Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
The match referee heard all the testimony & made his decision after a lengthy hearing. I will trust his 8 hours of hearing testimony over the few minutes of edited footage you& I have seen.
|
We Indians trust what Sachin Tendulkar said. He is the man with ethics. He is the person who walked out of the creese when he was out, without waiting for umpires decision. Rather than, believing what Clarke said, who was waiting in creese even if he has clearly nicked a ball to first slip and started waiting for umpires decision.
What happened during hearing, both Indians and Australians gave their statements. Without providing any concrete evidence. So how come, the statements of Australians takes more importance over Sachin Tendulkars statement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
Sorry, that dog won't hunt. Anyone who has spent any time with Australians in virtually any context will be familiar with the way we use the word 'bastard'. it is not used to imply lack of patentage here.
|
This is the classic example of cultural gap. If calling 'bastard' is ok for Australians, Indians dont see offence in calling 'monkey'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
If, as claimed, Indians have suffered under a barrage of sledging lo these long years then they would have heard the word. If Indians find the term particularly offensive they have had decades to make this clear, as we did with 'monkey'. As far as I know this has not been done. The report of Hogg was simply a pathetic attempt at a 'square up'.
|
We understood the cultural gap and taken that word sportively. Same thing would have done by Australians also. There was absolutely no necessity to start this controversy.
If this racism controversy had not been started, it would have only only stand off between India and Umpires.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
So what? I can give you examples of Australians being fined for things that either didn't happen on the field, or didn't happen at all (Glen McGrath allegedly spitting at an Indian player being a case in point - the side on shot was deceptive, the end-on shot showed McGrath many metres away from the player).
|
Lets start digging the past, let us see who finds more incidents
My friends I can assure you that you will find incidents at the ratio of 5:1 against Indians and sub continental players.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
And here we have a classic example of the great double standard at play here. You are complaining about alleged pressure on a match referee to fine a player (I believe the penalty has been voided). Yet you seem unconcerned with a cricket team blackmailing the ICC into changing umpires & ignoring its own match officials.
|
Lets be clear on this, can you list what are the reasons and evidences BCCI is providing to ICC, to change umpire. ICC is not so foolish to simply change umpire.
Then lets validates whether all those reasons and evidences are fair or unfair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
Everyone else here seems determined to drag in whatever past events suit their case (including you). Why do I not get that right?
|
NO, in the beginning of the thread, I have mentioned only current series and incidents in that. I was just responding to your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
And Indians only appeal when they are certain it is out? Spare me.
|
Come on, Pakistanis got fined for accessive appealing. How it is different from Gilchrist appealing for Dravid's catch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
As for Symonds (or any other batsmen) why should they walk.
|
It is called gentlemen's game. Tendulkar walks out if he is sure, he is out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
This test provided many examples of just how many errors umpires can make. As Symonds himself said, he has been given out at times when he knew he wasn't. Most batsmen have been. Why should they walk? Symonds was within his rights to wait for a decision, as was Ganguly in the 2nd innings. You walk when the umpire gives you out.
|
In the 2nd innings, Clarke had grounded the ball and umpire consulted Ricky Ponting what a shame on umpiring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigfella
Second, you are once again showing you bias. I hear team manager Chauhan talk about ALL the decisions going against India. Excuse me? I can think of two blatantly bad decisions that went against us, and then there were the usual collection of solid LBW shouts we didn't get (we do get some, which are usually included in the 'bad decisions' category by the opposition).
|
Excuse me sir, Among 10 bad decisions, only one goes against Australia. This selective bad decisions raises doubts.