BlogHer - O behave -- Indian, Australian cricketers need to mind their manners, and more - Comments

You said it!

snigdhasen — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:13:30 -0600

Good to see you here again, Nita :) What a coincidence, I was just reading your blog.
Thank you for stopping by and weighing in.

Yes, you've echoed my thoughts. So silly, no? I too have a nagging feeling that Symonds was looking to get back at Bhajji for what happened in India. After all, Bhajji patted Brett Lee's back, not Symonds. So if Lee was offended, he could have taken it up with Bhajji. I don't see any reason why Symonds needed to interfere.

More importantly, I think the Aussies didn't realize the consequence of taking this to the board. They probably figured it was happening in their backyard, and the Indians would back down and accept whatever is dished out to them.

That said, if Bhajji indeed is a repeat offender -- that he knew what it meant from his faceoff with Symonds in India and still used it -- then someone needs to tell him to keep the lid on his temper.

Either way, as former umpire Dickie Bird said, the umpires should've resolved this matter on the field.

Now everyone's looking silly, and many other important issues that needed to be taken up, have got mixed up in this.

Well, the good thing is that the Aussie aggression has been highlighted, and Indians are under pressure to perform and prove their worth. Cool!

Time to laugh it off, I hope :D

Snigdha

Balanced and objective post!

Nitajk — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:53:23 -0600

Snigdha, I have come a little late here but cannot help commenting on the effort you have taken to write such a balanced and exhaustive post. I agree with you wholeheartedly on all your points. Now we see that tempers have cooled and everyone is feeling foolish, including Sharad Pawar I am sure. Now on hindsight there is no doubt in my mind that this wasn't really a racism issue. It was the fact that Australia wanted to draw attention away from the poor and unfair umpiring. Luckily now both sides have seen sense and both are trying to make compromises.
I just hope that bhajji (poor chap) comes out unscathed. He is innocent, to my mind at least. I do not think he used the word monkey although he must have hurled some sort of epithet. And frankly a monkey as you very rightly pointed out means nothing more than a naughty fellow. I rather think that if Bhajji had cursed Symonds, he would have used a stronger word.

Nita

What's the story, really?

snigdhasen — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:51:39 -0600

Thank you, Kazari, for stopping by.

You echo my sentiments: Can't the boys sort this out?

We will never know what exactly transpires on the field, but this is one point that I agree with the Indian skipper -- this should've been sorted out between the teams, and the Aussie captain probably didn't realize that the complaint could boomerang.

Yes, Aussie sledging is legendary. I think some people had started complaining, and Ricky Ponting may have wanted to act, but other teams (India included) decided to start they own brand of sledging, and everything comes to a head.

Phew!

All said, I must say that both teams have great players, and the Aussie team is very much admired in India for their game :)

I wonder how the new "manners madness" will change the way cricket is played.

Snigdha

oops

kazari — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:17:20 -0600

what i meant to say first was, snigda, that has been the clearest, most unbiased summary of these events that i've seen. so thankyou for your post

oops

kazari — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:17:20 -0600

what i meant to say first was, snigda, that has been the clearest, most unbiased summary of these events that i've seen. so thankyou for your post

don't you wish they'd all grow up?

kazari — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:16:07 -0600

I'm another aussie, and I've been really irritated (and quite astounded) by the amount of coverage this has been given.
i don't think there's anything new about sledging in cricket - i don't know anything about the Indian team's tactics, but i know it's always been a factor in the way aussies play, at all levels. and the english have been criticised in the past (I think) for some pretty nasty calls. so it's not just our current australian teams.
what surprises me most is that Symonds put in a complaint. i'm not disputing that in an Australian context it can be a racist comment, or that racism is a horrible thing - but for Aussies... well, tattling is a pretty big taboo. and i wonder if it was his decision, or a team, strategic decision to put in a formal complaint. it overshadowed what would have been the major issue - the very bizarre umpiring decisions.
what a mess!

can we all get on with the game, now?

Aha!

snigdhasen — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:09:56 -0600

So there you go. Now you are involved in the cricketing madness too. I wonder what your dad would have to say about all this. ;-)

Snigdha

Big boys need to take a deep breath

snigdhasen — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:48:24 -0600

Hi Deborah!

Thanks for stopping by. Well, you can imagine how crazy this is. After a point, it seems, everyone's playing to the gallery.

It would be entertaining if it wasn't so tragic :)

Curiously, I have a friend in Australia, who thinks it's good the media covered it because now everyone's super keen to watch the Perth Test and he's sure all the attention will make it very interesting!

I do hope our youngsters either learn to laugh it off or learn to avoid such mishaps altogether.

Snigdha

From a cricketing country

Maria Niles — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:46:20 -0600

My dad is from St. Vincent in the West Indies.

Kleenex® Let It Out™ Blog
Beyond Help

Psychodrama indeed!

snigdhasen — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:40:34 -0600

Thanks Maria!
Yes, the formality is the game, per se. As days go by, I find this situation more and more hilarious :)
Big boys calling each other names and precipitating an international crisis. Ha! Ha!
Just curious, is your dad from a cricketing country or was he simply interested in the game?

Snigdha

Not Very Sporting

gwenifer — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:42:27 -0600

I live in Australia and you are right, this issue has been covered extensively by the media down under. It was bad sportsmanship all round at the cricket. But the last I heard both sides wanted to resolve the issue and get on with the tour. Hopefully, both the India and Australian teams can resolve this because it sends a negative message to youngsters in both countries.

Deborah Robinson

Fascinating, Snigda

Maria Niles — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:21:25 -0600

I grew up watching my father play cricket every Sunday in Griifith Park in Los Angeles. I freely admit I still have absolutely no idea how the game is played but something about the formality and the uniforms is mesmerizing. Anyhow, this is quite the psychodrama! Thanks for filling us non-Indians, non-Aussie, non-cricket watching folks in :-)

Kleenex® Let It Out™ Blog
Beyond Help

O behave -- Indian, Australian cricketers need to mind their manners, and more

snigdhasen — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 04:18:59 -0600

I wasn't going to write about the game of cricket, a) because it's being written to death in India and Australia, and b) not many of my readers follow the game in America; but the intensity with which a disastrous tour by the Indian team down under is being blogged about, I can't but talk about it.

A series of mishaps -- disputed umpiring, a disappointing loss (or a dramatic win, depending on which side you are on), charges of poor sportsmanship, name-calling and allegations of racist comments past and present --- glued together by some unrelenting ego, melted into one simmering pot of misgivings that finally blew up in the face of international cricket. The controversy has now left the cricket field --- where it ideally should have remained -- and hit headlines in both countries, more so in impassioned India, where cricket and movies are credited with being the two uniting religions of the nation.

You can read all about the controversy here, here, here or any online news outlet in the two countries. The Indian media -- barring a few offbeat opinion pieces -- is literally fighting the Indian "cause", while the Australian media has gone both ways, either being extremely critical or super supportive of their team. Either way, it was blanket coverage of an impasse that some felt could lead to a diplomatic crisis.

Briefly, stripped of details, here's what transpired: It was the second Test match between India and world champions Australia, being played at Sydney. India seemed set to either win or draw the match but for some obvious umpiring errors that went against the visiting team. Add to that the allegations that some of the Aussies were not sportsmen or honorable enough to own up that they were out and lied about it to stay in the field. Then came the racism charge that brought matters to a head: an altercation between Australia's Andrew Symonds and India's Harbhajan Singh led to the Aussies filing a complaint that Singh had called Symonds a "monkey", a racist N-word of sorts. Singh denied it, and was supported by India's cricketing superhero genius Sachin Tendulkar (nicknamed the Little Master in India), who was on the field and said he had heard nothing of the sort. Two of Symonds' teammates stood by him and said he couldn't lie. It was X's word against Y's and the arbitrator was convinced the Indian was in the wrong. Singh was slapped with a three-match ban.
The Little Master was reportedly furious that his words held no weight in the decision, and shot off a message to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) --- which controls 70 percent of the game's revenues worldwide --- asking that the tour be halted unless the Singh was cleared of all charges by the International Cricket Council (ICC).

All hell broke loose. The BCCI confronted the ICC and filed for a review, and also tagged along a demand that the erring umpire (with whom the Indian team had issues before) be dropped for the following Test matches. Meanwhile, Indians -- led by the media -- were incensed that their honor was hurt and demanded that the team pack its bags and return home. The Indian team -- which claimed it had requested the Aussies not to file a racism complaint --- filed a counter complaint that another Aussie player had called some of them "bastards", which is far more offensive than "monkey" in India. The ICC, clearly overwhelmed and desperate to save the series, caved, dropped the erring umpire, and said Singh could play pending the review process.

Playing resumed. Indians rejoiced in their "moral" victory, while some Aussies cried foul that a rich Indian cricket board had arm-twisted an international body into submission, and allowed one country to almost jeopardize the game.

If it seems strange that exchange of a couple words on a field can hold an international sport to ransom, here's why: cricket is supposed to be the gentleman's game, and proper manners are an integral part of it. The Aussies, particularly the current world-dominating team, built a reputation of being overly aggressive on the field, especially verbally (referred to as "sledging"), and Indian fans had held for long that their players are too mild-mannered to deal with the tough and caustic-tongued Aussies.

This is not the first time that India had a brush with the Aussie team's sledging. My jaw dropped while watching the award ceremony of a 2006 championship --- the only international trophy that the Aussies hadn't won until then -- in India, when an overzealous Aussie captain motioned to the BCCI chief Sharad Pawar to hand over the trophy. Disconcerting as it was, Pawar did hand over the trophy without a protest, only to be pushed out of the way by another Aussie teammate so the winning team could carry on with their jubilation and photo sessions. The media went ballistic and found support in former and current Indian cricketers, including the Little Master. BCCI chief Pawar (who is also a politician, BTW) was forced to comment on it, called the Aussie players involved "uncivilized", but was quick to add that he wanted to play down the incident, given the good relationship the two cricketing nations had. The captain apologized for his team and things cooled off.
But the general impression that the Aussies were admired but unloved world champions, remained.

As the two commentators in this clip discuss, on a previous occasion, the Aussies are used to sledging and needling and the Indians, being new at the art of on-field aggression, tend to take the bait and retort in a manner that could get them into trouble with the board. For a nation built on the Gandhian philosophy of giving "the silent treatment", aggression as a "mental disintegration" tactic (as the Aussies call it), isn't coming that easy. I am not even sure the Indians are using it as a tactic. They may be plain angry at the way they get needled.

The problem is that the good-old Australian "larrikinism" is not going down well with the cricketing world, which perceives it as rude behavior. So this test had opened up the proverbial Pandora's Box of bad onfield behavior by the world's best players.

Ditto for the Aussies. They were in India last year, where the same Symonds was heckled by the crowd. Singh reportedly called him a monkey there, but Symonds spoke to him about why it was offensive in his country. Singh reportedly apologized. So, argue the Aussies, he is a repeat offender and needed to be reported. The Indians, of course, argue that nothing happened.

Having said that, here's what I make of this whole episode. I can't speak for the awesome Aussies, but I have a few thoughts about my country:

One-sport wonder: Cricket is probably the only team sport that India has a strong international standing in. So the entire nation's sporting emotions and ambitions are invested in one single sport and that's the genesis of such over-the-top passions. We seem to know it, and have been hugely critical of our own team (more so when they fail), and how the game management has got fat and smug with all the money it has made. Calls for reviving our national game, field hockey, (yes, cricket is not the official national game after all) have got louder. But until then, we'll have to pin our hopes on cricket. Nevertheless, how one sport can become a matter of national honor befuddles me. But this is where we may find the cultural excuse/reason for our emotions.

National honor/family pride: Treating guests well is an important part of Indian culture. In fact, we have a saying that goes, the guest is God. So, the best food, the best silverware, the best room and best behavior -- are all reserved for the guest. Conversely, the guest, who feels unwelcome, must leave immediately. Another notion goes that family feuds should stay at home and one must put up a united front, no matter what. So while the Aussies were aghast at how Indians could be calling for a pull-out over this issue, I wonder if such inherent notions of pride and prejudice play into how we prioritize.

On name-calling, bastards and monkeys: Speaking of family feuds, we Indians are a fractious lot. We are big on name-calling amongst ourselves, none too complimentary or affectionate, but largely benign. Some communities get more personal than others, but feel free to bait them in return. And yes, we are prejudiced towards each other within our country, some may even call us racist. We are aware of it, critical of it, but that's the way we are.

But words mean something and knowledge changes everything. We use the term monkey often and loosely. One time, my mother said she was tired raising two monkeys (my sister and me) when I suggested we adopt an orphaned simian in the neighborhood, my husband calls me one and gets called the same in return :) It's meant to tease naughty or cheeky behavior, never to malign. I had no idea how offensive the term could be in another culture. But now that I know, I doubt I'll ever be able to use it again in the same jovial manner.

Like me, many Indians probably figured its implications only when this episode exploded. Predictably, they went overboard using it all the more (in offensive cartoons) and this time in a sense that would truly offend people sensitive to it. Indians, by and large, don't like to be told what to do :)
"Bastard", on the other hand, has sexual connotations especially for the mother. That blows off the wrong fuse in India, given that unwed mothers with no identifiable fathers are treated as dregs of society.

Still, neither is strong enough to knock me overboard. It seems highly unlikely that the Indians would've raised this issue, had the racism charge against Singh not gone through.

Just too much: Whatever the reasons, an altercation on a cricket field should under no circumstances hijack a nation's agenda. The BCCI president Sharad Pawar, who is also the Minister for Agriculture, has matters far graver to attend to than sorting out sporting fights. And the media has better uses for its resources than dragging out Singh's mother for comments.

I'm glad things are limping back to normal. We are playing again, and some Aussies are shooting for a Bollywood film as well :) But the fact that it came to such a pass is almost hilarious.

Some balance please.

My hope is that this episode will cause both sides to reflect: Aussies may have to rethink their on-field attitude, while the Indians will be under the scanner for the slightest slip.

My favorite blogher post on this subject, especially from an Indian point of view, is by Amrita at Indiequill. She argues -- in a post that cracked me up -- that the fallout of the Sydney test may end inter-country banter and sledging altogether:

[...]now that race has come into the open as a factor in a sport as beloved as cricket, there is no way it can be swept under the carpet by fatcats like the BCCI.
And now that the top dog in international cricket has stepped forward to make use of race laws, it should open the floodgates for other teams. After all, if Australia the hardy world champions don’t think it’s whiny behavior to stand up against racial abuse, why should other teams feel shy? And now that words like “monkey” and “bastard” are deemed racially sensitive, look for sledging to subside because really, who knows what might be culturally sensitive? Thus we come full circle and decide that abuse is abuse, whatever we call it. If you want to call someone names, make sure it’s someone from your own team because that’s the only way to ensure that you’re not stepping over some invisible line.

Other ladies are weighing in too:

Skepticlawyer at Catallaxy

Keshi at Viva Forever

As usual, Nita, at A Wide Angle View of India

Pr3rna at I love life...so I explore

Another fav, Anna, at Sepia Mutiny

Priya at Thought Process

Sakshi at To each its own