Making a monkey of fair sportsmanship
January 31, 2008
Threatening to quit is not 'in the spirit of the game'
THE word "monkey" can have different connotations. Chanted by a nasty mob of Indian cricket watchers as they made monkey gestures, it was sheer racial taunting when directed at Andrew Symonds, the only black man in the Australian cricket team visiting the subcontinent last year. In a different sense of the word, India's blackmailing thuggery made monkeys of Australia and the noble game of cricket on Tuesday. After bleating about being the only team upholding the "spirit of the game" during the acrimonious Sydney Test, India, with breathtaking hypocrisy, flexed its billionaire superpower muscle to get spinner Harbhajan Singh off the hook, although it should be noted that appeals commissioner John Hansen said the decision was made on the basis of lack of evidence, rather than any external pressure.
Previously, South African match referee Mike Procter had found Harbhajan guilty of racially abusing Symonds by calling him a monkey.
As in Sydney, where India staged a sit-in by refusing to move on with the tour until they got their way, the Indians holed up in their Adelaide hotel on Tuesday, again under instructions from management. They were ready to pick up their bats and skulk home on a charter plane, organised in advance, if their appeal against Procter's ruling failed. They got their way because these days a fair go and good sportsmanship are no match for the fact that India, with 1.2 billion people, provides 70 per cent of international cricket revenue from television rights. Accordingly, it dominates the administration of world cricket. Faced with the prospect of being sued for $60million for lost broadcast revenue in India if the tourists pulled up stumps, Cricket Australia felt compelled to cave in, allowing the racial slur charge to be dropped. Previously suspended by Procter for three matches, Singh escaped any meaningful penalty, with just a small fine for the lesser crime of using offensive language. While the Australian team seethed in silence yesterday, Indian selector Dilip Vengsarkar made the preposterous suggestion that Symonds and Procter should be punished. For fans, the imbroglio rekindled memories of Australian umpire Darrell Hair being dropped from the International Cricket Council's elite panel of umpires in 2006. That occurred after Pakistan complained about him disciplining its team for ball-tampering against England at The Oval.
Unfortunately, Singh's words are inaudible on the Nine Network video of the Sydney incident. But the recording goes some way towards corroborating the Australians' claims, with Symonds clearly saying: "You called me a monkey again." This was followed by Matthew Hayden saying: "Twice ... you've got a witness now, champ ... it doesn't matter mate, it's racial vilification." Although Indian society is largely structured around the concept of genetic privilege, the nation's cricketers can be quick to accuse others of racism. Sunil Gavaskar, the former Indian captain who now heads the ICC's rule-making committee, wrote in his newspaper column recently that millions of Indians were "quite understandably asking why (Mike Procter's original decision) should not be considered a racist one." While keen to take umbrage at others' faults, real or imagined, India, officially, is the worst-behaved team in the world. Over the past decade, it has had 43 players found guilty at disciplinary hearings, compared with 25 Australians. As recently as the Adelaide Test, the Indians blatantly pressured the umpires. Dinesh Kartirk reportedly wagged his finger at the umpire and spat heatedly on the ground near Michael Clarke, who the umpires had correctly given not out, despite the Indians' vociferous appealing. And like a number of Australians who fail to walk when they should, Sourav Ganguly stayed put when he was clearly caught by Michael Hussey. Ganguly only vacated the pitch when the replay confirmed his dismissal.
So bad was the Indians' conduct on Tuesday that even Fairfax cricket commentator Peter Roebuck branded it: "amongst the most nakedly aggressive actions" in the game's history. Correctly, Roebuck noted that if this was how the Indian board intended to behave in future, God help cricket. While Roebuck's concerns are justified, they fly in the face of his stance earlier in the series when he demonised the home team. Immediately after the Sydney Test, when Ponting led his side to a nailbiting 16th consecutive Test victory, Roebuck, bizarrely, called for the "arrogant" Australian captain's sacking. He berated Ricky Ponting for dragging "the game into the pits" and labelled the Australians "a pack of wild dogs". More balanced commentaries, such as those in The Australian, noted that the Indians had tried to hold the game to ransom with their threatened strike. Roebuck, however, claimed naively: "The only surprising part of it is that the Indians have not packed their bags and gone home. There is no justice for them in this country, nor any manners."
As Tuesday's outcome showed, the Indians have the clout to tip the course of events their way. In our national interest and in the interests of cricket, the ludicrous self-loathing displayed by some Australians, including parts of the media, cringing at our team's success, must be buried for all time. In today's cricket world, it is only Australia's on-field superiority preventing the sport from being dominated in every way by the subcontinent, which already wields its financial and administrative clout to the point of bullying. As for the smug Harbhajan Singh, the word "monkey" can also be applied in a derogatory, but strictly non-racist way, to silly troublemakers.
![[furrycat]](/data/avatars/m/6/6602.jpg?1213416722){kind=avatar}
