The international game of cricket appears not be run on so called objective rational rules for all but on a set of 'disproprtionating' stereotypes. Accordingly the 'perfidious' oriental or sub-continental types generally over-appeal way too much, are truculent, have a 'chip on their shoulder' (an iferiority complex), perfidious (cheat and decieve) etc etc. The 'munificent' Englishmen and Australians, New Zealanders, like Jeff Crowe, Chris Broad, John Reid (perhaps the most explicitly racist referee of all), and Shane Warne or Allan Donald, in contrast are governed instead by reason, by principles of human decency, by a competitive but fair spiirt when they appeal long loud aggressively and copiously, claim catches and LBWs that palpably arent, and racially abuse their opponents.
Its possible to do a 'scientific' or statistical study of test, examining umpiring and refereeing decisions (both positive and negative outcomes) to prove the hypothesis that ICC officials, umpires and referees are heavily influenced by other than that belief and practice of being equally fair to all proponents of our game - regardless of creed colour and faith.
