India Vs Australia 2007/8 Race Row

[usy]

Cricket man i said "If you can't take it, don't give it." on the other thread, praise me ..

 

[pal]

Yeah but there are limits, is it not?

There are already limits as defined under the Level Three offence of the ICC Code of Conduct. The question is whether Harbhajan's retort constituted a violation of that rule. The first aspect of Harbhajan's defense is that the only evidence against him is the word of Ponting and one or two of the other Aussie players. Kumble and Tendulkar, who was right there, recollected the entire incident and in their opinion, nothing racist was said. On what basis are you going to prove to me that Ponting's word is worth more in a court of justice than Tendulkar's? There is essentially no legal evidence that he called anyone 'monkey'. Second, this is all extremely relative. For example, you point out that monkey is considered to be a racist term in English and Aussie cultures, as opposed to it being a relatively benign term in subcontinental cultures. So, we don't know for certain that he used the term, but assuming he did, we're going to declare him guilty based on the connotation the word holds for Symonds. Accordingly, if you do accept hearsay as valid evidence and you're going to judge him based on the connotation that word holds in your culture, Hogg would be guilty of the same charge as well. The Indian players heard him use the term '*******' among other things derogatively towards one of them. And in case you're not aware of the connotation the word holds in Indian culture, it is used to denigrate and insult someone's family and descent, which would be in direct violation of the Code, meaning he deserves to be punished equally. Now, his hearing hasn't been held yet, so we don't know if Proctor is going to be equally punitive, but just the fact that the only evidence present in either of these cases is essentially hearsay sets a dangerous precedent.

 

[valvolux]

It's mental disintegration...not intimidation...it seems we don't even have to bother these days cause opposition teams bring their complaints over to Australia pre-prepared.

But our players don't racially sledge...that's waht this is all about you gooses. as far as I know the one time someone did...and please correct me cause I can't remember who it was but I think it was Darren Lehman?? calling someone a black c*nt... he got busted. why can't the indians accept Harbhajan, who has the wit of a door knob, stepped over the line?

 

[manee]

It's mental disintegration...not intimidation...

What is the difference?

 

[usy]

If any players who cannot take on field comments, they should go to the umpire straigh, report at te end of the match. And let ICC to deal with. As Imran Khan would have said.

But Me, I would have replyed back by not being nasty or racist.

 

[sohum]

why can't the indians accept Harbhajan, who has the wit of a door knob, stepped over the line?

The same reason you have no clue how to respond to the following comments:

Yeah. See that's what it boils down. Symonds wouldn't have made a fuss over it if nothing happens. But would Tendulkar go on record with the press and actively claim that it was just a bit of banter? If he knew something was up, he would decline to answer the question. If the match referee had no evidence, then he cannot make a decision of guilty.

valvolux said: You are as stupid as the BCCI if you think he didn't actually say it. And since when has conclusive evidence been required to accuse someone of racism?
Is that right? What if I tell the PC authorities that you called me something which I find to be racist and they then banned you. There's not been any evidence in posts or messages, yet by applying your logic you were banned.

And why am I stupid to say he actually didn't say it? Because I ask for proof instead of converting my prejudice against certain players into hatred?

There are already limits as defined under the Level Three offence of the ICC Code of Conduct. The question is whether Harbhajan's retort constituted a violation of that rule. The first aspect of Harbhajan's defense is that the only evidence against him is the word of Ponting and one or two of the other Aussie players. Kumble and Tendulkar, who was right there, recollected the entire incident and in their opinion, nothing racist was said. On what basis are you going to prove to me that Ponting's word is worth more in a court of justice than Tendulkar's? There is essentially no legal evidence that he called anyone 'monkey'. Second, this is all extremely relative. For example, you point out that monkey is considered to be a racist term in English and Aussie cultures, as opposed to it being a relatively benign term in subcontinental cultures. So, we don't know for certain that he used the term, but assuming he did, we're going to declare him guilty based on the connotation the word holds for Symonds. Accordingly, if you do accept hearsay as valid evidence and you're going to judge him based on the connotation that word holds in your culture, Hogg would be guilty of the same charge as well. The Indian players heard him use the term '*******' among other things derogatively towards one of them. And in case you're not aware of the connotation the word holds in Indian culture, it is used to denigrate and insult someone's family and descent, which would be in direct violation of the Code, meaning he deserves to be punished equally. Now, his hearing hasn't been held yet, so we don't know if Proctor is going to be equally punitive, but just the fact that the only evidence present in either of these cases is essentially hearsay sets a dangerous precedent.

 

[Cricketman]

It's mental disintegration...not intimidation...it seems we don't even have to bother these days cause opposition teams bring their complaints over to Australia pre-prepared.

But our players don't racially sledge...that's waht this is all about you gooses. as far as I know the one time someone did...and please correct me cause I can't remember who it was but I think it was Darren Lehman?? calling someone a black c*nt... he got busted. why can't the indians accept Harbhajan, who has the wit of a door knob, stepped over the line?

THERE WAS NO PROOF!

 

[usy]

and there is no reason why you should sit and drink milk on your cap locks?

 

[Cricketman]

It's mental disintegration...not intimidation...it seems we don't even have to bother these days cause opposition teams bring their complaints over to Australia pre-prepared.

But our players don't racially sledge...that's waht this is all about you gooses. as far as I know the one time someone did...and please correct me cause I can't remember who it was but I think it was Darren Lehman?? calling someone a black c*nt... he got busted. why can't the indians accept Harbhajan, who has the wit of a door knob, stepped over the line?

cough- http://youtube.com/watch?v=uM9zZc583C4

 

[Mr. Kurns]

i can't beleive people are dragging the SA V AUS series into it if i remember correctly yes there was some aussies racially abusing the SAfricans and that's not right but in Perth (I think?) someinsults were in Afrikaans! I was at the teltra dome at Safrica game and there was the old You Are A ******! and You're going home in the back of a divvy van etc chants and of course John Rhodes being punched is unacceptable, but what is it everyone has against us!

 

[freddiw]

i cant believe the aussies of all people are having a whinge

WHATS HAPPENS ON THE FIELD
STAYS ON THE FIELD

its that simple

 

[Mr. Kurns]

Tell the indians that about Brad Hogg!

 

[pal]

If you look at the chronology of these incidents, you would know that Hogg only became involved during Bhajji's hearing. I don't want to speculate, but I would suppose some of the players became aware of what exactly a Level III offense constituted, and recognized that Hogg's words were in violation of the Code. You would be daft if you didn't sense a bit of a payback element in that, but still, if Bhajji is going to be banned for three matches because of it, so should Hogg, but that really doesn't excuse their conduct, assuming, of course, that they are really guilty of the accusations.

 

[sohum]

Symonds claims that he sparked off the "discussion" because he apparently observed Harbhajan "hit Brett Lee on his backside". I'm not sure if this was a creative way to say Harbhajan had been creaming Brett Lee through the covers (hence--kicking his ass) or whether Harbhajan actually physically initiated contact with Lee. I don't have exact replays of the incident, but the one I did see, which was linked earlier in this thread, shows Brett Lee walking back to his mark pretty relaxed.

 

[.Mob]

Yeah, the whole thing seems incredibly fishy, surely if someone hits another person on a cricket pitch, that should be reported too and the person must be punished..


Hmmmmmmmmmmm, do I smell bull?