The Sydney Test – What Is The Issue?
So much heat and so much talk about a cricket match! Surprised?
Well! This was not about cricket and not about winning or losing. This entire match was about 5 things.
It’s about power, you duffer!
The Aussie weight in the cricketing administration is at a historic low and they cannot take that. For Britain and Australia, the loss of cricketing power (especially the administrative power) rankles. Especially, when that power moves to the browns. The rise of sub-continental cricket after India’s World Cup win in 1983, (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka) along with eclipse of the West Indian cricketing prowess has further isolated Australia and Britain.
The subsequent shift of ICC headquarters from London to Dubai completed the loss of power. It is this rankling at the loss of power that drives Australia – to take the match to the very brink of a political disaster.
India Saved Cricket
A comment by Robert Craddock (January 8th, 2008) in Australia says it all. “INDIA must not be allowed to run the game, and the International Cricket Council now faces one of the biggest days in its 98-year existence – when it simply must seize control of the game. … India’s cricketing wealth may be 50 times that of any rival, but that does not give that country the right to run the game.”
If Indians are footing the world’s cricketing bill, does it take away their right to protest? Does that stop them from reasonably demanding a fair hearing – as per Anglo Saxon legal system, which the ICC follows?
Possibly, Craddock’s memory fails him. His memory needs jogging. After the 1983, World Cup, ICC could not find a sponsor for the 1987 World Cup. Hosting rights were awarded to India, no contest. India saved cricket from becoming a museum sport – a dinosaur of a game. Indian spectators, the Indian Cricket board and Indian sponsors pulled out cricket from bankruptcy. We deserve some respect and consideration (and yes, even some gratitude) for giving cricket a second life.
So, Bob, what does give anyone the right to govern a game. Divine right! Colour of the skin? History!! Race. Bobby boy, he who pays the piper calls the tune. Is Robert Craddock suggesting that Indians foot the bill and Australians will run the game.
I dont believe that he is that daft – but then this a uncertain world.
And if Australians do want to sledge, why do they not accept it? Do the Australians expect sledging to be a one-way street? Symonds can accept sledging from his ‘friends’ and not his opponents. Good news! How come the same Symonds turn around and sledge opponents and believe that the opponents should take it. These illuminate the thread of double standards and racism.
I have not seen any reports or incidents where the Indian team has been reported for bad behaviour in this series. After such sterling behaviour, if all they get is intolerance, ill mannered hosts, opponents who swear like louts – and a team that goes after its opponents like a pack of wild dogs (so well put by Peter Roebuck), what do the Aussies expect. Smiling and fawning Indians? Do they expect that the Indian Cricket Board (which contributes 70% to ICC coffers) to take all the Aussies can give?
This is “dog-whistle” racism – only dogs can hear sounds from a dog-whistle. Others cannot point out the actions or incidents where racism occurs – yet you can cut this racism with a knife.
If the Australian ‘dragon’ does want to indulge in barrage, they must have also done their homework on what works and what does not. So, if Australians have indulged in offensive sledging (which is the purpose anyway), are they expecting Indians to sledge in a mild, gentlemanly manner? Why cant they take it on the chin as good as they give?
Allan Border and Bob Simpson, 20 years ago, threatened Pakistan, with tour cancellation, due to quality of umpiring. That was OK . But Indians are whingers and monsters, if they do it. The issue – quality of umpiring. Why cant they accept that Australia won at Sydney because of favorable umpiring.
Ozzies on Aussies with an Australian viewpoint criticising everybody who points out Australian failures. With a pathetic air of righteousness. Read it here.
Sledging, Banter, Allegations
“What we think is just routine banter, they take offence at,” Border said. It is straight out cultural stuff. “The cultural issues were always there in our day. When we say ‘lucky bastards’, they might take offence at that. It was a simple Aussie term no one takes offence to in Australia.” Alan Border, quoted By Iain Payten in Australia lose public support article.
Well, in India, monkey is not a racist term, or a pejorative, or even a swear word. India’s favorite God is a monkey. So, (as per Border’s logic) Symonds should feel honoured – just like Indians should feel honoured if we are called lucky bastards! Even though none of the Australian gods are “lucky bastards”!
Not men enough?
How is it that Australians want to sledge – and promptly run to their school principal when they get it back? Lucky bastards is more offensive to Indians than a monkey is to the Australians, I assure you. In India, calling people monkey, donkey, pig is normal.
And if it is war (as Mike Colman, says it is) then why cry if Indians give back what they got? Is it that the Australians are not men enough to fight a war?
Envy – Pure and Simple
Symonds told AAP – “We have had a very successful side and I think watching how we celebrate and how they celebrate, I think we have been pretty humble in the way we have gone about it … And personally, I think they have got far too carried away with their celebrations.”
Indian cricketers are treated like film stars and rock stars. They are amongst the richest sports people in the world. And that is something, that the Aussies cannot seem to digest – going by the above comment.
“…the Australian captain asserted he is not Harbhajan Singh’s bunny …”
This was supposed to be a mind game by Brett Lee against Sachin Tendulkar. Only it back fired. And Bhajji made life miserable for Ponting. Was this the reason why the Australians went after Bhajji – like a pack of wild dogs, as Peter Roebuck says.
Eight to One
As any statistician will tell you, when umpiring mistakes go against anyone in eight to one ratio (of the possible 24-28 top order dismissals), it stinks of bovine excrement. Interestingly, all the decisions that favored the Australians were against the Indian top order batsmen or in favor of the Australian top order batsmen.
33% (9 out of the possible 28) wrong decisions cannot be a co-incidence. It is not odds or an even chance. It is design – or a conspiracy. Deccan Herald said Anil Kumble’s side was on the wrong end of eight umpiring mistakes, which had affected the outcome.
A report filed by Alex Brown stands out. Brown’s criticism and reporting is completely devoid of the Indian standpoint. “Each time an Indian cricketer appeals, umpires are now compromised. Enrage the monster, and pay for it with your job” (italics mine) says Brown. Deftly, he changes the argument. Actually, each time an Australian appealed, the umpires raised their fingers. Each time an appeal against an Aussie top order batsman was made by Indians, the umpires turned it down. After 33% wrong decisions and a trumped up charge, Alex Brown thinks the Indian Monster Board is in the wrong.
Hello! Mike Fixer here!
All this logic, if Bhajji has in fact called Symonds a monkey. Is it that a white man’s word to another white man, worth more than a brown man’s word! Mike Proctor seems to think so. And it is the same Mike Proctor who upheld a baseless ball-tampering charge against the Pakistan team – that was finally overturned. Mike Proctor is building an anti-brown record.
Shivnarine Chanderpaul is quoted about how the Australians ‘manage’ to get many decisions in their favour. I wonder how? In 2001, the New Zealanders had similar concerns. New Zealand wrote to the ICC about umpiring in Australia – and they had far fewer decisions going against them.
The betting allegations and whispers during 1998-2000 against India and Pakistan was blown wide open by India where Australian cricketers were also implicated. The only countries to take serious action were India, South Africa and Pakistan. Australia let off Mark Waugh and Shane Warne with a rap on the knuckles.
Just how much more illogical can these Australians get! Do let me know the limits. I will make that many allowances next time around. Please.
Anglo Saxon Politics
This was not about cricket at all. It was another demonstration of Anglo Saxon political behaviour in its distilled form. To the Anglo Saxon Bloc, Sports is racial superiority by another means – and not entertainment or sport. The Boris Spassky-Bobby Fischer chess championships (early 1970s) which were projected as West versus East match by the ABC (America, Australia, Britain, Canada) press and media is a prime instance of this. The regular focus on the Olympics medal tally is another instance. (For further proof, click on this link and read this article).
An aside – Colin Tatz’s Obstacle Race is a book on racial discrimination in sports in Australia. 220 years after Anglo Saxon settlement in Australia, the Aborigines are still deprived of sporting facilities – in sports crazy nation. After unequal treatment, the ruling Anglo Saxon community uses sports to press home the image of racial superiority.
Does this mean that all Anglo Saxons behave in a particular manner? Thankfully, no. This is not to mistake this article as an attempt to tar or brush all Anglo Saxons. But yes, when Anglo Saxons get into power, their training and conditioning makes them behave in this abominable manner.
The Perth test (Jan16th 2008-Jan19th, 2008) showed how much trouble the Australians were actually in. The WACA pitch is an supposed to be an graveyard for Indian cricketers. It was possibly ‘assumed’ by the Australians that if they can ‘manage’ a victory at Sydney, the world record (of 16 continous wins), was broken again.
Sab ki pasand – Nirma.
The Perth Test clearly demonstrated that the Sydney test was won by Indians – umpiring apart. The BCCI should simply ask for the Sydney test to be scrubbed from all record books. After Harbhajan is absolved.
And if Aussie players want to stay away from IPL, it is their loss. No deal. No negotiations.