Actually the problem is with the BCCI who do not take up these issues with the ICC. Unless the boards in the subcontinent take up such incidents vigorously with the ICC, they will never stop being biased.
The article fails to debate the quality of the decisions handed out even while it discusses its impact. The umpiring decisions and also the match referee's decisions have been one-sided ever since India stepped foot in India. Allan Border would do well to read Prem Panicker's recent article on the same issue.
But even while the cricketing world needs to take serious note of these transgressions,especially on the part of one Mr. Bucknor, it is best if the Indian team doesn't get caught up in these issues.
Alan Border is just hiding the fact that Ponting was late by 2.4 overs too (as mention by Prem in his column). Aussies should have batted for 32 overs if the same yardstick was applied to them. It is a sad thing that its always India which gets targeted by umpires.
In the ODI in question even Ricky Ponting should have been fined coz he was slow by 2.4 overs. His delay is ignored but Ganguly's delay of 3 overs is fined heavily. Why this double standards? Similar stuff happened during the test matches too.
Allan Border should first address the over rates of Australians under Steve Waugh before he starts to criticise Indians under Ganguly. He lives in a glass house, yet he dares to throw stones on others. Rediff.com, Times of India and all others who publish this crap from Australians, PLEASE THINK TWICE BEFORE YOU PUBLISH.
I do not understand this. Why doesn't the ICC be impartial? Apparently, even the aussies were a little slow in their over-rate during the tests. How come none talks of that?
It amazes me, for all the money generated by the sub-continent, for all the talent churned out inthe sub-continent, it still remains that the OTHERS call the shots. They rule & we simply follow.
I am sure many have written on this, but, sadly, it doesn't seem to bother the ICC or anyone else. It is so evident, that each time an offense is committed, the punushment meted out for sub-continent players is more than what we see for the OTHERS.
This has to be looked into. That's all my plea is.
The article talks about good Indian performance - Thank you for that Mr. Border. Then again why to bring the issues of slow over rates and the ugly accusation to innocent Dravid in the same breath. If those issues has to be brought up then why not site Australia for slow over rates. And then again why not ask why they got away with it and Ganguly and his gang was penalized. There are more unanswered questions about the umpires behavior and their one sided decisions. The reason Mr. Border is not talking about them because they involve a white country reputation. And since white image must be kept untarnished, hush - dont talk about them.
Mr. Border with all respect, was India the only team in that match to have slow over-rate? WAht about your dear Aussies? Only worse part for Indian team was that they had rain to make bowling worse and that they were 3-overs slow while the counters were 2.4 overs? OR because they are brown? Why just "Indian captain Sourav Ganguly really needs to address this issue."? I agree that "If the game wants to retain its popularity and grow, it cannot be allowed to get slow. It must keep moving and it is the responsibility of players, more so of the captain, to be alert to the matter." But where does Pointing stands in here. He did not face any rain that made bowl wet? He did not have to face left-right batting combinations to adjust the feild after every single scored? Still he managed to be 2.4 overs slow. He was just 2 balls faster than Ganguly and that too under none of the stressing situations. Forget about this match. What happened during the test series. When Indian Team was 15 minutes slow it was a huge issue. AND when Aussies were 45 minutes slow, nothing? The spirit of the game is more damaged when the senior and the respected cricketers like yourself take such a biased stand.
