PDA

View Full Version : Haddin and Johnson should have been banned : Boycott


Neel Here
December 24, 2009, 04:33 PM
AR: Up next is Syed from USA, who says Sulieman Benn was banned for two ODIs after his spat with Brad Haddin and Mitchell Johnson in the third Test in Perth. Though he feels Benn's ban was justified, he says Haddin's actions warranted more than just a fine. The spat happened reportedly after Haddin pointed his bat towards Benn following a collision with the bowler. Should not the instigator be penalised as heavily as the one who responds?

GB: Well, I am in full agreement with Syed. Throughout sport the instigator tends to be dealt with more leniently than the players who retaliate. I don't agree with that. If they had both been suspended for two games and Johnson for one, I think that would have been fair. It would have shown to everybody in cricket that any sort of bad behaviour is not going to be tolerated.

http://www.cricinfo.com/talk/content/multimedia/440743.html

some more evidence of how the ICC officials are still heavily biased in favour of the first world players. two sets of rules apply, one for the master nations and one for the slave nations.

BD-Shardul
December 25, 2009, 05:24 AM
The world is not fair borhter :(

Neel Here
December 25, 2009, 05:51 AM
The world is not fair borhter :(

some more examples :
> mcgrath called jayasuria "black monkey". how many matches was he banned ?

> keppler wessels hit kapil dev with a cricket bat in a practice match in RSA, how many matches was he banned ?

> gambhir was banned for 2 matches for an altercation with shane watson after watson obstructed gambhir trying to take a run. why wasn't watson banned ?

> how many australians or english or NZ cricketers have been fined or banned for excessive appealing till date ? forget that, how many have been warned (let alone banned or fined)for claiming drop catches ?

> mike dennis banned SIX indian cricketers in a single test match. how long are we going to take this kind of bias from the cricketing world body ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Denness_and_Indian_cricket_team_incident

> michael slater did what was probably the most rude and offensive gestures ever in cricket at umpire venkat, why wasn't he banned ?

zainab
December 25, 2009, 08:46 AM
I agree, BEnn, Haddin and Johnson should have given the same punishment. the whole world is seeing how unfair and biased these match referees are towards some cricketing countries.There are different rules for some and different rules for others of less stature.
It is as stark as daylight and nobody is protesting, these boards are not protesting, just accepted these unfair decisions. When Shane Watson was doing a war dance and acting as if he was crazy in Chris Gayle's face, he should have been banned, instead, I heard that Chris Gayle was also blamed, because Watson said that Gayle baited him. What a fricasse.
If these antics are not nipped in the bud and given harsher punishments, the younger players will adopt this behaviour, and then cricket will not be a gentleman's game anymore.

Surfer
December 25, 2009, 11:26 AM
some more examples :
> mcgrath called jayasuria "black monkey". how many matches was he banned ?

> keppler wessels hit kapil dev with a cricket bat in a practice match in RSA, how many matches was he banned ?

> gambhir was banned for 2 matches for an altercation with shane watson after watson obstructed gambhir trying to take a run. why wasn't watson banned ?

> how many australians or english or NZ cricketers have been fined or banned for excessive appealing till date ? forget that, how many have been warned (let alone banned or fined)for claiming drop catches ?

> mike dennis banned SIX indian cricketers in a single test match. how long are we going to take this kind of bias from the cricketing world body ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Denness_and_Indian_cricket_team_incident

> michael slater did what was probably the most rude and offensive gestures ever in cricket at umpire venkat, why wasn't he banned ?

Good post Neel. You just mentioned a few. The history of the game is full of such bias. It's unfortunate that in today's date, we have to face this kind of racism.

revolver
December 25, 2009, 01:00 PM
some more examples :
> mcgrath called jayasuria "black monkey". how many matches was he banned ?

> keppler wessels hit kapil dev with a cricket bat in a practice match in RSA, how many matches was he banned ?

> gambhir was banned for 2 matches for an altercation with shane watson after watson obstructed gambhir trying to take a run. why wasn't watson banned ?

> how many australians or english or NZ cricketers have been fined or banned for excessive appealing till date ? forget that, how many have been warned (let alone banned or fined)for claiming drop catches ?

> mike dennis banned SIX indian cricketers in a single test match. how long are we going to take this kind of bias from the cricketing world body ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Denness_and_Indian_cricket_team_incident

> michael slater did what was probably the most rude and offensive gestures ever in cricket at umpire venkat, why wasn't he banned ?

:timeout:...how worse could it get

Neel Here
December 25, 2009, 01:20 PM
I agree, BEnn, Haddin and Johnson should have given the same punishment. the whole world is seeing how unfair and biased these match referees are towards some cricketing countries.There are different rules for some and different rules for others of less stature.
It is as stark as daylight and nobody is protesting, these boards are not protesting, just accepted these unfair decisions. When Shane Watson was doing a war dance and acting as if he was crazy in Chris Gayle's face, he should have been banned, instead, I heard that Chris Gayle was also blamed, because Watson said that Gayle baited him. What a fricasse.
If these antics are not nipped in the bud and given harsher punishments, the younger players will adopt this behaviour, and then cricket will not be a gentleman's game anymore.

cricket was never a gentleman's game unless you mean gentlemen to be simply rich but not well behaved. here's an example

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/397410.html

Mark Greatbatch :You have got to be careful when you are batting. If you get involved too much, you lose your focus to bat. I think Hughes spat at me once in Auckland. He just came down the wicket - and he used to swear all the time - but this time he decided to spit at me, and he got me in the pad. And he got into trouble because he was on TV. He got reprimanded for that.
think what would have happened if this was a sub-continental or WI cricketer ?
2 match ban at the minimum ?

everything was hunky-dory as long as the players from the "second-class" countries took everything lying down. even as late as early 90's there used to be sixteen cameras for matches in which the hujurs(eng & aus) played and only 10 for matches involving other countries.it changed only when bcci read out the riot act to the boards and TV channels and threatened to withdraw telecast rights.
these people will not change unless they are forced to. keep the eyes and ears open and don't hesitate to speak out whenever the situation arises.
it's the least we can do.

Neel Here
December 25, 2009, 01:24 PM
keppler wessels hit kapil dev with a cricket bat in a practice match in RSA, how many matches was he banned ?
I forgot to mention this. the TV channel that was recording the match "lost" the footage ! :rolleyes:

Neel Here
December 25, 2009, 11:47 PM
http://www.cricinfo.com/inline/content/image/440908.jpg?alt=

Neel Here
December 28, 2009, 01:25 AM
another instance.

http://www.cricinfo.com/rsaveng09/content/current/story/441451.html

Sunil Gavaskar alleges nexus over Stuart Broad non-action

Cricinfo staff

December 27, 2009
Text size: A | A
Stuart Broad appeals for lbw during the morning session at Buffalo Park, South African Invitational XI v England XI at East London, December 12, 2009
Sunil Gavaskar: 'Stuart Broad knows he can get away with it and indeed he has.' © PA Photos
Related Links
News : England fume at delayed review
Players/Officials: Chris Broad | Stuart Broad | Sunil Gavaskar
Series/Tournaments: England tour of South Africa
Teams: England

Former Indian captain Sunil Gavaskar believes the reason why Stuart Broad gets away with questioning umpires' decisions all the time is because of his father, Chris Broad, the ICC match referee. Gavaskar said the 23-year-old England fast bowler was an "exceptional cricketer in the making", but was surprised why Stuart had not even been reported or called before the match referee, and had got away scot free for offences that would make others lose a substantial portion of their match fees.

"Stuart's father Chris is one of ICC's match referees and so the umpires are reluctant to make a complaint against the youngster," wrote Gavaskar in his column for Mid-Day, an Indian daily. "Remember the umpires and match referees are used to hanging out together in the evenings since they are in a foreign country and so forge a good relationship and obviously the umpires are not looking to spoil that by citing the young Broad for a violation of the code of conduct."

Gavaskar said the latest instance in South Africa, when Stuart was involved in an ugly on-field exchange with the umpires after being given out lbw following a delayed review from the South Africans, was just one among a long list.

"He knows he can get away with it and indeed he has," Gavaskar wrote. "Stuart has been quoted as saying he didn't think he had done anything wrong in questioning the umpires decision to refer the appeal to the third umpire since he thought that it hadn't come in the expected time but a bit later than is normally the case and therein has confirmed again that he thinks he is a special case and not on par with the rest of the cricketing world."

Former England captains Michael Vaughan and Nasser Hussain, in their columns in English newspapers, have previously highlighted the petulance that Stuart has shown at umpiring decisons ever since he broke into the England team.

"Michael Vaughan and Nasser Hussain in their articles have brought out the petulance of Stuart Broad," Gavaskar wrote. "They have been thinking cricketers and captains during their careers and much admired for the manner in which they conducted themselves on the field...swearing and abusing the opposition when things are not going your way is tough cricket. That in fact is cowardly cricket for the practitioners of this approach would not have the courage to use the same language off the field to their opponents or anyone for that matter and hope to get away with it."


people might also remember that chris broad was the one who punished benn harshly but not the aussies and also gambhir last year but not watson.

Banglatiger84
December 28, 2009, 05:31 AM
Its all about color, unfortunately some people dont like it when people who are supposed to lay low get all uppity like Muralitharan, Ganguly, Wasim Akram etc....

Thats why even though I dislike many of BCCI's actions, i sometimes like it when they hand it back to England/Australia...

DJ Sahastra
December 29, 2009, 12:35 PM
It pays to be rich and powerful anyday.

ICC still suffers from the legacy of the twin Malcolms (both Australians, if i remember correctly). Mike Proctor, Stuart Broad are the remnants of that legacy which only endorsed bootlickers like Ranjan Madugalle and Clive Lloyd out of the non Eng-Aus (and non-white) Referees.

You may not like what Gavaskar has to say and you may have reasons to be annoyed and irritated with BCCI. But Gavaskar stands up like no other for the cause of Asian cricketers and i am thankful that BCCI has started to use its clout. To be treated second-class is no fun.

Banglatiger84
December 30, 2009, 12:45 AM
I was in an airport queue with Stuart Broad and one of his friends in Dubai, when they both just jumped the queue saying something on the lines of "why the **** do we have to stand behind all these ******".

Needless to say they were the only 2 Caucasians in the line...

Now of course I doubt thats something they would have tried in the UK ...