that was said up until then on the field had been drowned with these glasses of beer that just had to be consumed as war-stories were exchanged. Moreover, the drunken haze left him with not much money, a lot of friends — that he actually did not want — and not much memory of what was actually said the previous day! It was working well, in one sense, but for someone with not that much money and for someone not used to consuming as much beer as he was now forced to consume, it was all getting a bit too much!

So, he wanted to try another tack… He was batting well at this stage and had pulled his team out of trouble. He was willing to risk option (a) of patting someone’s backside. After surveying the field, his eyes focussed on Brett Lee’s well-appointed hind!

Rather than wait for the post-match drink-frenzy, he proceeded to tap Brett Lee on the bowlers’ well-appointed bottom. He may have chosen the right bottom to pat, but did not realise that Andrew Symonds had his eyes on that piece of real estate!

When Andrew Symonds saw this, he saw red! He proceeded to claim exclusive, perpetual and royalty-free rights for performing said task on Brett Lee’s bottom! He threw a sledge in Harbhajan Singh’s direction. Quite miffed at being reprimanded for his bum-tap and quite annoyed at having to now wait for the post-day what’s-said-on-the-field-is-left-on-the-field-drink-frenzy to make friends with this hard-but-fair bunch of muscular Australians, he proceeded to hurl the words “abey tere maan ki …” towards Andrew Symonds.

His pre-tour cultural briefings may have told him that if a bottom-pat didn’t work, an abuse would. After all, play “hard but fair” is the national way of playing!

So, it is likely that Harbhajan Singh may have wanted to start proceedings early in an anxious bid to not wait for the post-day “what’s said on the field is left on the field” drunken stupor!

Unfortunately, Andrew Symonds heard “maan ki” as “monkey” and, the rest, as we say is history.

It was Harbhajan Singh’s fault. He should have chosen Brad Hogg’s bum to pat. I doubt anyone in the Australian team would have been as protective of his backside real estate as they would be of Brett Lee’s.

[Tongue-in-cheek mode OFF]

Meanwhile, it also transpires that the two teams exchanged lists of offensive words prior to the series. And “bast**d” did not make the cut! So, Australia’s case will be that, it was perfectly kosher for Brad Hogg to utter that word in any statement flung in the direction of the Indians!

Section 3.3 of the ICC Code of Conduct says:

Players and teams are barred from Using language or gestures that offends, insults, humiliates, intimidates, threatens, disparages or vilifies another person on the basis of that person’s race, religion, gender, colour, descent, or national or ethic origin.

The Indians will argue that the term “bast**d” is insulting because “it questions a person’s descent and is highly sensitive in the Indian cultural context”. Hence, they will argue that 3.3 is an appropriate level of offence to slap on Brad Hogg. This may not wash with the Australians. Read this, for example! Moreover, the Australians will say, if it was as big as the Indians are now making it out to be, it ought to have been on the pre-tour banned-words-list!

There is only one way out of all of this.

“The teams should tear up that catch agreement and should plonk the entire Oxford English dictionary, Cappeller’s Digital Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Websters Online Hindi Dictionary, etc into such pre-tour off-limits words-lists!”

That way, nothing will be said out there and the umpire will make alll calls on catches!

– Mohan

Bucknor removed from the Perth Test

Steve Bucknor has been removed by the ICC from officiating in the Perth Test. Billy Bowden will, instead, officiate.

Malcolm Speed said, “I expect that Steve [Bucknor] will continue as an ICC Elite panel umpire but what we’re seeking to do here is to take some tension out of the situation.

The key word there, I suspect is “expect”. I suspect that that means we have seen the last of Bucknor?

So after flexing its financial muscle the BCCI has won round-one of two-round battle. It now wants its second claim to be settled prior to the Perth Test: that of Harbhajan Singh’s appeal being heard prior to the Perth Test and that the “guilty of racism” tag overturned against its player.

Once again, the ICC has buckled under pressure and has come down on one of its own. Yes, we all agree that Steve Bucknor had an ordinary game in Sydney and perhaps it was right for the ICC to bid goodbye to him. But why did they not do so prior to the Sydney Test? Why did it have to come to this?

Once again, the ICC has shown that it is a United-Nations-type organisation that just listens to the might of the powerful or (in this case) the rich.

– Mohan

Deadlocked Australia v India (2007-2008) :: Where does it all go now?

Will Anil Kumble, a proud, fiercely competitive and honest cricketer — his record speaks for himself — want to shake hands with an opposing Captain who, he feels, has played the game wrongly in a desperate bid to win? Is there a point, then, of playing on in Perth and Adelaide?

RIP :: Cricket as we know it…

The Australia v India tour is a mess right now. The players are stuck in their hotel in Sydney. Ironically, they cancelled a tour to the Bradman Museum in Bowral, enroute Canberra and stayed in their Sydney Hotel instead. The great Don may be turning in his grave in anguish at the sorry state of the game here in Australia. The game, as we know it, is in the Intensive Care Unit of an unknown hospital somewhere.

Who is to blame for this sorry mess? The Indian team alone? The ICC? Cricket Australia? Harbhajan Singh? Anil Kumble? Ricky Ponting? Mike Proctor? Umpires Benson and Bucknor? I believe each of these actors in this sordid play have to stand up and take some responsibility.

My feeling, though, is that if Proctor had not banned Harbhajan Singh — or if he had imposed a suspended sentence due to lack of complete and irrefutable evidence — things would not have come to this. Then again, if Ricky Ponting had not “dobbed in” — let us remember, when Australia were in danger of the game running away from them — things would not have come to this.

The Indians would have cried on a bit about the umpiring and disappeared to the Bradman Museum and then, Canberra.

But then, Ricky Ponting, we are told, had to report Harbhajan Singh. And Mike Proctor had to do his duties as Match Referee.

Within the Indian player group there is much anger and disappointment.

India, with the backing of its financial muscle power (over 70% of the games’ revenues come from India) has dug its heels and stuck to its guns, despite the danger of a $2.3m fine for pulling out midway from a tour for reasons other than security-risk. Cricket Australia indicated that the tour was certainly on, with CEO James Sutherland suggesting (as one would to one’s angry child, perhaps) that once Anil Kumble was a bit more sober, everything would be ok! His view was that Anil Kumble’s “outburst” was understandable for he had just lost a game and tensions were running high. Strong empathy there. Well done. Patronising perhaps? No way.

The BCCI has held emergency meetings and postured angrily and at times, with some confusion. Former Indian players were angry and scathing in their views over the goings-on. This had now become an issue of national pride; not just one man’s 3-Test ban.

How appropriate that the Test series itself is called the 3 Test Series!

Arun Jaitley, the BCCI’s lawyer as well as a BCCI Senior Vice President, has already filed an appeal against the Harbhajan Singh ban.

The BCCI has taken this on as an insult, not merely to the player in question, but to Indians as a whole around the globe. This issue has been politicised and yet again in cricket, a sense of proportion has been lost. In a terse and angry statement, the BCCI said, “The Indian board realises the game of cricket is paramount but so, too, is the honour of the Indian team and for that matter every Indian. To vindicate its position the board will fight the blatantly false and unfair slur on an Indian player”.

I think Mike Proctor has acted in a manner that, in my opinion, has not been either consistent or great for the game.

He was incorrect, in my view, for not banning Yuvraj Singh for dissent after the 1st Test, for if he had banned Yuvraj Singh, it would have provided India with a better batsman in the Sydney Test!

But jokes apart, Mike Proctor has not, in my view, been entirely consistent.

How he could let Ricky Ponting get away with three acts of misdemeanour in the Sydney Test is way beyond me: (a) Ponting’s dissent on being given out in the 1st Innings of the SCG Test, (b) The Australian teams’ appalling over rate in the Indian second Innings, (c) Claiming a catch off M. S. Dhoni when he must have known that he had grounded the catch.

For (c) above I provide below a picture that reader H. L. Cadambi refers to in the comments of an earlier posting. [Thanks Cad]

I also refer the reader to an articulate posting by Prem Panicker, a well-known and well-respected journalist for Rediff.com.

pontng-grounded-catch.jpg

Ponting must have known that he grounded the catch. Look at direction his eyes are appearing to look at in the picture!

Now, a cricketer has been banned in the past for claiming a catch when it was not out. Pakistan player, Rashid Latif was banned for five matches for claiming a “grounded” catch in a Test against Bangladesh.

The Match Referee in that precedent? Mike Proctor. Hello! Hello!

And what has Mike Proctor done in this game? He banned Harbhajan Singh. He hasn’t even questioned the integrity of Ricky Ponting. If Ricky Ponting could claim the catch against M. S. Dhoni, should he have the power to be a 4th umpire in the catch against Sourav Ganguly that Michael Clarke claimed to take cleanly?

I personally do not think so.

For a start, on the basis of this evidence, I feel that the pre-tour agreement on claiming catches between Anil Kumble and Ricky Ponting will be thrown out of the window. If the tour does go ahead, I do not believe the Indian team will (or indeed, should) have any faith in the integrity of the Australian captain or the Australian team.

If the tour goes on, in my view, all catches have to be referred to the 3rd umpire.

The hypothesis at play here is that in times of extreme duress, distress and anguish, integrity is the first thing that suffers in Australian cricket.

The backdrop against which this observation is made is important here.

Ricky Ponting was desperate to prove that the timing of his declaration was apt. A fact that made him interrupt Channel-9 interviews (at the end of the days’ play) with other players to scream out against Tony Greig’s criticism of the timing of the declaration. Adam Gilchrist was similarly under the pump too. He too was reported to have interrupted interviews to scream out (perhaps in jubiliation and perhaps in relief) at Tony Greig’s criticism of the declaration-timing. The criticism meant a lot to this team. Pontings’ timing was based on shutting India out first, winning next. He had achieved the former. He wanted the latter desperately. Evidence, albeit ancedotal, supports that. It was obvious that the win meant so much to Ricky Ponting. Apart from having things to prove to Tony Greig and the rest of the commentary team, and despite his public denials, the consecutive-win record would have meant much to this proud and fiesty cricketer.

Would he do anything he could to snatch that victory? Make up your own minds. But here was a captain that was, in my view, very very desperate to win… at any cost too, perhaps.

When questioned repeatedly on this facet of his (perhaps desperate) attempts ot win at all costs, Ricky Ponting reacted angrily and testily to G. Rajaraman, the Outlook India correspondent, who records the events in his blog. The question clearly rankled Ponting.

Only one team played in the spirit of the game“, said Anil Kumble at the conclusion of the game. You wonder why?

In a scathing attack, Peter Roebuck certainly thinks that Ricky Ponting brought the game into disrepute and should be stood down as captain of the Australian team.

But then Australians will point to the fact that Anil Kumble may have meant that it was perhaps Australia that was the one team that had played in the spirit of the game — and not Kumble’s own team. After all, Harbhajan Singh was the only one to be slapped on his wrists at the end of the game! History would perhaps record Anil Kumble’s comments as a salutation to Australia’s immense sportsmanship?

But I seriously wonder if Mike Proctor had enough evidence to ban Harbhajan Singh for 3 games? Or was this yet another gaffe from the Match Referee, who did not pull up Ricky Ponting as he had, Rashid Latif? Only time will tell. The lawyers will make money out of this.

However, history will record that, in a game where people from the Indian sub-continent and black South Africans have withstood decades of discrimination and villification, an Indian is the first to be booked for racism under the ICC’s new code. There is a strange irony to this. I have always maintained that, despite the baggage of past history (and provocation), if anyone could be proven guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, they should do the time. So, time will tell if Harbhajan Singh was a victim or indeed, the person that dished out an abuse.

I do believe that this is a horrible deadlock; one from which either party will find it hard to back down from.

The ICC has indicated that it will not allow Steve Bucknor to be stood down in the Perth Test. They have their backs up and will not let one of their own suffer an inglorious exit from the game. And fair enough, in my view. After all, the ICC has already been through a nightmare scenario once after the Darryl Hair issue! They would not want yet another umpire to go the same way! In all probability, Perth will be Bucknor’s last Test match. If he does not retire, he must be asked to do so. So, whether the Indians like it or not, I feel that Bucknor will officiate in Perth.

Cricket Australia and Ricky Ponting have their backs up, claiming that they have done nothing wrong and, if anything, it is the Indians who are to blame for all of this mess. Having said that, Cricket Australia has imposed a gag order on Andrew Symonds. Meanwhile, Cricket Australia has to come to terms with that fact that almost every Poll in the land has delivered bad news for the national cricket team; almost all of them have indicated that Australian cricketers are bad sportsmen (an example, here).

Meanwhile, Sachin Tendulkar has come out openly to state, “Harbhajan is innocent. I assure you of this.

So, is Proctor saying that Sachin Tendulkar is a cheat?

I feel that cricket has to go on, but I do believe that this entire episode has tarred relations — perhaps beyond repair — between these two cricket nations; each with a proud history. I somehow cannot see Ricky Ponting and Anil Kumble shake hands prior to the Perth Test. Sources close to the team say that Anil Kumble, a proud, fiercely competitive and honest crickter — his record speaks for himself — will not shake hands with a cricketer who, he feels, has played the game wrongly in a desperate bid to win.

If the Indians play on, in this tour, I doubt it will be because they want to play the game; it would be because they were forced to and not because they want to. Is this good for the game? For a bunch of XI players to rock up to Perth and Adelaide and for the game to be over in a day or two?

Who is to blame for all of this sadness?

Have your say…

– Mohan

Must read article from the mX

I saw this great piece of journalism when I picked up the mX today. For readers not living in Australia, the mX is a free evening newspaper that is usually available around train stations in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane.

MxReport

(Click on the image to see the whole mX article)

Thanks for the article Russell. I fully agree with what you have said. The Indian newspapers are all biased and have tunnel vision. I am glad that the mX isn’t. The umpires had nothing to do with the actual result of the match – it was pure Australian brilliance. I find it appalling that they even blame the umpire for letting Andrew Symonds off in the first innings several times. It is a good thing you did not mention it.

About the Aussie skipper, Ponting reacting to an Indian journa asking why he claimed a catch which clearly wasn’t, I have this to say to the journalist (Raj) – “How dare you question the integrity of the Australian cricket captain?” Sheesh! Doesn’t he know that journalists can even question the integrity of the Australian prime minister, but questioning the integrity of the much revered Australian cricket captain is clearly out of bounds – I am glad Ricky told him to get lost in a nice way.

Just can’t seem to understand why the  mX is free. People should be charged to read great articles like these…

-Mahesh-

Sledging: The Mafia Seeks Police Protection!

I have a simple view on sledging and more so on high-moral grounds that people suddenly seem to want to adopt when it comes to sledging.

My question is simple: If someone is crass enough to say something crude, vulgar and distasteful to me about a people that I adore and worship and respect (say, my mother, my sister, my child, my wife or even my best friend) through a sequence of expletives, pray how would I deem that that person was worthy of my respect and observe a line in the sand? How does that person automatically wear nappies and point to lines in the sand? Where is the sand when that person himself has questioned my lineage and parentage? Why should I not question that person’s lineage in any way I know?

In saying this, I am not condoning Harbhajan Singh who is reported to have called Andrew Symonds a “monkey”. Not many people walk up to another person and call them randomly hurtful names. There is no doubt in my mind that Harbhajan Singh was provoked, if indeed he did call Symonds a “monkey”. If he was provoked, and if that provocation brought into focus and question a class of people that Harbhajan Singh respected/adored/admired/worshipped, then why should he not be allowed to issue an no-holds-barred spray of his own to the perpetrator? Why should he not brandish his sword and get stuck into the perpetrator? I am not absolving Harbhajan Singh. But it is a legitimate question to ask. Is it not?

There are no “lines in the sand”. If McGrath asks Sarawan what Lara’s tool tastes like, he should expect that he would be requested to ask that question of his wife. There are no lines in the sand. Pray why is McGrath’s wife the only one for whom a “line in the sand” applies? Is that only because she was not playing the game? Are Sarawan and Lara any less human than McGrath’s wife just because they were playing at the time? If Andrew Symonds had questioned Harbhajan Singh’s lineage, he should expect that his own lineage could be questioned too. Surely!

There is only one way to stop all of this nonsense. On a cricket field, the only objects that can be allowed to talk are the bat and the ball. Cricket is not played with the mouth, for heavens sake! A cricket ball whacked into the mouth hurts! That is why helmets were invented. Hello!

Australians invented sledging. They practice it and perfect it. Now, every team in the world carries on. Any team that sledges should accept whatever comes with that territory and stop donning nappies to worry about lines in the sand. There ain’t none. If sledging continues on unabated, we will see more “monkeying” and “rabbiting on”, not less.

The ICC has to step in, in my view and ban any talk on the field.

And for Australia to complain about “appropriate sledging” is a bit rich. If you throw a stone in the gutter you ought to expect a splash-back to soil your own clothes. The mafia cannot ask for a rule book on proper methods of killing.

– Mohan

A huge statement from Anil Kumble…

One of the nicest cricketers in the game has made a huge call on Australian cricket and the way they play the game. After the Sydney Test match of the ongoing Australia v India match was over, it was nice to see Anil Kumble being gallant and gracious in defeat. Not that Channel-9 bothered with what the Indian captain thought. The normal prize-distribution ceremony was ditched in favour of random interviews with Australian players. Channel-9 cut to interviews with Michael Charke, Ricky Ponting and other Australians but did not once realise that there was another set of 11 other cricketers that played the game! They were so busy ejaculating in their intense excitement that they forgot that there was another team that had played! This was not just rude and ingracious, but irresponsible of the host broadcaster.

Perhaps Andrew Symonds needs to be reminded of his comments about appropriate post-victory celebrations?

However, Anil Kumble did make what I thought was the most telling comment of the night. In an almost verbatim quote that was taken straight out of Bodyline (and not used since), Anil Kumble said, “Only one team was playing with the spirit of the game, that’s all I can say“. That is an astonishing statement that is normally reserved for blogs and private opinion pieces. His statement is now ingrained in print as an indictment on Australian sport. This sound-byte will travel and will be imprinted, especially since it comes from one of the modern-day gentlemen of cricket.

This Indian cricket team contains, in Anil Kumble, Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and V. V. S. Laxman, four thorough gentlemen. When they speak, the world listens. That is because they have always played their cricket hard but fair. They have had a blemish-free career and to last 12-18 years in International cricket without a single blemish or black-mark against your name is a telling statistic. These awesome gentlement are true moder-day sports heros. Most other modern-day heroes (Ricky Ponting, Glen McGrath and Shane Warne included) have had run-ins and blemishes against their names. This foursome from India have to be saluted for the manner in which they have played the game. I would not include Sourav Ganguly in that same list because he has had his run ins with the law-makers as well as opposing captains.

Against this backdrop, the stament from Anil Kumble is a huge call in my books.

It is an imposing statement from a thorough sportsman and Australian cricket would do well to take notice of this harsh indictment. It would do no good for Ricky Ponting and the Australian governing authorities to bury their collective heads in the sand and be in denial. Australian sport needs to take a good, long, hard look at itself in the mirror and ask some searching questions. This was a scathing attack from a visiting captain who was, simultaneously, gracious in defeat. He had savaged his own batsmen with criticism for not lasting 72 overs on what was still a reasonable batting surface. After all, Kumble himself had hung around competently for 111 balls. It was after that when launched this scathing attack on Australian cricket. This wasn’t sour-grapes speak. This was a telling and timely assault on the Australian way of playing.

No one expects, not least Anil Kumble, that the Australians will walk when they snick the ball to the wicketkeeper (Ponting, Symonds, Hussey). I am most certain that that is not where Anil Kumble is coming from for he too often stands his ground until he is declared out by the umpire.

However, there were four glaring instances of bad sportsman-like behaviour, in my view.

  • The Australians had appealed for a catch when they clearly must have known that it was not out (against Rahul Dravid in the second innings). A “nick” and an “off the pad” sound different.
  • Ricky Ponting claimed a catch off M. S. Dhoni even though he must have known that he had grassed it! The fact that there was some doubt that the shot itself may not have come off the bat, is yet another matter.
  • The Australians had claimed a bump-ball catch (Sourav Ganguly).
  • And they had violated their own “what is said on the field is left on the fieldmantra.

All of these are monumental acts of unsportsmanlike behaviour that does not sit easily on a champion team. In my eyes, Australia will never be a Champion cricket team. Roger Federer would never be this desperate to adopt any means in order to secure a win. Tiger Woods would never adopt any means in a desperate bid to win. The Australian cricket team does.

When you set that alongside the broadside from Peter English and Peter Roebuck, one would think Australian cricket needs to find some answers.

Anil Kumble will, almost certainly, scrap the pre-match understanding that he had with Ricky Ponting on accepting the fielders’ word when a tough catch is taken. Ponting can react angrily and testily and point to his own withdrawal of a bump-catch against Rahul Dravid in the first innings. However, this agreement covers the entire team. If Michael Clarke’s bump-ball catch to get rid of Sourav Ganguly yesterday was referred upstairs, it would have been given not out — although you could never place your money on it, with Australian Bruce Oxenberg at the controls!

And with the expected fallout from the ruling on the Harbhajan Singh incident, this series has just reached nuclear-fallout territory.

One of my sources close to the team has said that the team will run to Mike Proctor everytime an Australian crickter opens his mouth because of the filth and the nonsense that is heard. Already there are early indications that this would indeed happen, because Brad Hogg has been reported by the Indian team for calling an Indian player a “B**tard” which is supposedly “a derogatory term in India”.

We live in interesting times and it is certainly not because of the quality of the cricket.

– Mohan

What is said on the field stays on the field?

In the Harbhajan Singh v Andrew Symonds incident that has marred the ongoing Sydney Test match, it has been confirmed by Match Referee Mike Proctor, that the on-field umpires heard nothing. It was Ricky Ponting that reported what was said.

It is all going to be very very interesting from here.

Not least because, in doing so, Ricky Ponting has threatened to break down a long-held Australian tradition of “What is said on the field is left on the field and forgotten after a glass of beer at the end of days’ play.

This was Sunil Gavaskar’s summing on Channel-9. Well said, Gavaskar.

It is likely that Harbhajan Singh did use the “monkey” word against Andrew Symonds. We will not know that until the hearing is completed and, I for one, will not be passing judgement on either player yet.

However, even assuming that something was said, what has happened to that great Aussie tradition? Or should that be re-written as “What is said on the field by an Australian ought to be left on the field and forgotten after a glass of beer at the end of days’ play?

I am not condoning slurs of any sort. I think racism should have no place in cricket, regardless of the provocation. My point is stronger than that. I think the ICC should stamp out sledging. Period.

– Mohan

Harbhajan Singh pulled up on a “racism charge”…

In my Day-2 report on the ongoing SCG Test, I talked about a strange passage in play in which Harbhajan Singh was involved in on-field chats with a whole lot of Australian players. There was certainly some niggle and carry-on there. Harbhajan Singh was batting at the time. No one seemed sure what was going on at the time. The umpire Mark Benson covered his mouth as he spoke to Harbhajan Singh (so that, one assumed, he could not be lip-read or no nearby mikes could pick up what he said).

This was all very strange indeed!

Overnight, it seems that this was due to an alleged rascism charge levelled against Harbhajan Singh. The ‘victim’, it is said, is Andrew Symonds.

In something that could potentially take the sheen off a brilliant Test match thus far, Andrew Symonds has confirmed that he was racially abused by Harbhajan Singh. Harbhajan Singh denied it immediately.

The Australians are also accusing Harbhajan Singh of having hit Brett Lee with his bat while running between the wickets. This was the incident that allegedly started off the sledge-match.

If proven guilty — I am not sure how Mike Proctor could prove Harbhajan Singh guilty of the offence without the aid of listening devices — Harbhajan Singh could be banned for between 2 and 4 Test matches (or 4 and 8 ODIs). The offence is for “language or gestures that offends, insults, humiliates, intimidates, threatens, disparages or vilifies another person on the basis of that person’s race, religion, gender, colour, descent or national ethnic origin.”

Sachin Tendulkar, who was batting with Harbhajan Singh at the time, brushed the incident aside and had this spin on the incident, which, he indicated may have been sparked off by Harbhajan Singh giving Brett Lee a pat on his backside.

His take on the incident was that the conversation went something like this:
Symonds: “You seem to be very friendly with our bowlers.
Harbhajan: “Aren’t you trying to be friends with me now? I’m a bowler, as well.

Malcolm Conn, from The Australian, leads with this as his headline and shows that he is from the same school of writing as Peter Lalor in this article when he suggests that perhaps Sourav Ganguly should be banned too, for showing disgust at himself for being out. I wonder how many times he has asked for a ban on Lleyton Hewitt in the same set?

We at i3j3Cricket have always maintained that rascism of all sorts should be banned on cricket grounds, regardless of the provocation. If Andrew Symonds was indeed called a “monkey” by Harbhajan Singh and if it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, Harbhajan Singh has to do time. There are no two ways about it.

However, instead of jumping up and down, I would have expected Malcolm Conn to listen to what Sachin Tendulkar had to say on the matter too rather than immediately start to paint Harbhajan Singh as a confirmed perpetrator of a crime. This sort of sensationalism sells newspapers, but I would have thought that The Australian had higher editorial standrads!

With a person like Sachin Tendulkar as character witness — after all, Tendulkar was there when it all happened, I can’t see Harbhajan Singh copping it for this offence.

I personally can’t wait for the day when the ICC bans sledging of all sorts and at all levels of cricket. Let us assume that Andrew Symonds was indeed issued with a racial slur by Harbhajan Singh — after all Harbhajan Singh is innocent until proven guilty. Our hypothesis at i3j3Cricket is that a racial sledge (as we have now or as we had against Darren Lehmann) or a sledge involving ones mother or sister or brother or wife (as we had against Glen McGrath in the Sarawan incident) is a logical conclusion to any sledge-escalation. Do we want that? Can we tolerate that? There are no lines in the sand. Sledging is not covered in any cricket rule book. So it just can’t be on. Any back chat between bowler and batsman ought to be stamped out on the cricket field. If a team want to “mentally disintegrate” another team, is a bat and ball and hands not enough? If the tools of cricket are not sufficient, then let us also not talk about “lines in the sand”. There are no lines in the sand! The mafia cannot ask for a book to be written on good and bad ways of killing. Killing is unlawful. Period.

Our good friend from The Australian, Peter Lalor, has got in on the act too, with a report and an opinion-article on Harbhajan Singh! In the opinion-piece, he traces the origins of the Harbhajan Singh V Ricky Ponting aggro. In an article that traces the rise and fall and rise of Harbhajan Singh’s career (similar to a piece that Channel 9 did on Harbhajan Singh a day previously), he traces all of Harbhajan Singh’s past dark incidents.

Peter Lalor asks what it is about the Australians that sends Harbhajan Singh’s eyes into a spin! As a self-proclaimed lover of a good fight, I’d have thought that the answer was bleeding obvious to Peter Lalor! I for one do not care what Harbhajan Singh or V. V. S. Laxman do against Kenya and Bangladesh. I want them to reserve their best for when they play the champion team — Australia! Perhaps it is Peter Lalor’s that go into a spin when he sees Harbhajan Singh?

Peter Lalor’s closing remarks in that article are a bit odd… He says, “Unlike other Sikhs in the side, he is conservative and adheres to the religious demands that his hair be covered and uncut, although when he shot an advertisement in 2006 without the patka, it caused an outcry with the main Sikh religious board demanding an apology and activists burning his effigy.

How many other Sikhs are there in the team?

– Mohan

An interview with Peter Lalor (Part-2)

peterlalor In the first part of this three-part in-depth interview with Peter Lalor (Picture left. Source: “The Australian”), we talked about his views on racism in cricket in the wake of the Andrew Symonds incidents in India in the recently concluded India-Australia ODI series.

Peter Lalor, a respected writer for “The Australian” newspaper, is a passionate supporter of the Australian cricket team and is fervent enthusiast for the way Australia plays its cricket.

Subsequent to Part-1 of our interview with Peter Lalor, in order to achieve a sense of balance in this debate, we asked more-or-less the same set of questions to Prem Panicker. Part-1 of our interview with Prem Panicker is available here.

In Part-2 of our interview with Peter Lalor, we talk about post-victory celebrations, aggression, sledging, match-fixing and much more.

Some of Peter Lalors’ articles are available here:

i3j3: Recently, we have heard comments from Jason Gillespie, Ricky Ponting, et al, saying that there will be boisterous crowd participation in the forthcoming summer. They have also urged players like Muralitharan and Sree Santh to show fortitude. What are your views on those comments in the light of their comments on crowd behaviour elsewhere?

Peter Lalor: If you come to Australia the crowd will try to un-nerve you. It is the Australian way and as long as it is not racist or too offensive there’s not much that can or should be done.

I watch my nine year old play footy and cricket and in both sports the kids sledge each other, it is accepted as part of Australian gamesmanship.

I had no problems with the crowds attacking Symonds as long as it wasn’t racist, although I would have hoped for more sympathy after the first racist taunts.

i3j3: Did you think the Australian team celebrated humbly and appropriately on the victory podium at the conclusion of the last edition of the Champions Trophy? In light of this, what are your views on the comments by Andrew Symonds on the Indian celebrations on winning the Twenty20 World Championship?

PL: Andrew [Symonds] was wrong in criticising the Indian celebrations.

Sharad Pawar was wrong to stay in front of the team when the photographers were yelling for him to get out of the way. I don’t think Damien Martyn was out of line to lead him to one side.

Australians have a healthy disrespect for authority especially when it is in the wrong place as it was then and as it was during the post-T20 celebrations [in India]. Fancy making the cricketers sit behind the officials!

i3j3: There has been a perception for a while now – backed by observations and some fact – amongst Asian cricket players and fans that “white” cricketers and fans alike constantly and consistently demonstrate prejudice, sanctimony and racism in their attitudes because of their perceived “ownership to the game”. For example, when the quality of umpiring was terrible all around the world, it was seen as a problem that afflicted only the sub-continent. A global solution was made impossible by the finger-pointing. Similarly, the match-fixing issue too. What are your views on this?

PL: You are probably right about the umpiring.

As for match fixing I suspect the concentration is on the subcontinent because that is where the bookies are.

By the way the biggest fish landed on that subject was Hansie [Cronje].

i3j3: Now assuming that there is this perception of prejudice – whether right or wrong is somewhat immaterial – where do you see this debate going, especially now when the balance of (financial muscle) power is tilting towards the sub-continent?

PL: India is the centre of world cricket by virtue of population and financial input. This has been accepted and embraced by Cricket Australia who see that they can have some of the rewards if they work closely with the BCCI, that is why CA basically ran the DLF cup and has done most of the organisational work for the ICL/IPL.

Cricket Australia is happy to carry the BCCI’s bags if they get a little bit of the cash that is there within.

It is a fair situation, India spent a lot of time pleading for Australia etc to play against it in the past and it’s good for the boot to be on the other foot.

i3j3: Do you feel that it is this financial muscle power that is making teams from India and Pakistan more aggressive on the cricket field against teams like Australia and England?

PL: No I think it is just an attempt to play on equal footing on the ground. Aggression is a muddled term. In cricket it should mean positive/confident play, but too often it means trying to sledge louder than the other side. This is a poor substitute for good run rates, tight fielding and positive bowling.

i3j3: Is match-fixing a thing of the past? Can it be completely controlled?

PL: Like racism it is something that authorities and lovers of the game need to be eternally vigilant about. Every bookie and punter is looking for an edge.

i3j3: What are your views on sledging? Should it be a part of cricket? And if it is, should there be a line in the sand? If so why?

PL: I think direct personal abuse should be stopped by umpires, but if the wicketkeeper asks the first slip if he thinks a batsman’s backlift is crooked or scoring rate is so slow that it endangers the team, what is the harm in that.

i3j3: What do you think of the recently concluded India-Australia ODI series?

PL: I thought the Symonds thing blew out of proportion but that was because the BCCI refused to take it seriously when it was beholden to do so.

peterLalor-charuSharma-vidyaShankarAiyarI thought Australia again performed well after a long break. One day tours are hectic and hard work when you travel so much in a foreign country.

India, I thought, showed promise under Dhoni’s fledgling leadership and should take heart from gaining two matches against a side that has not dropped a world cup game under Ponting.

I must admit one day series are a little hollow for writers. I love the lyricism and lengthy narrative of Tests.

[Source of the above picture: An article on CricketNext.com]

i3j3: It is our view that player behaviour, in the name of gamesmanship, has deteriorated over the years. What do you think ICC should do to curb it?

PL: I don’t think it has. I grew up in the Lillee-Miandad era. I watched many ugly incidents including John Snow being assaulted, teams being lead from the ground by various captains…

Today most games are played in the right spirit and when they’re not there is a framework to deal with it.

Players came close to crossing the line early in the Australia-India series, particularly Symonds, Sree [Santh] and Harbhajan [Singh], but generally behaved themselves after Kochi where they were warned to keep a lid on it.

i3j3: It is also our view that many teams in international cricket are trying to ape Australia in the sledging-stakes. Is this a healthy trend?

PL: No. Sledging is not a positive part of the game but not such a negative that it should gain much attention. I must admit I see mouths move a lot but I don’t know what’s said. If it was heard by audiences it might be a different matter.

i3j3: Crowd behaviour is also another matter that is of concern in international cricket. One of the ideas that has been circulated is that cricket should be banned in venues that have seen trouble. But is it viable to ban cricket from places like the MCG and Eden Gardens (Kolkata)? After all, both these venues have seen bad crowd behaviour. Do you feel there is any other way to curb this?

PL: If bad behaviour persists maybe this is the last alternative left to authorities but we are nowhere near that yet in most situations.

I believe one of [India’s] grounds hosted a riot where even the Indian team bus was stoned. That ground probably deserves a suspension for a match until its fans and officials can provide a safe venue for cricket. None of the behaviour I saw on the last [Australia] tour [of India] warranted such extreme action; some Australian one day crowds come close to that line.

i3j3: How do you rate crowd behaviour and crowd participation in the game in the subcontinent, compared to places like Australia, England and South Africa?

PL: In one day matches Indian crowds can be as offensive as Australian crowds or any others. I don’t take my family to one day matches because of this bizarre behaviour. Tests are usually much better environments. I will probably take the kids to a T20 soon and we’ll see what that is like.

 

(concluding part of the interview to appear next week…)