Cricket is a gentleman’s game, or so they say. I presume the meaning of either of the words “Cricket” or “gentlemen” has changed. Cricket has not remained cricket in its truest sense and the people playing the game haven’t remained gentlemen themselves.
It is so ironic that the allegations of racism being thrown at one particular team and the same team also face the results of ‘magnificent’ and ‘expert’ umpiring skills shown by ‘extremely unbiased and neutral’ umpires and a referee. The ‘gentlemen’ in question are Mr Steve Bucknor, Mr Mark Benson & Mr Mike Procter.
Half of the cricket fans around the globe would agree that umpiring mistakes happen and are as much a part of the game as the wickets and bails themselves. What caused the worldwide wave of dissent among the cricketing community is the number of bad decisions made in single days of a single test. Not surprisingly, team India lost the match, which was a possible win, had Symonds been given out the very first time, when on 30. As we all have seen the fighter named Kumble, determined not to be shaken by the schoolboy umpiring valiantly led his men and seemed to have a draw to his name. The umpires did not want that. Apparently, they presumed they were playing in the Australian team & the record-equaling win would get them some accolades as well!
Peter Roebuck, being an Australian, condemns the way his national team won the match with extremely strong words. He is also much shaken about Harbhajan being banned, as is the case with all true fans of Indian cricket. Two other respected gentlemen responding to the names of David Hopps and Robert Craddock seem to take offence that Bhajji is allowed to play in the 3rd test. To quote them, “… in punishing Harbhajan, cricket is punishing a sinner,” says Mr Hopps. He goes on to say Bhajji might be “mentally disintegrated.” Wow!
And Mr Craddock writes in The Daily Telegraph, that India is committing “… a veiled form of blackmail…” Both seem to have accepted that Harbhajan has made racist comments, and that goes without adequate proof and not even a transparent hearing! If Symonds’ words are proof enough for the match referee, that goes to say a lot about law enforcement in international cricket.
I ask only a simple question: What proof did Symonds provide at the hearing that made the judgment go against India, with the testimonies of other Indian players being ignored??? Mr Hopps & Mr Craddock, I think never bothered to speculate about this. Have they forgotten that Indians are majorly affected by racism, not just in cricket but in various other aspects of life? Ours is a country that has produced the world’s most famous leader who fought against apartheid.
Indians united to fight against this gross injustice meted out in the racism row, and we all vow that unless the proof is made public, the cries of dissent will remain heard. This does not mean that if Harbhajan is truly a culprit, he will not be shown pity. All’s well that ends well, and what remains to be seen is if it is ever found out that who is the culprit and who is the victim.
Comments
Post a Comment