This was a conspiracy help Australia win the series. Which they might anyway, but definitely not with the similar authority they used to show in the field. But this has raise curtain to a bigger stage. If saying is everything to prove a charge against somebody, then I am bringing a charge that this way (by imposing ban on Vajji) the Ausi Cricket team and the ICC match refry has insulted the whole Indian nation as well as all non-whites. I would also like to remind these racists that India is a country who still worship the great M.K.Gandhi as our "Father of Nation". By saying us racist Proctor is insulting him too. Has he forgot what we have done for his country?
And all you ICC people, just remember, if India alone disagrees to play for you. Or even stand against you you will be no better than beggars. Reasons well known to you.
I demand the match result to be erased from record book or to judged as drawn.
RE:This is a conspiracy
by Sunny Cricket on Jan 28, 2008 12:07 PM
Well said Sourav, I too have the same opinion as you have. I also demand the Sydney match result should be erased from the record book.
Actually, it appears that Andrew Symonds was just a pawn in the game of bringing down Harbhajan Singh. Just see the background: Harbhajan had been batting quite well and more importantly he had become a serious threat to the performance of Ricky Ponting. So they hatched the plot to have him officially thrown out for the balance test matches in the series. The Aussie know the mental make up of each Indian test cricketer. Who will react and how much. They selected Harbhajan Singh as he believes in giving back. They started making comments and riled up Harbhajan. Then came the opportunity : the back patting of Brett Lee. Make no mistake, if that had not happened, the Aussie would have drummed up something else. They had the services of both the umpires, eager to help them out. The idea was to get rid of Harbhajan by some means. Now Mike Proctor's statement: He has said that he was not concerned with the circumstances leading upto the alleged utterance of the objectionable word. How can he say that? It is fundamental to any trial for any offence. If an offence has been committed, the Judge would like to find out why was it committed? What were the reasons or cirumstances that compelled the person to do whatever he has been charged with. Generally no offence is committed without certain provocation and type of offence would depend upon the gravity of the provocation. It was his bounden duty to find out what Symonds said preceding the alleged utterence of the object
RE:Mike Proctor rulingt
by Ashish Kumar on Jan 26, 2008 10:25 PM
U r expecting Mike Proctor, the dim-wit racist, to be judicious! He sees one set of logic for Latif another for Ponting and a third for Harbhajan. He believes in right of the might - the rule of the old order.
Wah wah Mr. Proctor. Your decision is solely depending upon what the Australians say. You say, Sachin was not there when this happened. Mr. Proctor, were YOU there?
Mr. Gavaskar very correctly commented that you preferred to give a decision against a BROWNIE in favour of your race, the WHITES.
After all, it is very easy to give a decision against Asians and keep them defending.
MR. PROCTOR, YOU COME FROM A RACIST APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA AND NOTHING DIFFERENT IS EXPECTED FROM YOU.
Ponting is a SMALLER monkey, Symonds is a BIGGER monkey, Hayden is a VERY BIG monkey and you Mr. Proctor, is the BIGGEST of all these monkeys.
RE:Procter is a racist
by Calspadeaspade on Jan 26, 2008 09:40 PM
Yes. Nottoo long ago he belonged to a country that practiced worst form of official racism. How can we bebeive that his attitude has changed within this short time.
I feel frustrated and irritated by this biased and racist Whites in ICC. If you guys cannot take the non white nations dominating the sport, just say it loud and you guys play among yourself. IF YOU HAVE BALLS OF STEEL do it. HOW CAN SOME ONE GIVE A VERDICT WITH OUT PROOF, ITS JUST COMMON SENSE THAT TELLS PROCTOR IS THE REAL RACIST HERE. Australia fabricated a false case on Bujji and Proctore took the words of accusing as proof and ruled a judgment. He not only insulted Bujji, he insulted whole nation. Any lawyer from India should file a case on Mr Proctor. He should also explain why Latif was banned and not Ponting ? Pay the price if you do not do your job with dignity and unbiased.
RE:Sue Mr Proctor
by sd on Jan 26, 2008 06:31 PM
And these whites are in the ICC at India's cost which provides them with 90% of their total income.
Symonds should not have been concerned if Bhajji patted Lee. Obviously, they hatched a conspiracy and played it. Proctor was also a party to the conspiracy. Bucknor added to it with his bias against India.
Come back from the tour, Form an independent International Cricket Council, Involve other Asian nations and play amongst themselves. Let the white monkeys play on their own trees.
As usual, BCCI is not strong in its approach. They would have publicly made a statement that in fact Symonds, Hayden, Ponting, Clerk and Proctor are racists and are trying to shift the charge of racism on Indian players. What are they afraid of any way? If these whites had as much money as the BCCI has, they would even not play with Asians!
MUDDAI SUST, GAWAH CHUST......means the person who should be one of the party (Brett Lee in this case) has no interest in the incident but the self made witness (Symonds) is trying hard to make it a GIANT issue.....FUNNY
I am driving a car with my friends and I hit Mr procter on the road.....surprising case is filed by me and Judge gives his judgement that Mr Procter is guilty based on the FACE VALUE of my friends who are sitting with me in car......:)
Can anybody help me to send this message to Mr Procter......so that he will know the meaning of JUSTICE
Mr. Mike Proctor, THE WHOLE WORLD IS AWARE ABOUT YOUR STANCE AGAINST THE PLAYERS OF THE SUB CONTINENT SPECIALLY OF INDIA, PAKISTAN AND SRI LANKA. IF HARBHAJAN HAD TOLD SOMETHING WHEN HE WAS PROVOKED BY SYMONDS, YOU SHOULD HAVE TAKEN THAT ALSO IN CONSIDERATION BUT YOUR ACT SHOWS YOUR BIAS TOWARDS THE INDIANS. YOU ALWAYS GAVE YOUR RULINGS AGAINST THE INDIANS AND FAILED TO KEEP UP TO THE HIGH STANDARD OF NON BAISED ATTITUDE WORTHY OF YOUR POSITION. SO PLEASE BEAR IN MIND THAT WHEN YOU ARE A JUDGE, YOU SHOULD RISE ABOVE ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AND YOUR JUDGEMENT SHOULD NOT BE BIASED. LALIT
RE:YOUR BIAS TOWARDS INDIANS ARE A WELL KNOWN FACT
by indira on Jan 25, 2008 05:45 PM
Well said. The very fact that Proctor(a white) believed the Aussies' (whites) words against the Indians proves he is a racist.
RE:YOUR BIAS TOWARDS INDIANS ARE A WELL KNOWN FACT
by Kerry Hadley on Jan 25, 2008 06:01 PM
lalit, you lose that fact that symonds is a black man not white. so you are also saying that a black mans word is not good enough either only an indians word matters,
I think your bias towards non indians is a well know fact.
RE:YOUR BIAS TOWARDS INDIANS ARE A WELL KNOWN FACT
by Subhabrata Roy on Jan 25, 2008 06:26 PM
Kerry perhaps you are not aware of the facts.. and you should instead of the being biased understand few facts:
1. You cannot under any law use the version of the person who complained as an evidence.. In this case Symonds said Harbhajan said the word "monkey" to him.. Harbhajan denies that. So this cannot be a conclusive evidence against Harbhajan.. If Symond's version is an evidence then Harbhajan's statement is also an evidence in his favor..
2. The other evidences found are statements of Aussie players.. Can you treat this as evidence??
3. No umpires, no channel 9 cameras could show the evidence.. In this time where even a gesture in the crowd is under scanner no slide was found where Harbhajan said the word "monkey"
So its basically as Aussies has said that Harbhajan said Symonds a monkey, its proved..
For your information it was same Mike Procter who banned Rashid Latif the then pakistan captain for wrongfully claiming a catch citing improper conduct. What was he doing now?? Ponting claimed the wicket of saurav Ganguly wrongly (all television replays suggested that)..
Come on Kerry.. at least be honest..(However I dont expect it from you)
RE:RE:YOUR BIAS TOWARDS INDIANS ARE A WELL KNOWN FACT
by Kerry Hadley on Jan 26, 2008 06:01 AM
In normal circumstances one word against another may not be taken as proof, but and I say but, there are witnesses to say that he did, even in a court of law, that will be taken into account. you cannot take into account the word of one who didn't hear anything due to not being in earshot of what was said and only came over once he was aware. you are taking a lot out of context and putting own spin on it.
if it was the other way around and harby had 2 witnesses to say he didn't say it then that would have to be accepted. it has nothing to do with whether they where Indians or Australians. I am well aware of the facts.
just because they are Australians matters not, their word is just as valid and to infer they are not smacks plainly of BIAS and Libel.
this stupid notion of collusion to get harby is just plain nonsense and a smoke screen to take away the actual issue.
common sense tell you that if you are going to say something that may well land you into trouble you are not going to say it within earshot of a stump mike. and seeing harby's back was turned the camera could not get view of his face. but what video was taken when symonds had replied and the words I quote where "so I am a monkey am I" his words not mine.
as far as rashid latiff goes, there is actual evidence showing that he tried to claim a catch that bounced twice. so that is justified.
you are whining about ponting, I have seen catches like these given before, (Australia not being invo
RE:YOUR BIAS TOWARDS INDIANS ARE A WELL KNOWN FACT
by raj on Jan 26, 2008 01:03 PM
thats your take on the whole issue. you feel that this is the right version.
after some banter, symonds mouths "so I am a monkey am I" . bhajjie is completely stumped by that, you can even see his response - totally flummoxed. symonds then creates a ruckus about the whole issue. its plain and simple bhajjie has been framed due to his past record in mumbai, procter held that as history behind bhajjie and symonds. its plain BS. procter is biased as hell. i'll take the word of sachin , the umpires of not hearing any such words being uttered, and symonds is no angel.
RE:YOUR BIAS TOWARDS INDIANS ARE A WELL KNOWN FACT
by CricFan01 on Jan 27, 2008 02:12 AM
Mr Kerry, That is your opinion. But Sachin told that he Harbhajan did not say the word, but Mr.Procter somehow inferred that Sachin did not hear anything. So does that mean Sachin is a liar? Just because 2 other Aus players said they heard it does not mean it is true. As per Procter, Sachin did not hear it, so how could Ponting or Hayden (who were standing on other side of pitch) heard it? Does it mean that Indian players word is not good enough? If this is the standard then tomorrow anyone can complain to the referee and get 2-3 other team mates to be witnesses and get at the opposition players. Ponting and the Aus have started something that may come back at them later.
RE:YOUR BIAS TOWARDS INDIANS ARE A WELL KNOWN FACT
by Kerry Hadley on Jan 26, 2008 05:39 AM
mmspm, idiot, I asked a question, and you come back with this well you can't answer the question I guess because the answer will confirm that the bias really belongs to you.
I have no bias towards Indians, blacks white etc. but with all this whineing by the Indian supporters doesn't put your people in a good light does it, why you are whineing about australia the rest of the world is watching you.
remember Indian supporters and players are no shining light in saintly behaviour.
there is a saying that goes like this, "Those without sin cast the first stone" think about it you might be enlightened.
