It was a dark and stormy night. That’s a lie. It was a mild and unseasonably warm night and I was almost asleep, lulled away by Heidi Klum’s and Niki Taylor’s voiceovers on Bravo.
Then, something insane happened; I received a reality-bending email. But first, some unnecessary prattle back story.
From age 0-3.5, I had a much-adored stuffed bear, like most children my age. Unlike most children, my bear was named Babu, which totally proves that kids born here in the early to mid seventies might as well have been popped out “back home”. Anyway, Babu was wonderful as a confidante, hugging partner and drool-catcher…until we moved to San Francisco. Somewhere between Southern California and Northern, Babu disappeared, never to be seen again.
Last night, dazed and confused by exhaustion, I checked my email one final time…and did a sleepy double-take. There, in my inbox…Babu. The only justification I can offer for thinking what comes next is, um, Benadryl. “My Babu reached out to me from beyond!”, I gasped, and he did so via GMail no less:
Hi Anna,
It’s the biggest story happening in Indian Cricket and you are not covering it….that’s not right 🙂
Feed your cricket hunger with the story. I’m not sure if you are aware of the suspension of an Indian cricket player over racial abuse. This has created a cricket war between India and Australia. and YOU should write about it.
It has high drama, fight for honor, millions of dollars at stake and the big Indian ego Vs Australian. Australian media is supporting India as well 🙂
Link, link, link and link.
Well, I didn’t wanna vote in News tab and wait….hehe.. 😀
~Babu
Babu, after absorbing tears, snot and Lord knows what else, this is the least I can do.
All right people.
The cricket post I have received eleven requests for (not counting the above-pasted, impassioned plea from my bear) is up next.
India’s cricket team stayed in its hotel in protest Monday after one of its players was penalized for allegedly using a racial slur during a match against Australia.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India plans to challenge the “the unfair decision” by the International Cricket Council to suspend Harbhajan Singh for three matches because it said he made racist remarks to Australia’s only black player. The Indian board said it will “suspend its operation until the appeal is disposed of.” [IHT]
What the hell is going on, you might be asking. No? Well, I was asking…this is a lot of story for a blogger of little cricket brain. Apparently Indian cricket player Harbhajan Singh called Australian player Andrew Symonds a monkey. Symonds is black.
Admittedly, “monkey” would not qualify in the top hundred racist insults. Ian Botham used to revel in the nickname “Guy The Gorilla”. When all is said and done, we are all simian primates. But the word “monkey” had form, as everybody knew that Symonds had supposedly suffered such insults last year from Indian crowds. So case proven, the Indian spinner was guilty as charged. The Indian board should stop its posturing, accept what must be a galling reminder that it is the International Cricket Council that still runs the game, and get on with the tour.
Do not delude yourself, though, that in punishing Harbhajan cricket is punishing a sinner. It is punishing a victim. It is punishing a player who, it might be concluded, mentally disintegrated. Remember mental disintegration? It is Australia’s nauseatingly self-congratulatory phrase for sledging. And it worked. It worked so well that Harbhajan cracked and Australia have not stopped bleating about their shoddy little victory ever since. [Guardian]
Sledging is a cricket term for undermining players by talking a lot o’ tatti. Insult someone enough and they crack, not that I would know a damned thing about that.
Match referee Mike Proctor held a four-hour hearing at the Sydney Cricket Ground after Australia’s 122-run victory and ruled that the case against the India spinner was proved.
“I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Harbhajan Singh directed that word at Andrew Symonds and also that he meant it to offend on the basis of Symonds’ race or ethnic origin,” Proctor said. [IHT]
Beyond a reasonable doubt, eh?
“Unfair allegation of racism against our Indian player is wholly unacceptable,” said board president Sharad Pawar, who is also a senior government minister, in a statement. “The game of cricket is paramount but so too is the honor of India’s cricket team and every Indian.” [IHT]
Warning: cricket neophyte about to type.
The second test match of the tour = drama. Captain Kumble (that’s fun to say!) called the Aussies out on being dirty bastards while his team rolled their eyes the fifth time the umpires made a stupid and unfair decision.
The most blatant was an appeal that would have put Symonds out after just 30 runs in the first innings.
Symonds has freely admitted he should have been out. He went on to score 162 runs not out and was later named man of the match. [IHT]
We’re not alone in our hot tub of displeasure:
Several Australian newspapers agreed Monday that India should have won the second test, and criticized the behavior of Australian players during the test. [IHT]
I think what is pissing so many people off is the double-standard which is so evident in this unfortunate situation, the hypocrisy.
The problem is that Australia’s dividing line is not a reliable division between the morally upstanding and the indefensible. Australia’s dividing line is repugnant, enabling the condemnation of the likes of Harbhajan whilst legitimising obnoxious behaviour that cricket should have had the bravery to root out a generation ago.
Racism cannot be countenanced. But it is a rum old world that bans a man for three Tests for calling someone a monkey, yet allows the sort of boorish behaviour that allows first slip to drone to a batsman that he is shagging his wife, or that convinces any fast bowler with half a brain that personal insults every time a batsman plays and misses are essential for any cricketer of spirit. As long as you are careful not to refer to the colour of his skin.
It needs to be remembered that Harbhajan’s assault did not come without provocation. Before he was abused as a monkey, Symonds had been indulging in a phrase or two out of the corner of his mouth. Australia and Harbhajan have been at each other for years. But Australia have been obsessed with “reverse racism” ever since Darren Lehmann, their batsman, became the first international player to be banned for the racial abuse of Sri Lankan players five years ago. They have been intent upon revenge and now they have gained it. [Guardian]
What I found interesting is how Harbhajan Singh’s outburst might have been overlooked (vs. becoming the subject of 5,000 blog posts and news articles) had Aussie captain Ponting not whined about it to the umpires, thus drawing attention to it. That’s classy.
Well, Ponting may have won this pathetic, wee, jeer-worthy (no! sledging-worthy) battle but after everything I’ve read online, he has lost far more, most notably respect and credibility because of it. Well-played. Idiot (note: must be pronounced the way Naseeruddin Shah did in Monsoon Wedding, kthx bai).
on the mark anna.
India should have left australia after the ruling. If there’s one place that south asian countries seem to come together, its at their reactoin to the double-standards in the cricketing world. With better organization, the ICC could easily become India’s bitch.
Harbhajan got Ponting out cheaply many times and had the temerity to boast about it (a move straight from the Aussie playbook). I can see why Ponting would want him out.
Thanks for posting this. I am of the opinion that Harbhajan should be banned if the allegations against him are true. The incident would not be without precedent (Mumbai, Oct). I really can’t put it any better than Mukul Kesavan did so in this article – http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/316219.html
Monkey chants are common in Spain, where African football players are subject to hoots and banana skins. I would not be overly surprised to see it in stadiums in India. Face it, we all have an uncle, aunt or even parent (yikes!) who occasionally make blatantly racist remarks. I know I have.
Heh heh, my inbox has been inundated with email forwards on this for the past few days. Some samples:
Bucknor: (n) (adj) 1. Temporary blindness leading to missing out on the obvious. Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing 2. To be at the wrong place at the wrong time. 3. Situations leading to grave judgemental errors. Usage: I feel bucknored by my boss; Life often throws a bucknor at you.
Benson: (n) (adj) 1. Something that legitimises a severe bucknor. Usage: First they bucknored me and then they bensoned it! I am toast. Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Also see bucknor
Ponting: (n) (adj) 1. A substance or entity or even a person of unquestionable integrity 2. An act of uncivilised behaviour. [Also, pontingness (n)]
(1) Ricky Ponting – (THE TRULY GENUINE CRICKETER OF THE CRICKET ERA AND WHOSE INTEGRITY SHOULD NOT BE DOUBTED) should be considered as the FOURTH UMPIRE. As per the new rules, FOURTH UMPIRE decision is final and will over ride any decisions taken by any other umpires. ON-FIELD umpires can seek the assistance of RICKY PONTING even if he is not on the field. This rule is to be made, so that every team should understand the importance of the FOURTH UMPIRE.
(2) While AUSTRALIAN TEAM is bowling, If the ball flies anywhere close to the AUSTRALIAN FIELDER(WITHIN 5 metre distance), the batsman is to be considered OUT irrelevant of whether the catch was taken cleanly or grassed. Any decision for further clarification should be seeked from the FOURTH UMPIRE. This is made to ensure that the cricket is played with SPORTIVE SPIRIT by all the teams.
(3) While BATTING, AUSTRALIAN players will wait for the ON-FIELD UMPIRE decisions only (even if the catch goes to the FIFTH SLIP as the ball might not have touched the bat). Each AUSTRALIAN batsman has to be out FOUR TIMES (minimum) before he can return to the pavilion. In case of THE CRICKETER WITH INTEGRITY, this can be higher.
(4) UMPIRES should consider a huge bonus if an AUSTRALIAN player scores a century. Any wrong decisions can be ignored as they will be paid huge bonus and will receive the backing of the AUSTRALIAN team and board.
(5) All AUSTRALIAN players are eligible to keep commenting about all players on the field and the OPPONENT TEAM should never comment as they will be spoiling the spirit of the AUSTRALIAN team. Any comments made in any other language are to be considered as RACISM only.
(6) MATCH REFREE decisions will be taken purely on the AUSTRALIAN TEAM advice only. Player views from the other teams decisions will not be considered for hearing. MATCH REFREES are to be given huge bonus if this rule is implemented.
(7) NO VISITING TEAM should plan to win in AUSTRALIA. This is to ensure that the sportive spirit of CRICKET is maintained.
(8) THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE: If any bowler gets RICKY PONTING – “THE UNDISPUTED CRICKETER WITH INTEGTIRY IN THE GAME OF CRICKET†more than twice in a series, he will be banned for the REST OF THE SERIES. This is to ensure that the best batsman/Captain will be played to break records and create history in the game of CRICKET.
I don’t know what Symonds and Ponting think they’re up to: complaining about sledging is hardly likely to make anyone look mature, especially for something as unimaginative as a monkey. At least pick a serious fight, not some monkey poo.
At the high end of the imagination scale, you have this:
Glenn McGrath of Australia tried to get Eddo Brandes of Zimbabwe out quickly but failed, then wandered over to him and asked “Why are you so fucking fat?”. Brandes responded in a matter-of-fact way, “Because every time I fuck your wife, she gives me a biscuit”. [link].
And at the low end, you have this:
Inzamam-ul-Haq of Pakistan once blew up at a spectator. Quote: “For getting called several kinds of potato, Inzamam went into the stands … and attempted to attack a mouthy fan, triggering a nasty mini-riot that could easily have escalated to world-wide ugly.” [link]
Innnteresting.
None of the half-dozen articles I frantically waded through today mentioned this. Please to be excusing, saar.
It was an excellent game of cricket ruined by umpiring and now this. I clapped for Very Very Special’s knock and Sachin finally reachin three figures. I jumped out when Bhajji had Ponting…again! But all this is jus turning out to be more of a soap and saas-bahu serial than Sports. oh and thanks ANNA for posting this, I know you didnt expect all this drama when you first took a liking to Cricket 😉 Funtastic!
Apparently Indian cricket player Harbhajan Singh called Australian player Andrew Symonds a monkey. Symonds is black.
That is extremely racist when you combine it with these pictures of Indian spectators taunting Symonds with monkey chants reminiscent of Soccer Nazi hooligans in Europe taunting black players with similar monkey taunts.
For those who came in late, Bucknor and Benson were the two officiating umpires for the said match.
I feel bucknored by my boss HAHAHAHAH
5 · pingpong said
😀 Yeah, that’s why I titled one of my posts “Farewell, my Aloo” back in March.
There is one fact that does not support this hypothesis. No Caribbean player has been called a monkey by Indian fans. Nor has it happened for anyone from Kenya, or any black player from Zimbabwe or South Africa. I’m inclined to believe that the monkey thing was targeted specifically at Symonds, and he would probably have been singled out for the name-calling even if he were in an all-black team. It’s like Inzamam attracting the calls of “Aloo” – even if he were surrounded by people of a similar build, it would still be Inzamam who gets called the Aloo. In that light, I personally don’t think this was racial slurring. Being a bit of a dickish and offensive boor, yes. But not racist.
::de-lurks::
I didn’t watch the one day series where the whole “Monkey” chants erupted, but I have been following the tests this time. Now, this is just something I’ve been wondering about, and I hope that this doesn’t come across in the wrong way, so I’m trying to be careful with my words.
It’s the weird sunscreen/lipstick that Symonds dons everytime on the field. Pardon my bluntness, but it often brings the image of a monkey to my mind, or those obnoxious black faces and golliwogs of earlier times. I think for crowds in India, the name calling is based on his appearance and not his race. Have we ever heard any complaints about racism when we played against the West Indians (and got comprehensively beaten then too)? Not that this justifies the name calling. It doesn’t. It’s offensive to the individual, and I’m horrified and disgusted (though not completely surprised) at this behaviour of the Mumbai crowd. But I’d put it in the category of calling former (current?) Pakistani captain Inzamam Ul-Haq “Aloo”. Another illustration of the same point, Dubya being called “Chimpy”, and all the caricatures that show him as such.
Anyway, I’d still believe Tendulkar over any of the obnoxious and boorish Australian players any day. If Bhajji retaliated, then he was also obviously provoked. Why isn’t anyone trying to find out what Symonds said to him?
::re-lurks::
There is one fact that does not support this hypothesis. No Caribbean player has been called a monkey by Indian fans. Nor has it happened for anyone from Kenya, or any black player from Zimbabwe or South Africa. I’m inclined to believe that the monkey thing was targeted specifically at Symonds, and he would probably have been singled out for the name-calling even if he were in an all-black team. It’s like Inzamam attracting the calls of “Aloo” – even if he were surrounded by people of a similar build, it would still be Inzamam who gets called the Aloo. In that light, I personally don’t think this was racial slurring. Being a bit of a dickish and offensive boor, yes. But not racist.
This is not racist? Look at this comment on SM: Symonds just happens to look like an ape – nothing else to it!! from the other thread.
Yep and nothing derogatory is every said about Blacks in the desi community.
SM Intern, I request your divine blessing for rectifying my comment #5. The links, which have become garbled, should be link #1 and link #2.
Also, I had no idea that Andrew Symonds was black before this whole ruckus started, he is fairer than most of the Indians out there. So the monkey chants in football is not a comparable analogy.
Spotted: John Rocker riding the subway with Harbajjan.
If it were racist, then why has Brian Lara never been called a monkey? Or any one else in the Caribbean? Or in Kenya? Even Makhaya Ntini or Henry Olonga for that matter, who were for a time the only black players in their respective teams? I’m not saying that Indian spectators (or society) are paragons of non-discrimination, but I don’t believe that the Symonds case is racially motivated. I suspect that it was more individually driven than racially in this particular case, and consequently it wasn’t the right decision to ban Harbhajan on the grounds of racial discrimination. If he deserved the ban for individual name-calling or bringing the game into disrepute or whatever, so be it.
Mighty sporting of Peter Roebuck to ask for Ponting’s head. But I tend to agree w/ Greg Baum who wants everyone to grow the hell up.
Also, this controversy is rather convenient for the underperforming bums in Indian batting lineup. Those who made low scores and those who made attractive runs, but forgot to land the killer blow.
If it were racist, then why has Brian Lara never been called a monkey? Or any one else in the Caribbean? Or in Kenya?
So unless everybody is called racist names in a particular class, there can be no racism directed exclusively against individual members of that class?
Wazzup macacas?
I had stopped paying attention to cricket (after the match fixing scandals of the late 90s) and started shedding my tears for the NY Mets. I have been following cricket with a renewed interest this year since the Indian tour to England. Australians have always been pushing the line on what can be considered hard, aggressive and professional playing to territories that can be considered abusive and unprofessional. If I am to believe what I have been reading in the papers, the Australian sledging begins at the lowest rungs of the sport when they are kids, and they are well-trained professional sledgers when they reach the national level.
It also seems like they are good at dishing it out, but can’t really take it. Case in point: During Australia’s tour of West Indies in 2003, the Australian bowler Glenn Mcgrath tried to get on the nerves of the West Indian batsman (of East Indian origin, btw) Ramnaresh Sarwan.
GM : What does Brian Lara’s $%^& taste like? (Lara, being the Great West Indian Batsman) RS : I don’t know. Ask your wife. GM : (After being taken aback) If you ever $#%^&*# talk about my wife, I will $%^&@#$ kill you.
I was shocked to read that sledging had reached such levels. I had always assumed that the insults were largely limited to the Batsman’s cricketing skills or the occasional jab at the dieteray habits of the more rotund players. While there is no place for racist insults in sport, I am not sure personal insults should be taken any lightly either. This brings us to the current nighmare scenario at Sydney. The Aussies claim that (a clearly provoked) Harbhajan used the racist term “Monkey” to refer to Symonds. Harbhajan (backed by Sachin Tendulkar, a Gentleman if there ever was one) refutes the claim. To add fuel to the fire, the Indians have made the counterclaim that Brad Hogg abused Kumble and Dhoni by calling them “Bastards”.
There is a cultural aspect at work here too. While it is culturally admissible for an Aussie (or an American, if I may broadly generalize the cultures) to make a gay joke or call somebody a bastard, anything race related is clearly not kosher. Whereas in India, racial insults, which have significance in Europe or elsewhere, have no context. A Monkey insult (or a macaca) is meaningless. In fact, kids are routinely admonished for acting like monkeys when they misbehave.
Indians are no angels either (Anna’s favorite Sreesant kuttan is a wannabe sledger). If Harbhajan did call Symonds a monkey, then he indeed needs to be punished, but so should every Aussie who hurls personal insults at Indians and others. We should not see this from green-tinted cultural point of view of the Aussies alone.
This controversy has been bubbling for a few years and finally has reached boilign point. It is time a no-tolerance policy was instituted, not for racist taunts alone, but any type fo insult, period. I think the Aussies should be forced to shut-up and play the game the way it is supposed to be played. Unfortunately, they are still going to dominate the world of cricket because of their talent alone…
.
Me too.
I just assumed that he was just another over-tanned Aussie.
Anna here is the link
Pingpong, I’ve been in the cheap seats at Wankhede Stadium. Dark folk, even local ones like Kambli cop plenty of abuse.
This Australian team did what they’ve always complained about subcontinental teams: haranguing the umpires and performing histrionics worthy of a Sivaji Ganesan or a latter day Amitabh to put pressure on an already incompetent pair (Symonds’ emoting about being hard done on LBW decisions not given when the ball was heading firmly towards a leg gully should definitely qualify him for an Oscar nom). While India did lose the game, it is a little difficult to compete when Symonds is out twice, on 30 and 50-odd, but is allowed to continue till he makes 160 thanks to umpiring errors, and when two of India’s frontline batsmen are wrongly given out, on the word of a player – Ponting – who claimed a catch which he grassed. Truly crass display by the Aussies, exemplified by Michael Clarke standing around after clearly edging the ball and being caught at first slip with the ball always at least knee to waist high, in the hope that the umpire would declare him not out (or the charitable explanation of “shock”). And Bucknor has a history of horrendous decisions against India: the brilliant LBW decision last time around when Tendulkar was hit on the head ducking into a not-quite-bouncer from McGrath, and the Dravid ball tampering allegations.
It is high time these umpires are penalized very severely for mistakes, and for the game to make much better use of the high quality technology at its disposal. “Glorious uncertainties” do not mean coin tosses by paid officials, they mean a high quality contest on the field and display of athletic ability, thinking, and reflexes.
I think the Indian team should have sacrificed Bhajji and asked him to have a go at Bucknor and Ponting, given that he was going to be banned in any case.
Excuse my rant 🙂
If Bhajji used that slur he deserves the punishment but there is no proof of what he said except for Symonds’ words against Bhajji’s. The Indian team is POed because Bhajji was handed a 3 match suspension with zero evidence unless of course you can count on Symonds’ word.
But wouldn’t that be unfair to the Australians, who have been finely honing their sledging skills since early youth? 😉
I don’t see it happening – the biggest reason for my doubt is that Ntini (South Africa) and Olonga (Zimbabwe) weren’t targeted for special taunting even though many circumstantial parallels exist with Symonds in the current Australian lineup. In particular, all three were for a time the only black players on their teams (“standing out” from the crowd as it were), and all three have been effective (to varying degrees) against India (Olonga was particularly devastating in the 1999 World Cup), plausibly giving reasons for Indian fans to dislike them. I don’t see a strong case for ascribing the conduct to racism simply because there has been only one player involved (Symonds) and one taunt (monkey). That is not enough to conclusively establish a pattern, and I am not comfortable with invoking racism for this reason. I used to think that it was directed against Symonds more because he was Australian than because he was black, but then I could not answer “Why Symonds alone? Why not Ponting? Or anyone else?”. My only conclusion is that as far as cricket goes (not talking about society here), the Symonds case must have been an individual attack.
But I’ll play devil’s advocate with myself and put forth an alternate hypothesis which you can build on:
While other players like Ntini and Olonga have “stood out” as much as Symonds does, Indian fans hate Australia much more than they do South Africa or Zimbabwe, and didn’t feel the need to call names equally. Hence Symonds was targeted both for being black and for being Australian.
On the topic of racism, I am inclined to believe that Harbhajan used the word against Symonds, but belief is not evidence, nor is the word of the aggrieved (Symonds) who hasn’t exactly shown a predilection for honesty on the field, especially when contrasted against somebody like Sachin who has gone out on a limb in Harbhajan’s defence.
Personally, I found the behavior of the Aussies completely disgusting, and when somebody as decent and quiet as Kumble, who actually made a gentleman’s pact with Ponting about accepting the fielding captain’s word on catches before the series, feels so strongly as to make a remark on the unsporting nature of the Aussies (which, in my opinion, is among the worst charges that you can level at a sportsman), it says a lot. I would feel like walking away from this nastiness just out of spite, and I sympathize with the Indian team on this one.
Thanks, Shodan. I’ll amend my position then, and say that the Symonds case is the only one that has been publicized, while there could be unreported instances with other players. But, hell! Kambli? Getting abused in Maharashtra? The mind boggles.
Yes, I read about this in one of the flurry of recent articles on the r-word in cricket. Of course, the other explanations thrown around were his bad performance compounded with his bad attitude. I am inclined to believe the skin color prejudice argument though.
To add to the mess, some Aussie columnist recently wrote an article about how selection was casteist as 7 of the 11 players are Brahmin, or some such thing. Somehow, he forgot to mention how racist the Aussie team is given the limited, if at all, aboriginal presence, and non-existent presence of any non native Aussie origin players (England and South Africa have players of Indian origin, for example). I think the composition of the Indian team could reflect disproportionate access to resources, but I hardly think there is any caste agenda in the selection. (And I mention the Aussie counterpoint, not because I think that should be a primary criterion in team selection, but the limited vision of the writer of the article).
You are herewith banished to forward short leg.
14 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said
people called symonds a monkey, because he like president bush in the eyes of many, resembles one. calling someone a monkey is not a striaght up hateword only used to derogatorily refer to people who are black. There is also no proof that bhajji said this as there is no proof symonds said anything to bhajji. So how can the indian be guilty and not symonds?
Yea aunties and uncles may say racist things, learn from them and dont do it yourself and dont let your kids do it, i just dont see how that justifies someone to be wronged because they’re Indian and their mom’s brother has racist things to say.
Its screwed up to assume the best of someone because they are of similar cultural background, but some of us seem to have real identity issues by assuming the worst of someone for being from the same background.
I wish Babu never emailed you! Seriously Anna, do you have anything new to add apart from your dumb-ass comments? I wish you left this post to be done by someone who knows more about cricket at SM. Have you even read other posts on this subject that were so thought provoking and intelligent?
Wherever you got this idea from!! Find out for yourself what Kumble actually had to say after the match!
The problem is the inconsistency in applying the rules. Adam Gilchrist accused Rashid Latif of Pakistan of racially abusing him, but Latif was exonerated when checks of the stump mike and checks with the umpire showed no evidence of that whatsoever. Yet Mike Procter has banned Bhajji on the hearsay of some Australians whose integrity is not all that. Procter said he is satisfied that only one party is telling the truth. So he implies that Tendulkar, who was with Harbhajan at the time, is lying, whilst Ponting, Hayden and others out of earshot are telling the truth. Procter also banned Latif for five matches for claiming a grounded catch while captaining Pakistan. Procter told Latif that as captain he had a duty not to do that. Yet Ponting claimed a grounded catch, and also took Michael Clarke’s word for a likely grounded catch and acted as fourth umpire in raising his finger. No ban for him. Imagine if Ganguly had raised his finger in such an imperious manner. The papers would have been full of stories about the Prince of Kolkata and his snootiness.
It is no small coincidence that this came up just days before a documentary on the whole Symonds affair in India was scheduled to be shown on Australian TV. And suspicious that Ricky Ponting suddenly now claims that Bhajji also racially abused Ponting in Mumbai months ago, but the Aussies “gallantly” decided not to say anything about it then. Right. How convenient then that he should leak that info on the day of Harbhajan’s hearing for an allegedly repeated offence. It’s clear that once Sreesanth was unfit to go to Australia, the Australians were going to target someone else. They themselves say that they hunt like a pack of dogs (with due apologies to the dogs). Harbhajan called them vulgar, Ponting is his bunny lately, and Bhajji and Tendulkar were taking the match away from them at the time. Who asked Symonds, and then Hayden, to come all the way in and interject themselves in a private matter between Harbhajan and Brett Lee?. Lee didn’t even seem to care or get riled by Harbhajan tapping him on the behind. If Bhajji racially abused Symonds, he should be banned, but it should be on more evidence than what the Aussies say. Also, Symonds should come clean on what he said to Bhajji. He seemed to have no problem coming clean on not walking despite the nick heard around the world.
should read Ponting accused Harbhajan of racially abusing Symonds in Mumbai.
Hey! Whose forward leg are you calling “short”? I’ve got 24 inches. Really, I’ve got 2 feet, enough to touch the floor.
I’m sure yours isn’t the last one today and agree w/ all the points. Beyond poor umpiring and Aussie “gamesmanshipâ€, I still have plenty of love for our batsmen. Compare them w/ poor bowlers, who haven’t been too shabby in recent years and can bat a bit too. The batsmen show all the skill and vigour of a govt. babu and are just as well-entrenched.
34 · Yapsee said
Saar, why don’t you go and read those intelligent posts? we prefer this wonly!
Between everything that has been said about this issue in the past two days, I saw a gem on the rec.sports.cricket new group. Titled ” The Harbhajan ban: a cross cultural view”, the author attempts to look at this whole from a “difference in culture” perspective. He feels, and I quite agree that the whole fracas ultimately is an issue of justice vs process. You could also term it as an ends vs means argument.
As a desi, you feel justice has not been done, because you cannot essentially trust a system where on one day the adjucator (Mike Procter) says on public tv that he has no documentary proof apart from the word given by the Aussie players. Just before play started on Day 5 (or was it Day 4), Mike Procter tells Mark Taylor that he will hold a hearing after the test ends, but he does not know what will happen since there are no witnesses apart from the Australians. Not even the umpires heard anything. And then this same man comes out and says that he is convinced “beyond a reasonable doubt that Harbhajan Singh directed that word at Andrew Symonds and also that he meant it to offend on the basis of Symonds’ race or ethnic origin”.
Now 2 days after the hearing and the verdict, we still have no idea of what changed between his initial television interview when he did have no evidence and now when he is convinced. There certainly seems to be no audio evidence, because stump mics are turned down/off in between balls/overs. So everybody’s guess is that the verdict hinged on the words of five Australian players. Hence all the indignation, effigy burning, name calling etc. in India.
On the other hand, if you trust the process, you will say that due process was followed, witnesses were interviewed and an impartial judge gave his verdict. Never mind that in doing so, he has basically sullied the reputation of the witness that the accused brought forward (in this case, Sachin Tendulkar who has gone on record to say that no reference to simians were made).
This “trust the process” argument and the general view (in England and Australia, mostly) that the Asian bloc is twisting the arms of cricket’s governing body, the ICC, is what has soured things.
In all this though, one thing is universally agreed upon. The ICC is run by a bunch of incompetent jokers who cannot be trusted to take a decision.
Sorry for lauging. I just returned from India. I mean suppose it was the opposite. An Australian that called an Indian player a monkey. We would not hear the end of it, no problem really. But would you have Australians arguing that calling a blackman “monkey” wasn’t racism? When it comes to racism, few, very few can be more hypocritical than us Indians.
It is one of the greatest feelings in the world when the aussies lose, they simply can’t take it, they have no class and skilled as they may be they resort to cheap sledging which is fine and dandy, but don’t go crying like a baby when someone erupts.
I have no sympathy for the aussies, they called ol’ Monty a “raghead!â€
Not at all ! Conversly Indians haved complained against Brad Hogg for calling Kumble a bastard.
Missed this link in my last comment – The Harbhajan ban: a cross cultural view
Also have to agree with #41. We are the biggest hypocrites when it comes to racism. But I think its an argument for another day because, IMHO, the fact that Harbhajan called him a monkey is still unproven. Another thing, the fact that the BCCI and the team needs a media manager has never been more apparent, in spite of the presence of the wonderfully articulate Kumble. (video link)
In the areas of India where hindi is spoken, goras are often referred to as “lal bandars”, pink monkeys, because their fair skin resembles the same skin tone as the monkeys that populate that belt, the rheusus monkeys.
Unless Harbhajan lives in an area populated by black skinned monkeys, and hence black people are frequently referred to as such, this is not neccessarily a racial slur.
I’m two minds about the suspension, even if it was a racial slur.
I guess it’s kind of like that radio dj who referred to a team of female basketball players as, “nappy headed hos” on air. That was more of a gender issue, I feel.
“But would you have Australians arguing that calling a blackman “monkey” wasn’t racism?”
I agree, I don’t think Indians should go down the road of claiming that calling only a black person a monkey out of all the Australian team members is not racist. However, Indians don’t have a monopoly on hypocrisy. I know some Australians who think that calling people “w*gs” and other less savoury names is not racist. The Sydney Morning Herald had a blog on this after the Symonds incident in India, and the number of words that Australians use to call others that they don’t think are racist/offensive boggles the mind. But maybe that’s their culture, maybe over there it really is ok to call people these names.
goday* sez
wow! that’s a biggie – especially given the context of these couple of matches.
something reeks man.
maizeblu* sez
agreed. i’m guilty of calling kids monkeys or fooling around with them making grunting chimp noises. (Oh! COME ON! like you dont horse around with kids). unortunately I was just messing with a buddy’s kid (buddy is zambian)… and I said something like “you little monkey…” and realized only by the shocked expression on buddy’s face that I hurt him. 🙁 sorry yaar. i learn. but for someone who’s grown up in the crush of desi society, i can see this as being a problem.
I don’t know if Australia’s words are more crass than the ones used in hindi, but those alone (hindi name calling words) are shocking enough to someone who is not familiar with the culture. It is not at all uncommon to refer to people by their physical characteristics, which when translated into english, comes across as totally rude and offensive, but in hindi somehow the edge is taken off.
ANNA, ignore yapsee. You knew someone like him would pop up eventually right? Dogs will bark. And although I’m not a cricket fan I’ve been peripherally aware of this controversy… thanks for taking the time to write this and post it here.
You racist!