Bhajji banned, I say call off the series (Page 7)

 hmmm...true...I think this test match should be annulled but the series should go on with different umpires...and of course ban on Bhajji should be revoked!

 

 Wonder what ICL had to say about this controversy...all I heard was a monologue happy Navjot Sidhu all over all news channels having a ball!

Aap keh muh mein Ghee Shakkar

HOT OF THE SAHARA SAMAY NEWS CHANNEL [10: pm pacific time].

The BCCI has finally taken a stand. The BCCI is informing the ICC that the 2nd test was unfair, and the banning of Harbajan for his so called "racist remark" is totally bizarre. India as a country that has always opposed racism in any shape or form. The BCCI has also asked the two umps be removed from further matches. The BCCI will not tolerate any unfair treatment of it's players in the face of lousy and biased officiating.

As of now Team India is staying put in Sydney, and it is unclear if that is the decison of the BCCI or the initiative of Team India.  Kumbley's stand not to play any more matches till Harbajan is reinstated has not been addressed by the BCCI.

Apparently Kumbley has emerged as a true leader for Team India, since he has taken a firm stand stating that his team has taken all the abuse for the past five days, and the BCCI needs to stand firmly behind them or they will return to India effective immediately.

Meanwhile the Janta Janardhan of India is in total agreement with Kumbley and is demanding the BCCI to pressurize the ICC to issue a decision on the ban against Bhajji, by days end, or have Team India return home.

Edited by bunbutt_too - 06 January 2008 at 11:32pm

I think Sreesanth is soo lucky not play against aus otherwise...it will be his last game....

Edited by Believe - 06 January 2008 at 11:16pm

At one point Sahara Samay's reporters were stating that Team Australia had originally planned all this against Sreesant. However because he was not included in the team due to his injury, they truned their attack towards Harbajan.  Again, all this is hear say, but that is what was being reported earlier this evening.

I liked the article by Peter Roebuck in the Sydney Herald. It would be unprecedented if the test match is annulled but it would be the right thing to do.


Print this article |   Close this window
Dodgy deeds leave sour taste

Peter Roebuck
January 7, 2008
Advertisement

INDIA have been dudded. No one with the slightest enthusiasm for cricket will take the least satisfaction from the victory secured by the local team in an SCG Test that entertained spectators, provided some excellent batting but left a sour taste in the mouth.

It was a match that will have been relished only by rabid nationalists and others for whom victory and vengeance are the sole reasons for playing sport. Truth to tell, the last day was as bad as the first. It was a rotten contest that singularly failed to elevate the spirit.

Until another shocking decision was made by a 61-year-old umpire, reliable in his time but past his prime, the fifth day of this unattractive contest was offering plenty of tension to put alongside the memorable hundreds contributed by capable batsmen on both sides. Thereafter they might as well have drawn stumps, as all interest had been removed. Once justice and fair play have been ejected there is no point in playing the game.

Whilst Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly were at the crease it seemed India might escape with a draw. Had the umpiring been even remotely acceptable on the opening days or had replays been used to give embattled umpires a chance, they might perchance have won the contest, but that will forever remain in the land of conjecture. Australia had regrouped and set a stiff target and a badly chosen Indian batting order had faltered. Thereafter it was a matter of trying to save the match.

India's former captains stayed together till tea and afterwards continued their attempt to negotiate the 46 overs that still remained as a result of the lamentable over rates indulged in by both sides, and especially the visitors. By now Ricky Ponting had thrown the ball to his spinners and asked them to land the ball in the rough. Ponting's street fighter instincts have emerged in this contest, and it has not always been a pretty sight. By now the Australians were starting to press the umpires with appeals, dirty looks and questions. Cricketers know that umpires are vulnerable on the fifth afternoon, when even the most seasoned white coat can succumb to pressure created by weariness and the frenzy of eager fieldsmen around the bat.

Dravid found himself facing Andrew Symonds. Beyond argument, Dravid's was the crucial wicket. He had been dropped once at first slip off a snorter from Mitchell Johnson. But he had looked better balanced at the crease and more upright in his strokes. From a distance it seemed the worst was over. Although not exactly an immovable object, he looked solid enough to save his side.

Then came the moment that compromised all subsequent events, rendering meaningless the continuation of Australia's run of victories. Dravid thrust his pad forward at a wide delivery and wisely took the precaution of tucking his bat out of harm's way. The ball brushed the front pad and was taken by the local gloveman, a man with a high reputation for sportsmanship. Adam Gilchrist and his comrades around the bat immediately roared a raucous appeal. Gilchrist was especially animated. To think, there was a time when teammates chided him for holding back.

Doubtless, the fieldsmen heard a noise, but canvas and wood make different sounds, a fact known to every cricketer. That the bat was hidden away behind the body was surely more obvious from behind. Doubtless, the Australians will argue that excesses of this sort are commonplace elsewhere. But they were stoking the fires of an angry contest.

If the appeal was bad, the decision was worse. A mild-natured and intelligent man, Dravid departed shaking his head slowly as the Australians celebrated. Instead, they should have been fearing the damage done to their reputations. Already scorned by the English, they may find themselves under the cosh in a country where most of them make most of their money. Despite the amiability of many players, Ponting's team is developing an unwanted reputation for being headstrong and precious. Matthew Hayden's belittling of Anil Kumble's bowling at the MCG was a case in point.

Nor was that all. Ganguly's departure was also debated. An edge flew low to Michael Clarke at slip and the catch was claimed. Replays were inconclusive and the batsman stood his ground. He remembered that the catcher waited to be given out after being taken at slip. In these circumstances, the umpires in the field have been urged to make the decision. But that was not enough for an agitated Australian captain. Just to help the umpire make up his mind, Ponting held up a finger to indicate the catch had been taken. Having recalled an opponent prepared to take his word in the first innings, he expected to be believed. Unfortunately, Australia had long since left the high ground.

Certainly the match gripped the crowd. Ultimately Australia secured a 16th consecutive victory as Clarke struck. Kumble trooped forlornly from the field and reached the boundary before any Australian thought to shake his hand. Others may be caught up in the euphoria. It is to be earnestly hoped that at least a vestige of sportsmanship is observed when the teams next meet in Perth. What happens in the middle has a nasty habit of spreading further afield.

This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/01/06/1199554486052.html