Monkey Business
Harbhajan Singh, more endearingly known to us as “Bhajji,” has been banned for three matches for his use of “a racial slur,” the International Cricket Council or the ICC has confirmed. The Australians claim that Harbhajan called Andrew Symonds a “monkey”, that, evidently being a pointed remark at the fact that Symonds is ethnically an Aboriginal. While Harbhajan has denied these accusations and Tendulkar has said that Harbhajan has not been racist in his comments, Matthew Hayden and Michael Clarke (both Aussies and therefore far from being neutral) have claimed that Harbhajan was in fact, racist in his comments.
There is no video footage of the heated exchange of abuses (whether at all they were exchanges, we cannot tell).Nor has there been any concrete evidence that points towards the fact that Harbhajan is guilty. This has been a clear-cut case of the Aussies’ word against the Indians. The ICC has decided to slap a three match ban on Harbhajan.
In the meantime, the Indian Team has decided to stay on in Australia. The Umpire, Steve Bucknor has been removed by the ICC. My belief is that the Indian Team should have come back after such humiliating treatment has been meted out to them. Steve Bucknor has been removed by the ICC in the interest of the game, and not because of the Indians request. Also, Harbhajan’s ban hasn’t been removed. He can play only till a verdict is given.
This is unchartered territory, but I believe that this too should be mentioned here. Let’s for once assume that Harbhajan has called Symonds a “monkey”. Roughly translated, monkey would be “Bandar” in Hindi. If that is indeed the case, then monkey is hardly a “racial slur”. This is my viewpoint alone and I don’t expect Cricketing authorities to view it from a cultural perspective at all, but this is one observation that I couldn’t do away with.
This happens to all the players from the subcontinent-be it an Indian, A Pakistani or a Sri Lankan. A stalwart like Sachin Tendulkar is not believed, but the Aussies are believed. This, in the truest sense of the word, is real racism.
This is really a sad day for International Cricket. If indeed there is a Neutral Governing Body, then such things cannot be happening. I suggest they check the dictionary for the meaning of the word “neutral”. They obviously don’t know what it means yet.
Reeti Roy
(This is my opinion only and should not be treated as a kind of diktat)
Close
Hey - I do agree with you 100%.
The only racist here is Procter.
Reply | | Report Abuse
Bhajji's MA KI becomes.... becomes MONKEY or MONEY . This happens only in cricket fields....hehehe. Good post.
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hi, CRICKET HAS PERHAPS LOST PRISTINE GLORY.
PLAYERS HAVE FORGOTTEN TO PLAY FOR THE TRUE SPIRIT
OF THE GAME.
iNDIAN TEAM'S VICTORY OF T-20 WORLD CUP FINAL WAS ALSO
NOT CONVINCING.
IN THIS WORLD, EVERYTHING SEEMS TO BE SPINNING AROUND
MONEY AND FAME.
Regards.
Reply | | Report Abuse
Darwin's Survival of the fittest
In our system we have learnt to respect the judiciary and the umpire .If we question their decisions every time we lose, the very foundations of the rule of law and fair play are shaken.That said, the judicial system itself has in-built mechanisms for dealing with abuse and corruption.
Lets deal with Steve Bucknor first.Unless we cynically believe that ICC removed him as a compromise,horse-trading measure, the ICC accepts that he has a problem. He has given,quite consistently and with unfailing regularity , atrocious decisions.If he had handed these decisions in a random fashion I would have given Steve the benefit of doubt and thought him to be incompetent.Unfortunately, the pattern of his mistakes make him a biased judge and I will not allow him the defence of incompetence. The ICC has removed,right decision,I rest my case.
The Symonds one is more difficult .The Aussies have a terrible "racist" record of mistreating their aboriginal people . Therefore, picking a person with aboriginal ancestry and solidly arguing his case for racial discrimination is indeed a great strategy. I wish they would now emulate this off the field and start a visible,measurable program (not pogrom) of affirmative action to help the aboriginals become fully participating Australian citizens.
Whether Harbhajan called him a monkey or not is a question of fact and not of opinion.
I cannot second guess the ICC's evaluation of the evidence that was adduced.But I want to comment on the "neutrality" of ICC. When the judicial system is controlled by elected "executive" we have "committed" judiciary.We know how the Bush-Gore elections went and how the judiciary played a crucial role in choosing the victor. The financial muscle and the economic power associated with the game of cricket have shifted to the sub-continent .If India wants a level playing field, it will not get it by screaming and kicking. India must learn use the economic levers to access political power and the sub-continental cricket playing nations must unite and demand a share of voice that is equal to their share of wallet.
Charles Darwin considered monkey as a stage of man's evolution and he suggested that it is it not the biggest or the most intelligent species that survive .Only the fittest who can adapt can survive. We must listen to Darwin carefully.
We must improve our game on the field and we must learn to play our game off the field.
Then the detractors will no longer be able to punch above their weight. Let our bats speak first, then our wallets- the two together will change the cricketing world.And as a bearded German
very popular in Bengal famously said ,"The philosophers have hitherto interpreted the world, the point,however,is to change it." Jai Hind.
Reply | | Report Abuse
Cricket is a passionate sport in India and Australia. Before the entire episode, let us remember one thing. Bhajji was batting and kept the run score up. It was frustrating to the Aussies. And they were sledging him. They wanted to stop Indians from scoring and were very focussed on Bhajji since he is known to react when provoked.
I personally think that calling someone a monkey is indecent, be it racial or otherwise. It is not about whether calling someone a monkey is racial or not. Its about insulting.
We don't know what sledging that Bhajji went through before he lost his temper to an indecent retort. I particularly want to know the depth to which the Aussies resort to sledging without that being considered a racial slur.
Playing the racial card is easy as was in the OJ Simpson case. But what is racial and what is not is immaterial. What provoked Bhajji?
That begs the question.
Reply | | Report Abuse