Well the remarks made out in the colmun seem to logical to the reasons stated.even if the ICC were not to be fully blamed but they have to take their share of blame.As the highest governing authority in the game it cannot shy away by saying that it was a lapse on the part of the umpires. Does it not have any overruling powers. When it sees that umpires or Match refrees have not done their job then take the matters in their hand. I am not saying they be doing this everytime an umpire or refree makes a mistake but sometimes when the situations go overboard as the one between Mcgrath and sarwan.
The comments by author seems to be justification and rationalisation rather than taking an objective view of the situation. It is unfortunate that such an article has been allowed on rediff. There is no doubt that racialism exists in cricket at international and national level(e.g SA and castism in India).Author has beautifully taken a position which says that there is no discrimination. If this be so, how is it possible that Ganguly is reprimanded for showing slightest of dissent( this does not mean that Ganguly or others should not have been punished) while Australians are allowed to get away with so many incidences. Whenever Australians have been punished for their bad behaviour, the reason has been that Autorities were not in a position to hide acts of pla from public because of sheer abrasiveness of act. Hence,in order to look neutral they take actions against Australians only when it is unavoidable. Author has taken similar position. Agreed that all individuals are responsible for their all actions but it does not mean that sledging is individual phenomenon in Australian team or for that matter any other team. Take sledging out of Australian and see how effective are they?
Daniel Laidlaw clearly shows that even after being fined again and again Australians continue to misbehave on the field, hence, it is proved that there is no effect of current punishments. With so many instances of Australians being there are many more where they were not punished at all. To make them behave properly and show them they are not above law and cricket the concerned Australian players should be banned at least for an year.
1. If umpires are responsible for taking action against such demeaning behaviour and they are not doing so, it is quite possible that they are under some sort of pressure when they officiate in matches involving certain teams.
2. In one of the paras , it is mentioned the number of Aussies who have been fined for various occassions. Dispite that , it they continue their on field unsportsmen like behaviour , definetely the top brass of the organisation should take steps to do something concrete .
It is not fair to simply put the blame on umpires alone
RE:Response to 'Sledging continued'
by Vikram Sami on Jun 02, 2003 02:47 AM
What do you mean forget it??? The issue is not the sledging, but the inconsistency in punishment. If an Indian, Pakistani or a Sri Lankan does the same thing, do you think they will get away with it?
A very fine piece of reporting- Truly a calm and composed overview...!!!!
THe writer has dispassionately analysed the plus and minus of the Australian team!!!
The racial bias between Bangladdesh skipper's comments and the bawdy comment of McGrath is startling... More so when the innocuous comment of the Bangladeshi skipper was pounced upon for fining!!!!
The servile nature of the Asians to suffer the treatment and even to deny that they said anything(Bangla skipper) speaks of the colonial mindset , 50 years after the masters left.
Australians ply ugly cricket. They have no sportsman spirit which is very important in cricket. They don't know to play cricket without sledging. They still go scot free. They should be banned from cricket for some time.
cricket was for a long time known as a gentleman sport and everything about it was courteous and clean and enjoyable with no big demonstrations when a bowler takes a wicket and earlier whent the captain came in he was generally given a mild welcome clapping. talking and commenting on field was discouraged and since it was not a contact sport there was hardly any reason to get upset and react with any type of finger pointing or whatever. the umpires were never threatened with the appeals by pointing fingers and making faces and increasing voice volumes! and almost everyone appeals for everything whether he is in a position to do it or not! umpires were respected irrespective and in spite of their decisions. moderation in these aspects by the players and the umpires and the boards should be imposed and make cricket what it was meant to be. in fact the meaning of ' it is not cricket' should be instilled in the players with heavy penalties for offences and offensive behaviour.
RE:sledging
by kerry on Jun 06, 2003 04:14 PM
which century are you in that sort of cricket went out about the time of bodyline in the 1930's so where have you been hey!!! and even back in the previous century you had sledging and cheating just think back to WG Grace's time he called a batsman over for a chat after the ball had been played and the batman decided he wouldn't run and then wg grace ran him out, don't you think that was a bit low, and there was a story about an indian cricketer doing something not so sportsmanlike also about that time in history. so the history of cricket is not neccessarily a gentlemans game then nor is it now, just they did not have the media as they do now, so pull your head out of the sand and look at cricket in perspective any sport that is competitive as cricket is you will have teams playing it tough and hard and rough and yes underhanded at times doesn't make it right but humans are competitive by nature, just don't take it so personally, I don't I'm sure others don't either well would hope to think that they don't.
