Sundararajan's Weblog

Aussies can win any match....

Guest Author
Observations based on the second test:
  1. Aussies lost 6 wickets fairly quickly in the first inning. It could have been easily 200 all out. But, one player [Symonds] gets multiple lives! He goes as not out.
  2. So long as Steve Bucknor officiates matches India has no chance. He does not ask for third umpire at times when Indian team needs most.
  3. Even the third umpire seems to "get it wrong" [what was he doing other than watching TV?]
  4. Umpire (Mark Benson) asks the Aussie fielder to check whether Ganguly was out or not!! Why not call out third umpire or ask the batsman as well? [never mind even the third umpire gets wrong to help the Aussies!]
  5. They can play so called "mind games". Even a bunch of former players and local media bat and bowl for their team. Other teams don't have this luxury or haven't learned the "art". They write/talk about so called "weakness" of opponents, "talk a lot" during fielding/batting. But, claim racial abuse when the opponent talks. I don't believe Aussies are talking the truth here. Why should anyone believe Aussie players? They claim catch after picking up the ball from the ground. Aussie players don't walk when they know they are out. ( "I was out when I was 30 - given not out. I can sit here and tell you about some bad decisions as well, but I won't. That's the game."
    Andrew Symonds tells
    ). That talks a lot about their honesty. Why should anyone believe them? I believe (like many in India) this may be one of the tricks by Aussies. Unless the umpires have seen/heard something or TV has captured something, it is not fair to punish Harbhajan Singh based on the words from Aussies.

Join the discussion

Comments ( 4 )
  • Arun Gupta Saturday, January 5, 2008

    Truly agree, Aussies play 13 against 11 of any other team.

  • Amit Sunday, January 6, 2008

    And as Chandrapaul said sometime back. Even if half the 50-50 decisions (most of which always go in favour of aussies no matter who they play against) start going the other way. It would not be too hard to see that the aussies are not that hard to beat !

  • guest Monday, January 7, 2008

    The "mind games" played by media is to be expected to favour the local team, no matter where in the world sport is being played.

    With the lack of substantial evidence that we (the public) are aware of, it is hard to believe that Harbhajan Singh has been banned. It should have been (at the most) a wrist slapping. But in this case, it may be that Harbhajan Singh is not being sentenced on this event alone - quite often the events of October 2007 are mentioned in concert with this. It would be very interesting to see that decision (and materials) made open and available to scrutiny by the public.

    Of the players that do and don't walk, it is my perception that bowlers (and Symonds is one) are very unlikely to walk (regardless of who they play for) because they're often on the receiving end of bad decisions. Or to put it bluntly, if batters don't walk when a bowler believes they get them out and the umpire doesn't give them out, how does that encourage bowlers to be honest? It's pointless to point fingers in this because it is a very long (in years and matches) trail of incorrect umpire decisions that leads to the buildup here. One might be tempted to argue that it is impossible for anyone to enter the top level of cricket and not be biased against umpires and volunteering yourself as out. But what is worse: not walking when you know you're out and the umpire says you aren't, or not walking when the umpire has given you out but you don't believe you are?

    I didn't see the stumping problem that people are referring to with the 3rd umpire issue, but I was both watching the TV and listening to the radio on Sunday when there was talk about an lbw decision. The radio commentators indicated that "hawkeye" gave it not out but at the same time, the simulation used by channel 9 showed the ball clipping the top of the stumps. Who do you believe?

  • A. Sundararajan Monday, January 7, 2008

    \* Unfortunately, historically Indian media does not favour Indian team!! It has been critical of local team in many instances.

    \* Yes, you are right we would like to see why Harbhajan was banned.

    \* The point is not about walking or not. Not walking, claiming dubious catches definitely tells something about honesty level of the player. So, why believe only their words to give out (to Ganguly) or ban a player [yes, I assume there is no evidence in this case. Of course, if there is any evidence other than the word from Aussie players then the matter is definitely different]

    \* No, I was not talking about lbw decision. I know one lbw decision was definitely wrong. Ponting was not out - there was a definite edge. Ponting was not given out earlier when he nicked one to keeper. In any case, two wrongs don't make it right. And that stumping in my view was out.

Please enter your name.Please provide a valid email address.Please enter a comment.CAPTCHA challenge response provided was incorrect. Please try again.