Are the Indian cricket team and board bringing cricket into disrepute?

[punterpupnroy]

I might be missing something here, but when did Sharad Pawar, the man who runs the BCCI, say that the tour would be called off if the appeal wasn't upheld?

Well the Indian cricket team did say that. So if thats the case. It is the Indian cricket teams fault is it not?

 

[sohum]

You mean these chartered planes?



http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IES20080130063139&Page=S&Title=Sports&Topic=-521&

This is what I mean. There is essentially no factual evidence to back up most of the things that are being posted here accusing the Indians and the BCCI of this or that.

Commence MediaWar.

 

[pal]

Well the Indian cricket team did say that. So if thats the case. It is the Indian cricket teams fault is it not?

India will not pull out of its tour of Australia, even if an appeal against spinner Harbhajan Singh's ban for alleged racist comments is rejected, media reports quoted India's cricket chief as saying on Saturday.

The future of the tour had been in doubt after Singh was suspended for three tests for racially abusing Australian all-rounder Andrew Symonds during the second test - he allegedly called Symonds a monkey.

"There's no question of a pullout," Sharad Pawar, who heads the Board of Control for Cricket in India, told the Hindustan Times newspaper.

The BCCI allowed the team to continue with the tour following the granting of an appeal of Harbhajan's suspension, and the removal of umpire Steve Bucknor for the upcoming third test in Perth.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=6&click_id=17&art_id=nw20080112140208251C653759

I'm pretty sure Sharad Pawar has consistently maintained the position that the tour would proceed regardless of what happened. I think Dr. Sridhar stated, following Bhajji's ban, that the team was backing him and looking at options on how to proceed if an appeal wasn't granted (not that an appeal was upheld), so that Bhajji could argue his case.

 

[harishankar]

Goodbye... I will return once this flame war dies down...

 

[sohum]

Goodbye... I will return once this flame war dies down...

This is why all the boards schedule too much cricket--so there's no time to think about the controversies.

 

[RoboRocks]

This is why all the boards schedule too much cricket--so there's no time to think about the controversies.

Nor is there time to come to a conclusion.

 

[smssia0112]

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=6&click_id=17&art_id=nw20080112140208251C653759

I'm pretty sure Sharad Pawar has consistently maintained the position that the tour would proceed regardless of what happened. I think Dr. Sridhar stated, following Bhajji's ban, that the team was backing him and looking at options on how to proceed if an appeal wasn't granted (not that an appeal was upheld), so that Bhajji could argue his case.

This sums it up really:

Although it was Justice Hansen's decision to downgrade the charge from the level-three offence to a less serious level-two charge, which makes no mention of racism, the Australian and Indian boards had previously struck an agreement that the spinner would plead guilty to the lesser charge.

The Australian Test players — most notably Australian skipper Ricky Ponting and Symonds — had little choice but to accept this arrangement and should not be blamed for suppressing their strong instincts to insist that their board press ahead with the racial abuse charge while India was threatening to abandon the tour, a decision that Cricket Australia told them would expose it to multi-million dollar legal action from broadcaster ESPN and could threaten its commercial existence.

Despite the blanket denials issued on the Indian squad's arrival in Melbourne ahead of tomorrow night's Twenty20 international at the MCG, those threats were overt and Cricket Australia held genuine fears for the tour.

Not to mention their blackmail regarding Bucknor, whilst he didn't deserve to continue umpiring the series, that is the ICC's decision to make, not the BCCI's.

If there was no threat, Cricket Australia wouldn't have forced their players to accept the lesser charge.

Yes, our entire country is bringing this petty little game down. Just kick us out, why don'tcha..:rollyeyes:

Are you really that defensive? I was referring to the India cricket team, not the nation. You know that very well. I'll change the thread anyway.

And for those who are asking us to leave the sentence behind, that is irrelevant. It is the manner in which he recieved it, and the BCCI's conduct, that makes this despicable. I will not stop talking simply because I am a moderator, this is a serious issue and I have the right to voice my opinion.

 

[sohum]

This sums it up really

It doesn't really. For example, it doesn't really mention a source within the team or the BCCI who clearly claim that India will be going back if the decision doesn't go their way. There's been a lot of speculation about it, especially in the Australian media who seem eager to give the visitors a taste of their own media's medicine.

Are you really that defensive? I was referring to the India cricket team, not the nation. You know that very well. I'll change the thread anyway.

Anyone who takes the time to think about it, breathe and then post will realize that. But if you are going to post a thread title like that, then you are going to get plenty of stupid posts (like you have) in the thread. For example, if I started a thread saying, "Australia are stupid" when I was actually referring to Cricket Australia's decision to choose Chris Rogers, don't you think many patriotic fans would have a go at me? Or is this a ploy to force the patriotic fans to attempt to defend the BCCI's actions so that you can then ridicule them?

 

[smssia0112]

It doesn't really. For example, it doesn't really mention a source within the team or the BCCI who clearly claim that India will be going back if the decision doesn't go their way. There's been a lot of speculation about it, especially in the Australian media who seem eager to give the visitors a taste of their own media's medicine.


Anyone who takes the time to think about it, breathe and then post will realize that. But if you are going to post a thread title like that, then you are going to get plenty of stupid posts (like you have) in the thread. For example, if I started a thread saying, "Australia are stupid" when I was actually referring to Cricket Australia's decision to choose Chris Rogers, don't you think many patriotic fans would have a go at me? Or is this a ploy to force the patriotic fans to attempt to defend the BCCI's actions so that you can then ridicule them?

If you honestly believe that people would criticize you for that then you're either paranoid or people are quite stupid. The statement is that India are bringing cricket into disrepute.

If anyone with half a brain were to read that, they would surely not accuse it of being a generalisation of the entire nation. Furthermore, if they were to read the content of the post, they would get further proof of its contention.

There are no ploys here, I just want people to discuss this. So far, the Indians are the only ones defending their board, which means a lot in terms of agreement with the question.

 

[sjdigitall]

I wonder who was the first person to actually break the story about Sharad Pawar and his alleged statements about leaving the tour? Because im yet to see any kind of audio or video evidence of this.

 

[Cricket_60]

Whether or not Harbhajan was guilty of calling Symonds a monkey (a term that was openly defined as offensive to Symo and agreed upon by both teams not to be used on the field of play, along with any other racial taunts), the fact remains that the BCCI have emerged as the biggest "crybabies" throughout this whole affair. Fair enough, if Harbhajan had been found guilty they could have appealed the decision but to blatantly organize a flight home for the players and declare the tour cancelled should he be found to have called Symonds a monkey is absolutely pathetic. The Aussies and the rest of the cricketing world have a right to be outraged by these threats.

 

[iloveireland]

Whether or not Harbhajan was guilty of calling Symonds a monkey (a term that was openly defined as offensive to Symo and agreed upon by both teams not to be used on the field of play, along with any other racial taunts), the fact remains that the BCCI have emerged as the biggest "crybabies" throughout this whole affair. Fair enough, if Harbhajan had been found guilty they could have appealed the decision but to blatantly organize a flight home for the players and declare the tour cancelled should he be found to have called Symonds a monkey is absolutely pathetic. The Aussies and the rest of the cricketing world have a right to be outraged by these threats.

It wasnt a fair trial. Not only was the ICC pressured by the BCCI but the television companies and their sponsors would have lost millions!! No way could they say no

 

[pal]

It wasnt a fair trial.

You're going to tell me that a Justice of a High Court of New Zealand is going to be pressured into a decision because of any external influence? For anyone to suggest that he was somehow corrupted and cajoled into making this decision is pretty irresponsible. In his verdict, he did state that if information about Harbhajan's two previous fines, I believe, one was for over-appealing, had been presented, he would have increased Harbhajan's fine for this case. That shows incompetence all round, with both the ICC and perhaps, CA for not using it in their argument.

 

[smssia0112]

He was given a lesser charge because Cricket Australia agreed to it.

I wonder who was the first person to actually break the story about Sharad Pawar and his alleged statements about leaving the tour? Because im yet to see any kind of audio or video evidence of this.

I don't know who said it but I believe it was a representative who is on tour, not Pawar.

 

[pal]

He was given a lesser charge because Cricket Australia agreed to it.

"Hansen denied any deal had been struck between legal counsel for the Australian and Indian players to downgrade the charge. He was also critical of all parties involved in the confrontation in Sydney, saying "their actions do not reflect well on them or the game."

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/story/334196.html

You might, of course, be well-versed and knowledgeable than Justice Hansen on these matters, but I hope you won't offended if I don't believe that to be the case.