I posted this on PA in response to a post by Plough. It is relevant here.......
Quote:Dont need to have played ay cricket to knowledgeable and have an informed opinion of the game. That is quite a stupid statement you make Aussie.
No, you don't but his comments were all about how the Australian Team lacked humility, yet he completely ignored the antics of Harbhijan immediately after he dismissed Ponting. So, I conclude his opinion is ill-informed. Benaud, someone who played the game at Test level, and who is universally accepted as having an informed opinion concluded there was nothing untoward in the behaviour of the Australians.
Quote:As for Harbhijan, There was no recording, the umpiresd heard nothing hence it was his word against the Symonds word. Hardly a fair result given that.
I do not believe it was just one man's word against another. Can anyone point to anyone, including an Indian, who has been quoted as saying that Harbhijan did not abuse Symonds with the monkey? Further, Plough, it might surprise you that many Magistrates are faced with deciding cases by choosing one man's word over another every day of the week. Sometimes, the Magistrate might say he was not satisfied that either party had convinced him, but on other occasions, he wil be confident in accepting one man's word over another.
Quote:That said the Indioans are acting petulant in their disapproval of the decision.
Bloody oath they have. I agree withy Uncanny. Stupid Roebuck. Why make mention of Harb....'s family and refer to him as a 'warrior?' What? As though the Australians are not!! Tosser!
Quote:They did how ever get bent over and buggered up the arse by the umpires and the aussies did rub that in by sporting behaviour that was, while inside the rules, questionable on an ethical/spirit sense.
Sure, the Umpires buggered up. Not for the first time in the history of the game, but this crap from India smacks of sheer petulence from a bunch of losers. Tell me, just exactly what did the Australians do which establishes their behaviour as outside the spirit of the game? bugger me dead........they needed three wicket in two overs. They got them in the second to last. India did not manage to draw that game because three blokes could not handle the powder puffs from Clarke. Saving the game like Australia did in those circumstances will lead to due celebration, and renewed self belief. The Indian sooks lost ''cause they can't bloody bat above school boy level at 8,9,10 and 11.
Quote:Symonds not going when 30 and deffinatley out, Clarke waiting for a decision when he nicked it to slip in the second innings. The whole team celebrating the win in the way they did without regard for their opponent. Protocall would have them shake hands etc before the stupidity of the group hug we saw on the field.
Symonds should never have publicly admitted he hit it. Stupid bastard! As for Clarke, he did what just about every batsman does, waits for the decision. As they say in Rugby League, 'play the whistle!' How many Rugby League players confess they dropped the ball when trying to place it at 'try time!' Why can't Australia celebrate as soon as they win ferfuxsake. They just snatched victory from the jaws of a draw....three wickets in one over to win the game at the last minute, and you expect them to act like students accepting their degree on Graduation Night or would you prefer them to be like Priests dishing out the wine and biccies at Mass? You have to put it all in context. They just pulled off one of the great wins in cricket history, and they celebrated just like any other bunch of human beings would in those circumstances.
Quote:Ps: Ponting needs to go as captain. I have always said any bloke who tries to pick up a trany at the bourbon and beef steak is not fit to captain Australia
Crap. Ponting is leading this Team extremely well. In this case, he did what Malcolm Speed required of him.....i.e. report any accusation of racial abuse.
.................and what is this other slur about pickling up a tranny?
Forum
Pages: 1 
