Streaker Advice

Tip: If you have to streak at Brisbane, don't run near to Andrew Symonds...

Harbhajan gets off?

Harbhajan Singh’s appeal for his ban for allegedly racially abusing Andrew Symonds has been upheld. Quite often in these cases we are left with a bad taste in the mouth, a feeling that there is no smoke without fire and that Singh ‘got away with it’, probably on a technicality. That was my initial reaction and I have heard a few people voice the same. The Australian cricket team certainly feel this way. To quote Ricky Ponting:

"The judge has made it pretty clear today that even he was a bit disappointed with the severity, or non-severity, of his findings, basically because he wasn't handed some pretty vital and important information," ... "There's no doubt that there'd be a few players in the Australian dressing-room that would be a little bit disappointed with the outcome as well, knowing what we now know.”

However, before we consign another spat into history and secretly blacken Harbhajan’s name it may be worth a quiet discussion of what actually happened.

You can read the hearing transcript at http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2007-08/IND_IN_AUS/icc_commissioner_decision_30012008.pdf. Some points from it (italics denote direct quotes)

1. Brett Lee bowled an excellent yorker at Singh who just managed to get a bit of bat on it and scored runs. As they passed Singh patted Lee on the backside, anyone who plays cricket will recognise this as an indication of ‘well bowled’.

2. Symonds took exception to this action and “approached Harbhajan Singh and told him that he had no friends amongst the Australians (he admits he used the word ‘fuck’ or a derivation thereof). Singh used similar language to Symonds and neither took offence at that stage.”

3. However the exchange caused Singh to become angry and he motioned to Symonds to come towards him. Singh then said something to Symonds.

When asked why Symonds took exception he said (and I kid you not, this is his reply at the hearing):

MR MANOHAR: You had any objection to that patting on the back?
MR SYMONDS: Did I have an objection to it – my objection was that a test match is no place to be friendly with an opposition player, is my objection.

So… Symonds deliberately walked up to Singh and used abusive language just because he showed a bit of sportsmanship and friendship. What sort of an attitude is that? I think Symonds should take a long look at his actions and consider setting an example for others to follow rather than deplore.

What Singh said to Symonds is the point of the hearing. Several people (Symonds, Clarke and Hayden) say they heard the word ‘monkey’ or ‘big monkey’ although only Symonds was close to Singh. Tendulkar did not hear ‘monkey’ and was quite close. Singh and Tendulkar claim the word ‘teri maki’ was used which is an insult in his native tongue and could be misheard as ‘monkey’. Symonds does not deny ‘teri maki’ was used.

I am personally disgusted at Symonds attitude and actions; they have no place on a cricket field. It seems fairly likely that Singh used ‘teri maki’ and quite rightly was cleared of the offence.

Double Standard

The controversial Australia v India Test Match at Sydney has attracted much media attention and this blog has started just too late to get involved. However, there was one incident that was not given the coverage it deserved. In the Australian first innings Andrew Symonds was given not out when he edged a ball from Ishant Sharma. Symonds had several more dubious decisions go his way and went onto make 162 not out. At the press conference at the end of the first day, Symonds said:

"I was very lucky. I was out when I was 30, given not out. That's cricket though. I can sit here and tell you about my bad decisions as well, but I won't"

How can he get away with saying that? Surely this is undermining the umpire at the very basic level. He is not giving an opinion, he is saying that he knows he hit the ball and umpire was wrong. What would happen if Ishant Shama had said (which he did not)

"I was unlucky today. I had Symonds out when he was on 30 but the umpire was wrong. That may have lost us the test match"

I would suggest that Sharma would have had a severe reprimand and at the very least been fined. Why was Symonds not fined for undermining the umpire?