I know I am probably going to get flamed straight away by many of the Indian fans, and I apologise if you find anything I say offensive, I am trying not to be! Yes I am Australian, but don't accuse me of being biased. I was entirely happy when Australia's batting collapsed in the first day because it was about time that Australia had a challenge rather than an overwhelming win.
For people criticising Australia's appealing, perhaps you should take a look at India's appealing. You do realise that India appealed for lbw's that were easily outside the line, and were called so by the commentators too. But no-one is bashing India in the media for such appeals...because they happen. What looks right to the bowler or umpire doesn't necessarily mean it IS right. But the umpire's decision is the umpire's decision. When I saw Michael Clark's "catch" I knew it was speculative. No camera was in a good enough angle to get the full story. Really it is down to the integrity of the fieldsman to make the call and the integrity of the umpire to make a decision. I am sure if it was Paul Collingwood taking the catch he would still be questioned, even though many hold him in regards as one of the best fielders ever. The point is that we, as viewers, have the ability to sit back and criticise anything and everything with hindsight. But if you were the umpire, you had been standing out in the middle all day just like the players, then you don't have the ability to sit back and form an opinion on the matter. You either give Out or Not Out, there is no real time for conscientious objection. I agree poor decisions were given by the umpires, and there were some speculative calls (speculative meaning none of us can make a fair assumption as to what happened [ie. Michael Clark's catch...no cameras had a good angle, both hands and ball were at the absolute bottom of frame and blurred, so not even third umpire could have been used]. In such cases, really only the umpire can be blamed for such a decision, if it was in fact the wrong decision. (I'm not saying it was, I'm not saying it wasn't)
As for the apparent 'lack of respect' for the Australian team, someone tell him he is dreaming. Even though we flattened England in the Ashes 5-0, (sorry Skateboarder, Manee, Stevie and Evertonfan :P but it is true) England respects Australia. The Ashes is quite possibly THE most highly regarded cricket series in the world, and it is played by the two most highly regarded teams in the world, Australia and England (see Skateboarder, Manee, Stevie and Evertonfan, I said you are one of the most highly regarded teams in the world ;P ) New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa, West Indies, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka all respect Australia. Questioning Australia's integrity as a team is unfair. Especially when worded in such obviously biased distaste.
As for Anil Kumble's comment of "Only one team was playing with the spirit of the game, that's all I can say". I purely disregard this comment. The spirit of the game would have been to just draw the game or let India win? I don't think so. The spirit of the game is to PLAY until the last ball, which is what we did, and we won. Imagine if we hadn't continued playing, India would have drawn the match and there would be none of this criticism. India is just as fiercely competitive as Australia when it comes to cricket. Losing a match is met by much criticism in the media. It is both vicious and malicious. I think Kumble's comment was out of line, and very contradictory because he is now putting himself out of 'the spirit of the game'. Bad decisions are made no matter who the teams or umpires are. Placing the blame on a whole team and calling them unsportsmanlike is against the spirit of the game.
he's ours!
