Strip Sydney Test of its Official Status!

Strip Sydney Test of its Official Status!

Australia: World beaters or World cheaters?

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

The only logical manner that cricket can now move on at a saner level is if the Sydney Test is stripped off its official status. It will not be the first time (remember the last time India, and Sachin Tendulkar in particular, was targeted by then match referee Mike Denness in South Africa). Consider the other options. Consider the magnitude of the repercussions. This is not about one-upmanship. This is about delivering justice, where it belongs.

Consider for the moment that not one or two but a good many instances where the umpires have botched up the rules of ruling someone out. Consider the impact where at least seven of the alleged bad decisions were declared wrong when all an opposition side needs is 20 wickets to win a match. This was simply not a case of the umpires getting it wrong. To err is human; to be bias, is to aid the opposition.

Admittedly India's batting on the final day of the second Test in Sydney was far from encouraging, especially given that India had done so well in the first innings to set the cat amongst the pigeons for Australia. Australia were determined to shake India’s morale. Instead they have only highlighted their bullying ways and ungentlemanly approach to the game, whose crown they wear but whose respect they have failed to command.

The guffaws must be really loud. How does one gentleman’s rule apply to India and not apply to Australia? Adam Gilchrist’s comments to a channel here in India spoke of downright double standards. When Gilchrist asserts that India should accept the umpire’s decision, why is it that on more than one occasion, Ricky Ponting has stood his ground in sheer arrogance? Had the tables been reversed, would Australia stand for this blatant one sided affair? If Ponting is acting dictatorial with the media about being questioning on his double stand on how the game should be played, does not a player of Sachin Tendulkar’s stature speak of a greater integrity when he claims Harbhajan made no racist remarks to warrant this punishment?

Ponting is asserting Michael Clarke has taken the catch cleanly when the replays clearly show that there is more than an element of doubt to suggest Sourav Ganguly was only given out under dubious circumstances. While the members of the Australian team had conveniently brushed it as Mark Benson’s oversight in not consulting with the square leg umpire (thought given that that gentleman was Steve Bucknor, would it have been any different?) , the fact remains that Ponting is claiming a significant wicket. Who gave him the authority to decide who goes (having seen as it can be so biased) just as who did give him the authority to decide how the media should report? How does anyone believe when the captain has claimed a catch when the captain himself stands blatantly despite being out? Is this honesty, or Australia’s meaning of honesty, like their interpretation of racism?

Gilchrist may have made walking a new phenomenon for Australian cricket but to claim mighty that he does not make appeals unnecessarily and that it is India who have gone over the top is foolhardy. Need we remind Gilchrist of his vociferous appeal against Rahul Dravid in the second innings when the bat was nowhere close to the ball? Australia were desperate for victory, and they did employ the sub continent’s tactics of vociferous appealing, and rather needlessly so. Did they not succeed?

The loopholes are many. Consider the fact that these nonsensical charges of racism were labeled by Ponting on behalf of Andrew Symonds and the testimony on which Harbhajan was slapped the three match ban came through Matthew Hayden and Michael Clarke. In the same manner that without evidence, the committee decided to pass judgement against Harbhajan, why was the word of Sachin Tendulkar not taken into account? Does Sachin not command respect simply for the way he has played the game all these years, forget Ponting’s colourful past?

The result simply shows insensitivity in understanding such serious allegations of racism. Racism is not even a concept in India. Yes, casteism is understandable, although deplorable. But racism is a raging matter in Australia where the aborigines for long have been handed a raw deal. Perhaps the word has become rather loose to rattle at the first hint of disruption.

Symonds is playing cry wolf. When it didn’t work in India, he has done it again back home. Someone of his own background must be careful of not degrading the meaning of the word ‘race’, because the word soon loses its charged meaning when used so blatantly. What it once again shows is the divisive nature even in the ten nations that this ‘world’ game is played. Is Symonds the type who will stand still while he is childishly labeled a ‘monkey’? Would the pictures lie when they show that more words were exchanged by Symonds rather than Harbhajan Singh?

If conspiracy theories must abound, this was a well planned ploy. Australia have already had their sixteen match winning streak broken once. That too, humilitation handed by India. The way India bounced back in Sydney, another upset was on the cards. Whether the umpires were adhering to the white supremacy theory or if Bucknor has coloured his vision is subject to debate. But this was an obvious attempt to shift the focus and what could be more poignant that shaking the one man Australia thought was an easy subject? How else does one explain how the two teams appeared to make truce on the field only to have the issue take of racist allegations when the day’s play was done with?

The thing about Steve Bucknor’s age and vision is rubbish. His vision is just fine if he is giving only one team obviously disgraceful levels at the international team (in this case, India, in all cases, India) while the other team is allowed to get away. (the vision of the third umpire may need an optmologist though.) One wondered why Symonds was not sharing the ‘Man of the Match’ trophy with the other ‘men of the match’ Bucknor, Benson and company.

This was well thought out and executed to perfection. Kudos must be given to Australia, not only for playing the game hard, ruthless even in the face of obviously deplorable decisions, but also, bullying the game, the opposition and the ICC authorities to rule in their favour. Australia dare not touch Tendulkar. Dravid has his own grave to ponder over while Ganguly has come back raring stronger. Anil Kumble will fight fire with fire. Who then would make for an easy target and who could be provoked into playing the perfect ‘bakra’ (that goat for non-Hindi folks)?

It is no small matter that Australia have been smarting ever since India won the Twenty20, to even denounce the nature of the format of the game. That Australia nursed that grudge through their one day series in India became pretty obvious as the series progressed. Now it is the threat of the Test series becoming more formidable that set fear in the hearts of the Australian players. Australia has played a rather dirty game off the field, and revealed even the top world beating team is not exempt from behaving shamelessly under the threat of fear and humiliation.

(if anything should come from this, Harbhajan must learn to keep in tongue in check; Australia have just exploited his easily provoked nature to malicious intent.) Sunil Gavaskar hit the nail on the head when he said it was hard to accept the honesty of the players who claims a dishonest catch and who has the temerity to stand his ground when he is obviously out. There is only one way to solve Kapil Dev’s dilemma that five years hence on, everyone will forget the injustice delivered to India. Obliterate the result. India should accept that. Australia must live with that.

Just ask Australia if they would accept their sixteen match streak coming to a halt because of such poor umpiring decisions. Gilchrist says, India must accept the umpire’s decision. If India does accept the loss, who gains by the maladies of the Test? Ponder on that and Gilchrist’s assertions will become easier to understand. If the umpired have sullied the game, Australia have shown why despite being world champions all these years has not improved their reputation as unreasonable bullies for their blatant ungentlemanly conduct, unbecoming of a team and nation of their stature. Sri Lanka have suffered, South Africa have suffered. And it is easy to see why racism is such a ‘hot’ (disgracefully) term in their game. Education is required for Australia and the men who dictate the rules of the game to understand sensitivities of people better than they do the laws of the game.

The only decent way this game can go on is for Australia to get an educated lesson on what constitutes racism , for Harbhajan’s ban to be revoked, for Ponting a lesson on what constitutes the gentleman’s game and whether his authority as Australian captain ends, for Bucknor to bid goodbye to cricket, and for the Sydney Test to be stripped of its official Test status. In the game where so many decisions have been wronged; no other balm can effect a reversal of fortunes or stop the Border-Gavaskar Trophy (ignominious if Australia wins the Trophy on the basis of the Sydney Test) from being unfairly retained by the Australians on the basis of this Test.

If there was a time to rebel for the Indian team, it is now. There is integrity at stake and (not Ponting’s kind of integrity, please) and no sport can be a leveler that chooses to divide peoples of nations and people of one world and worse, promotes behavior that sabotages games by using these divisive forces. Neither the game has won, nor has the people who have followed it. Australia has scream from the rooftops; they did not shape this particular game on their cricketing acumen.

If a middle ground cannot be found, if such a champion beating side cannot decipher that their opposition has been handed a raw deal (which could also mean Australia is afraid to take on the challenge again in trying to retain the trophy), India must pack its bags. Forget financial repercussions; there is a lot more at stake here and it simply ain’t cricket, mate! Who wants to play a game like this, let alone watch it?

(As for public information, the author of this piece did not grow up as a fan of Indian cricket. As a sports writer-columnist, she has tempered an objective view about the game and it is from this that steams the anger at the obvious sullying of a game she so reveres. Again for the sake of those myopic to view this as anti-Australian, the author holds the game in reverence as does the champions, but not their unruly behavior. Besides, Australia is much too beautiful a country to be done in by a couple of their uncouth cricketers.)

free-website-hit-counters.com

SL : Another One bites the Dust!

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Sri Lanka is perhaps the one team besides New Zealand who seemed to have a hang of the tournament. Dark horses perhaps, but decidedly Sri Lanka was showing the mature side if Pakistan could curb its temperamental ways. India was thrown in with England as two of the worst teams of the tournaments; harsh perhaps but there was too much deviation to predict. Sri Lanka though flopped at their worst moment. The result: it was not a pretty sight!

Australia were riding on a prayer and their final league match against Sri Lanka to make it to the final four. Men of cricketing acumen concurred: Sri Lanka deserved it more than Australia. Australia, one felt, never really tuned in to the tournament and paid a face losing price for their debacle against a zealous Zimbabwean squad. Sri Lanka were always brimming with confidence and seemed they could put no foot wrong.

Sri Lanka were on a high with Sanath Jayasuriya, the thirty-seven year old veteran of the bombastic bat, roaring like his hey days of the limited overs World Cup of 1996. It would then have to be said that Sri Lanka’s fall from grace had much to do with the luck of the charismatic all-rounder. Jaysuriya was taken to the cleaners by Pakistan and his lbw against Australia waylaid Sri Lanka beyond recovery point.

The hurdles grew and so did Sri Lanka’s woes. Against Australia, Sri Lanka failed to simply wind down. Their gung-ho attitude of the earlier games failed to sublimate as the Australian bowlers proved too hot to handle. But at least a couple of dismissals were soft, suggesting a greater subdued application at the crease could have seen better times for Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka were blown away by the speed of the game and by a man people are unfairly likening to Glen McGrath. Stuart Clark would like his own identity and certainly after the way he systematically decimated Sri Lanka’s pride and performance, he is not a man to take lightly.

One had to blink twice to see a side five down with virtually nothing on board. Even the minnows have not fallen as badly. Coming from Sri Lanka, it was a shocker. From being the favourites to put it past the world champions who failed to overcome Pakistan in their previous game, Sri Lanka put up a limp performance that every one would like to forget in a hurry.

Undoubtedly Sri Lanka’s worse day of the tournament and unfortunately at a stage of no comebacks. As well as Sri Lanka have performed, they simply did not have enough in the bank to overcome this horrendous performance. For the tournament, the timing of this clash could not have been any better. Not only was this a match between the so called favoruites and the so called fallen champions, it was also a knock out match that should have ideally brought out the best of both teams and made this a teething tussle.

But Sri Lanka put up their toothless side on show; the much hyped clash appeared never to have arrived. Now the much shell shocked Sri Lanka will find themselves on the flight back, their campaign to the inaugural Twenty20 cut short cruelly by their own inability at application as also, a resurgent performance from the slighted world champions.

Australia should consider themselves to have survived the vagaries of their shock and awe performances. Now they will in all likelihood without the resources of their skipper Ricky Ponting who was left shamefaced after their first loss to Zimbabwe. But Australia are finding their feet in this tournament and on their day, can blow away the opposition like they did to Sri Lanka. Australia will hope to capture that essence in the semi-final in order to reach the final pinnacle.

Australia have put their defeats past them and with this close to laying their hands on a second World Cup trophy in a year, will now go for crowning glory. Australia will be the team to beat, although that is not how all cricket fans would have liked it. Australia are the overwhelming favourites to be the least favourite side to win the tournament, if the fans were concerned. The green and gold have had it all too much for the fans to settle for more of the same. The tournament perhaps deserves a brand new champion. But this time it would be Sri Lanka who stands in Australia’s way!

Time to Play that Forgotten Series

By Trevor Chesterfield

Ten months ago, well . . . a little less now as we are nearing the end of June, there was mayhem and a lot of finger pointing going on in Colombo.
South Africa, led by Mark Boucher, were caught in the middle of what turned out to be an assassination attempt on the Pakistan High Commissioner, and decided enough was enough. Home, with its hijackings and daylight robberies, came the suggestion was felt to be a lot safer.
This was, of course, despite police suggesting armoured protection, wearing bullet vests, and other extreme safety precautions. Forgotten was that despite the deluge at the end of the monsoon season, a triangular series was about to be played.
No matter all the good intentions, dressing up players in garb designed to stop your every day chandiya (thugs) from causing disorder is going to be the first indication that while they are here to play Sri Lanka and India, cricket has become an incidental part of the visit.
Now, if you read the itinerary South Africa have agreed to on their tour of Pakistan in a couple of months to play in Karachi, where they riot over exorbitantly long power cuts and storm banks and wreck restaurants in the process. Pakistan is a nation where extremism leads to journalists being beheaded.
In fact, a quick check of failed states has Pakistan in the top 10 bracket and Karachi is not a city where tourists of any sort willingly tread. But typecasting cities and stereotyping its citizens as betel chewing terrorists is a generalising insult to the country, Karachi as a city, and its teeming population.
Even in Colombo, you won't find Chandiyas lurking at every street corner and trishaw jockeys are fair-minded types. They may try and wheedle the extra few rupees out of what tourists there are, but that is part of the fun in hiring a trishaw. Living in this part of the world, by choice, is what you make of it.
Even in New Zealand, an email from a relative suggests that in the city of my Alma Mater, Wanganui, they now have drive-by shootings. Yeah. Sure it gets scary.
The point here is that South Africa owe Sri Lanka a postponed limited overs series. If the Safs (the name Proteas, a spiky flower without any genuine scent, is one that has never sat comfortably in my thoughts), can go to Karachi in Pakistan, what is wrong with Colombo?
Oh, okay . . . If they insist on playing it in Dambulla, fine. Let's go to Dambulla and visit the Rock Temple on a day off. Even climb the world cultural heritage site of Sigiriya, if my legs can take it.
As part of the agreed future tours programme, and not something that has been sneaked as an extra (as the West Indies Cricket Board had the cheek to do), the Unitech Series is still an event that has to be played as part of the general programme.
No doubt, while they are at Lord's, in London, before sitting down to the annual dinner with its foie gras patê starter and chilled Chablis, with discredited types as Zimbabwe's Peter Chingoka and his chief executive side kick, Bvute, Sri Lanka Cricket's chairman and CEO, Jayantha Dharmadasa and Duleep Mendis might remind the South African delegation of their obligations.
Just a tap on the shoulder would do. They have, it is understood from sources in the Caribbean, already met and discussed the issue of the shelved series. Emirate sources also suggest that if the South Africans are still concerned about playing in Sri Lanka, there are alternative venues available.
Remember if you will that Australia went this route some years ago and borrowed P Saravanamuttu Oval for the first Test all because of the riots in Pakistan. At least Colombo is far safer than Karachi. They may hold demonstrations, and protest about certain aspects of life, but you don't get riots, even over power cuts.
There is nothing wrong with South Africa playing the series here this time of year; or any time of year as long as it doesn't coincide with the worst days of the monsoon. Security is pretty good. So, what's the beef? If it’s scheduling, the games can be played before the Pakistan tour as Sri Lanka, until the marshmallow twenty/20 event in South Africa in September, have a free period. So, what's wrong with an extra slog series being added to the programme?
The only complaint here is that hopefully visiting journalists won't be used to try and get in on the act and urged by others, tell me what I should and should not write, as happened last time.
Cricket South Africa have come out in support of the International Cricket Council's decision to ban officials who were involved in the World Cup final debacle, Rudi Koertzen among them.
The CSA chief executive, Majola, talking from London, said the decision to suspend the five officials from the World Twenty20 Championships in South Africa was to 'be applauded'. This was despite the suspension 'of South African cricket's favourite son, Rudi Koertzen, we feel that match officials need to be punished, like captains and players, for transgressions. We at CSA took a decision at our last meeting to request the ICC to adopt this approach after several major blunders by match officials. Captains are fined and face suspensions for relatively minor infringements of the regulations such as slow over rates, yet officials get away with errors that change the outcome of matches. We believe they, too, need to be held accountable for their actions.'
Ironically, Koertzen and match referee Jeff Crowe, in Sri Lanka for the Tests against Bangladesh, are two of the officials who have been banned for that tournament. Not that they'll miss it. Like rugby and football, Twenty/20 is about as palatable as sucking on an after dinner mint: tacky and forgettable.
While Crowe shouldered the blame for the World Cup final fiasco, the former New Zealand captain wasn't the only one at fault. No doubt when he's next back in South Africa, he will enjoy a bottle of one of the world's great wines, Warwick 'three ladies' from the small estate in the Mulder's Vlei (river) Valley. It has been ranked along with that of some of the best Medoc wines of which Chateau Margeaux comes at a much higher price.