Posts
Loading ...oh give me a break..
there’s going to be no undermining the umpire’s authority… only a check on their powers to do what ever the hell they wish..
this wasn’t an lbw decision/caught behind etc..
he was quick to punish and penalize on a whim..
he couldn’t back it up.. created a big scene.. was quick to declare the match over..AND asked for 500,000 to shut up about the whole thing..
the english and aussies are so gung ho about hair because they weren’t at the receiving end of his wrath..
the umpire’s are not bigger than the game.. and they need to act responsibly.. next time umpire’s will be careful before they go around penalizing teams.. it will also discourage dishonest umpires from creating a scene to get a 500,000 pay off and book deals..
don’t feel sorry for hair.. he’ll soon have a book out.. and will make a killing selling it in england and australia.. probably a lot more money than he could have made umpiring..
Bad Hair Day
By Scott 2 years ago, at the start of November Leave a comment on this post
The ICC has decided that Darrell Hair has raised his last finger in international cricket, deciding that he will not officiate in any more fixtures, until his contract runs out in 2008. A vote of the full ICC board went 7-3, with only Australia, New Zealand and England voting for him to continue.
Given the lack of confidence in Hair by so much of the international cricket fraternity this decision does not come as a surprise.
Count me in as a reactionary if you like, but I think this is a dreadful day, one that continues the trend of the last two decades in undermining the authority of the umpires. One of the key points of the old game was that you accepted the authority of the umpires, regardless of whether or not you agreed with his decisions. The ICC, like it or not, have sent a pretty clear message to Hair’s colleagues here, and that message is, “Don’t look to us for help, we won’t back you up. You are on your own out there.”
The way things are continuing, you can expect to see other undermining principles like automatic third umpire decisions for leg-before appeals before too much longer, and the umpire’s main job will be to hold the bowler’s sweater.
Oh well. Roll on the Ashes!
Tags: darrell-hair, ICC, umpiring |
31 Responses to “Bad Hair Day”
November 4th, 2006 at 11.05 pm
November 4th, 2006 at 11.32 pm
Sorry, no. I feel bad for Hair - admittedly not one of my favourite umpires but correct. I think he has been let down, and badly by the ICC.
November 5th, 2006 at 1.17 am
Give me a break dude. Hair is one of the most racially discriminating umpires and the Oval incident was entirely motivated by his racial views. He just needed to go and this should serve as a warning to the rest of his gang to mend their ways or find their way out.
All we are asking for is the same rules to be applied to all. Just because a brown guy swings the ball a little more, you don’t assume he’s tampered the ball.
Just because you don’t like the skin of a guy involved in a verbal duel, you don’t fine him and let the white guy who instigated the duel get away with it.
November 5th, 2006 at 1.59 am
Of course. Racism. Would have to be, wouldn’t it.
November 5th, 2006 at 7.18 am
I think that perhaps it was assumed that the brown guy swinging the ball so much was cheating was purely because the sub-con nations are proven cheats.
Remember also, there were two umpires who made the decisions on the day, yet Hair was singled out by the sub-con nations because he’s called them on their cheating ways in the past. The rules had to be changed to aloow Murali to continue in the game - but that was retrospectively, he was still a cheat at the time, and always will be. The fact is, Hair acted in accordance with the rules. Had the relevant hearing been heard at the end of that day, instead of being dragged out for weeks, perhaps things may have been resolved more amicably. Pakistan has only itself to blame for forfeiting the Test, and this bullshit about their nation and religion being impugned by the umpires is a pathetic smokescreen. What on eatrh has either to do with a legitimate decision. Had it been overturned at the time, fair enough - mistakes happen - move on with it. The fact is Pakistan miscalculated with their grandstanding, and forfeited the match. They and their continental mates are so used to bludgeoning the cricketing authorities into submission that they obviuosly thought that they’d get away eith yet again on the day. Pity it backfired, eh?
No surprises that the sub-cons were able to swing the African and West Indies votes - they pretty much bought them some time ago.
So: we see a further undermining of the umpires, and more flexing of muscles from the Asian bloc. Hopefully they’ll continue to push and cause a schism in world cricket. I can never take matches against the Asian bloc seriously anyway - I just never know if a result is legitimate, or was bought by a well-connected bookie. It’s a pity the South Africans were willing to whore themselves so cheaply, because it’s always fun to beat them. Zimabawe (and for that matter Bangladesh) should never have been accorded Test status, so no loss there, and while I’ll miss the Windies, iI’ll get over it. The only cricket really worth watchiing is Aust. v England, so the sooner the Asians piss off and take their lackeys with them, the better off we’ll all be.
November 5th, 2006 at 8.07 am
slips just about sums up darrell hair’s world view..
and this is 2006 so he has to go..
the asian block will no longer have to deal with hair types because they provide all the $$ for the game.. so they can’t be discriminated against any longer…
November 5th, 2006 at 10.38 am
Mani, you don’t realise it, but you’ve hit on exactly why what’s happened to Hair is such a travesty.
The reason why he’s been booted out isn’t because of the ball tampering issue, otherwise Doctrove would be gone too. Its not because he’s a bad umpire, because he’s been on the elite panel for years now. He’s out because there’s a lot of people out there who think he is a racist.
No court, no tribunal, no procedure of any kind has been brought against him for this, and he’s never had the chance to face his accusers and defend himself. There is absolutely no evidence that he discriminates against Asian people, except that some people disagree with some of the decisions he’s made.
If you seriously think that Asian nations are discriminated against by the ICC, then you are a one-eyed moron. Hair’s sacking is an indulgence given to the Asian nations that has never been given to England or Australia. This isn’t ‘equality’. This is a bias in favour of Asia.
November 5th, 2006 at 11.40 am
Well, everyone always gets their knickers in a twist at the sniff of a racist scandal. Though I think Hair acted a little too hastily and rigidly, the ICC’s being rather unfair right now. Hair technically didn’t do anything wrong.
But the thing is, if you’re not Asian, you just won’t understand all the other bias (not just this incident) towards Asians. And you won’t understand how grossly inferior they have been made to feel, and still feel, most of the time. The whole incident may not even be about race, but to those countries with a massive chip on their shoulder, that’s what they feel.
and hey, with people saying things like “the sooner the Asians piss off and take their lackeys with them, the better off we’ll all be”, you have to admit that the Asians have a bit of a right to have that chip!
November 5th, 2006 at 11.59 am
Just because ur world revolves around these one sided series called “the ASHES” (the exception being last year’s ASHES, wake up dude. There’s a lot more interesting cricket going on around the world.
And the guys who’ve actually fell for the lure of the lucre include “Shane Warne”, “Hansie Cronje”, “Herschell Gibbs”, “Derek Crookes”, etc. So its not really like its a ALL Asian thing.
As regards your claim of Murali and Akhtar chucking, I’ve no doubts they chuck. But the Lees and the McGraths are bigger chuckers than Murali and Akhtar. Atleast Murali and Akhtar have gone through clinics and it has been proven they are legal within the “stupid 13 degree” rule that ICC has brought in. My problem with Hair and others is why is it only the brown chuckers who are called. Someone said on Hair recently that Bond is among the few legal fast bowlers left in the world. Almost all the super fast bowlers and some accurate medium pacers like McGrath are chuckers of the Nth order. But how come they aren’t called?
November 5th, 2006 at 12.05 pm
Tom, Its no rocket science that Hair got booted out for reasons other than the Oval Incident. The Oval incident was just the last straw where he just went a little too far in the assumption that he had the backing of Speed et al.
The problem is some of these folks haven’t gotten over the East India Company mindset. They still think that the world revolves around them and that they are the masters of the Universe. Guys, its time you get over it and stop living in your dreamland.
November 5th, 2006 at 12.09 pm
You’re right Tom. Mani: so because you’ve provided lots of cash, it’s OK to dictate which umpires you’ll allow? That is the problem in a nutshell - you seem to think you’ve bought the game.
And Pamlea: sorry, but you’re wrong. I’ve not done anything to any Asians - my two best friends are Sikhs, but they don’t consider themselves Indian, they’re Australians. The fact is, I’m not responsible for any historical gripe any Asian has. This is cricket, if they want to rewrite history (ICC as the East India Company my arse), they can’t expect any sympathy. The sub-con nations have become adept at playing the race card purely because it’s so hard to defend against - if any white person is accused of racism, they are immediately taken to task, and have to prove they weren’t racist in intent, rather than their accusers having to prove their accusation. Mention racism, and the smokescreen goes up - it work for Inzy and the Paki cricket team, when they added whole layers of meaning to what was, initially, a fairly mundane incident. Then again, it worked for Cheatin’ Ranatunga in Perth a while back, too. They are using an emotive vehicle to get away with absolute rubbish.
I don’t care about the colour of the Asian blocs skin - I care that they are a pack of cheats, who seem to have decided that they own cricket. I’ve previously given my reasons for a lack of interest in Asian cricket - it’s dirty as can be. If they can’t play in a reasonable manner, and they feel they are entitled to special treatment, they can piss off. I won’t miss them, but I’ll enjoy the peace and quiet, and I’ll enjoy not having to read the sort of bullshit that imbeciles like mani consistently come up with.
November 5th, 2006 at 12.25 pm
Yeah, Randhir, and who bought the players you mentioned? The thing is, this sort of wholesale acceptance of cheating is built into Asian culture. This idea that buckets of cash can buy or legitimise anything is exactly what is wrong with the game. The BCCI wants to buy world cricket - even though it cannot administer the game in it’s own country. Anyone who dares to criticise: must be racist.
Mate - I don’t care what colour your skin is. I care that your compatriots are destroying the game. Pamela is writing puerile nonsense when she writes: “The whole incident may not even be about race, but to those countries with a massive chip on their shoulder, that’s what they feel.” Who cares? This is about cricket - don’t use it as a forum to work through other gripes. I genuinely do not care about past injustices (real or perceived). Lose the chip, deal with cricket issues seperately. If you can’t, don’t bother playing - rather than try to rewrite history by proxy.
And yes, the Ashes are the most important series in cricket - to me. Of course fans from other countries won’t rate it as highly - but at least I know that it wll be a legitimate contest. I can be certain that neither Centrebet or an SP bookie has had any bearing on the result.
By the way - even though I don’t rate Speed, it appears that Hair did still have at least some support from him. Hair simply got rolled by the Asian bloc, with their camp whores the Africans and Windies. Once the Asians set themselves against him he was doomed. It had nothing to do with right or wrong - it was a numbers game. Your lot want doclie umpires that you can intimidate into submission. Otherwise, why was Doctrove not even tabled for discussion. The fact is, Hair called it as he saw it. He may well have been wrong re: tampering, but so what? Pakistan would have won anyway. They were just being petulant - then decided to flex their muscles. Targetting Hair tokk a lot of heat from them for bring everlasting shame upon themselves for forfeiting the match due to a gross miscalculation on their part. Hair is a scapegoat.
November 5th, 2006 at 12.27 pm
Slips - by claiming that all Asians are cheats, it really does support the Asians’ “there exists racism in this world!” stance. And I wasn’t trying to be personal or anything, I just picked that quote of yours because it did rather seem to be racist. Not all subcontinental cricket players are cheats, if you haven’t noticed yet.
Anyway, this seems like it’s going to wind up being one of those awful racism-centred pointless threads. How gripping.
November 5th, 2006 at 12.46 pm
Not all are cheats - but corruption is endemic to their culture. In the West, we have our fair share of corporate cheats - but it’s still considered wrong. Attempts are made to cotrol it or root ir out. In India (for example) it’s an accepted part of doing business, from the government level down. It’s not rare, and it’s not low key. In Asia, it’s accepted. That’s a big problem - particularly when a body like the BCCI attempts to wrest control of the game from an at times idiotic but at least generally honest body. Look at the Asian bidding for the next World Cup on the sub-con: the first bid didn’t arrive. ICC gives golden extension. Second: 30 odd grounds (so everyone can get their cut) instead of the requisite 15 or less. Third bid?
The stance that: we’ve lots of money, so we want every third Cup as our right? Where is the merit in any of this? Frankly, it was yet another form of cheating: in this case intimidation and blackmail. And again, fuelled by this arrogant belief economic power legitimises everything that they do.
By the way, there is racism in every camp on earth. The Asians who have posted here are attempting to promulgate the belief that only white people are racist. I’ve spent enough time with South and South-East Asians to know that they too can be virulently racist. Any community can be.
November 5th, 2006 at 12.54 pm
Well, it IS a little harsh to say that corruption is part of South Asian culture, and I think you’ll have to accept that backlash that comes with that sort of statement!
But anyway, I DO personally believe that Hair’s been terribly wronged by the ICC, and that racism does not necessarily have anything to do with this tired issue. It’s just that it’s not so great to see non-Asians wiping aside all Asian views and claiming them to be worth nothing. Calling Mani an imbecile and my statements “puerile” just isn’t very nice, whether the poster be Asian, Aussie, British or Fijian.
Well, I’m off to watch Windies get thrashed by Australia and the rain. Perhaps the subcontinent’s corruption has leaked into its weather, and India’s out to ruin the tournament because it didn’t get into the finals? 
November 5th, 2006 at 1.16 pm
One: Mani is an imbecile (and that’s the nicest term I’ll use here).
Two: bring on the backlash. I just don’t care - I’ve noticed that the sub-con apologists shout the loudest when they’ve something to hide. They use it to distract from the original issue (like the Pakis did at the Oval).
I, too, have finished here for now.
November 5th, 2006 at 6.04 pm
slips - Its obvious you don’t care about our opinions here.
If acceptance was built into Asian culture, they wouldn’t have been caught and punished. Its the SAs who’ve let the cheat Gibbs get back into the game with such a light or no punishment. Atleast India ended Azhar’s career and that of a few others because of their involvement.
Don’t be assured that the Ashes is not booked. If money can get involved in a SA-ENG game (Cronje declaration game with the dramatic Eng victory), it pretty soon might step into the Ashes too. It might just be that the authorities haven’t caught on yet and the English win the last time round might have been the result of a bookie getting active for all you know.
Hair got the boot because of his history of stupid decisions and not just because of the Oval incident. One mistake and you can give him the benefit of doubt. After all umpires are humans and are susceptible to making mistakes. But if someone repeatedly makes mistakes that go against you, you begin to suspect something. That’s what happened here. The trust factor had gone out of the window. The only thing left to do was to let him umpire Eng-WI-SA games. But it appears they too, believe to some extent that he was a partial umpire if not racially biased.
November 6th, 2006 at 1.24 am
you’re hilarious slips.. name calling and all..
i’m not going to play that game..
i’m just happy that the asians for once got together and showed some unity to get rid of hair…
think about it.. india and pak NEVER agree on anything.. so the fact that they agreed on this shows that he really was a big pain in the back side for asians..
why isn’t anybody complaining about simon taufel or rudi and others? we’re not complaining because they are fair umpires that don’t discriminate..
you have not watched the games that i have to see the extent to which hair goes to penalize asian teams..i could give you loads of examples.. and i’m not talking about things like lbw’s etc.. 5 run penalties etc.. for no reason at all.. at some point he had to go.. you were not on the receiving end of his wrath so you can never understand..
and $$ doesn’t make it right.. but it does help you get rid of hair types that you wouldn’t have been able to if you didn’t have any $$..
the world is all about might and wrong.. not right and wrong.. hair thought he could use his might instead of being right and get away with it… he miscalculated.. he’ll still get his money till his contract runs out.. how nice.. no work but still is going to be paid.. + all the book money.. he’s laughing all the way to the bank.. and unlike you i’m not going around bad mouthing all english and australians etc.. i have a problem with just hair.. not all english/australians.. shep,bird and other umpires were awesome.. no problems..
November 6th, 2006 at 2.50 am
And I have no problem with individual Asians - but you come from a background of corruption, and what you’ve just stated is tantamount to active support for bullying. Just because Hair didn’t cower to Asian chest beating, you support the use of monetary blackmail to carry the day. That’s exactly why I have nothing but contempt for Asians like you - those same Asians who now pretty much run cricket. I long for the day when you go too far and there is a break in world cricket, because I can certainly live without your lot stirring from the sidelines (and back rooms). I’d rather it didn’t happen, but with the Asian bloc’s refusal to clean up it’s act, it appears inevitable.
The difference between Hair and others was that he enforced the rules, and wouldn’t be intimidated by Asian histrionics. That’s why he had to go, and cricket - and the institution of umpiring - will be the big loser in all of this. You’ve buried a good and honest man to cover for you own inadequacies, and to further your quest for control.
November 6th, 2006 at 5.34 am
“corruption”, “bullying” etc..
and you come from a background of???
lets see … country founded by convicts by killing the native people.. HOW? because your ancestors had the $$$ and power.. major misuse of power..
in the case of hair.. the $$$ of india has allowed justice to be done.. which would not have been possible without $$$.. now if india had used its $$$ to kick out simon taufel.. then that you could call “bullying” etc..
it was a 7-3 vote.. aren’t you guys all about democracy? or only when it serves your purpose?
if hair was such a priest.. oops.. priests might not be a good example.. if he was such a saint.. then it would not have been 7-3..
umpires need to be accountable too.. nobody is above scrutiny.. i apologize for getting off topic.. but i had to reply to the “corruption” background nonsense…
November 6th, 2006 at 6.25 am
Again, you’ve shown that you still live in the past: EIC, convicts, etc… And you think I’m name-calling? I’m not even going to examine what the majority of the so-called ‘convicts’ were convicted of, because it’s not pertinent (I do, however, wonder if many were sent here for bribery, illegal bookmaking etc?). Incidentally, I’m from a free state - no convict background.
India’s money didn’t allow justice to be done - you bought the result you wanted. The 7-3 ‘democratic’ vote you allude to was not even close to democratic. In any Asia v. the rest vote, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh always vote the same because of your collective chip-on-shoulder about whites. That’s where the real racism is - India and lackeys are using India’s money to re-fight old battles, and avenge old slights (real or imagined). So - that’s 4 votes. You bought the Windies some time ago: 5. The same goes for Zimbabwe, which should have been summarily expelled from world cricket, but the Asian bloc bought them too. Easy when one considers how corrupt and racist the Zimbabweans are. It must make you all feel all warm inside to be allied with someone even more racist and corrupt than you are. What did it cost you to get them readmitted to Test stauts the other day, I wonder? That’s 6. The we have the South Africans, who support Zimbabwe in pretty much everything to pay Mugabe back for supporting the ANC (and who ever said politics and sport didn’t mix?). 7.
Then we have England, which alone had the backbone to do the honourable thing, and Australia and New Zealand who seem to have seen the writing on the wall and were too gutless to vote in Hair’s favour, but couldn’t bring themselves to support an outright vendetta.
It amazes me that the very first reports on the Oval fiasco made mention of Hair’s nationality. He wasn’t there as an Australian, he was there as an umpire, a custodian of the game. You Asians made this a race-based story, and it is you Asians who are the racists. By playing the race card, you have successfully diverted attention from your own endemic racism and corruption, and done irreparable harm to the game.
This article is instructive: http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,20703042-5006372,00.html
And, of course, Roebuck’s recent article gives further creedence to accusations of Indian arrogance and corruption:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20617223-2722,00.html
Frankly, Mani, unless you comeup with anything original, I’m not going to respond to you any further.
November 6th, 2006 at 11.42 am
The main reason why Hair got kickedout is becasue he demanded $500,000 to keep shut. If this is not blackmail then I dont know what is!
Slips and other pro Hair folks please dwell on this also!
November 8th, 2006 at 12.20 pm
Look at it like this. There are certain things that cannot be proven. Whether hair was a racist or not no one can proove. So to me he is innocent until proven guilty. Mr Hair is a decent human being. But if a guy is involved in so many incidents it is natural that opinions will go against him. its a democracy 7 out 10 voted he should go. then he should go. He should accept that. And umpires authority is not being undermined its a selection process you dont do well you have to go. The elite panel will get better. we are all humans and we are all equal mayb not alike but equals. I am a pakistani but i know inzimam got the right punishment even if there was no proof of ball tampering he should not have protested like that and even he acknowledged this. what racism we are all the same. cheers.
November 8th, 2006 at 1.15 pm
Um, he does still have almost eighteen months to go on his contract. Reading the relevant emails, it is clear that he was not attempting to blackmail anyone - he was offering to throw himself on his sword, but why do so for free when he was an innocent party? His career is over because he was sacrificed on the altar of sub-con appeasement, not through any real fault. His immediate ‘retirement’ would have helped ease the situation - perhaps - had the ICC not hung him out to dry. I suspect $500,000 would have been a bargain. Hopefully he’ll sue the ICC, but they have more lawyers than him, so I wouldn’t bet on it.
November 8th, 2006 at 1.29 pm
Demanding money for such things is what is called blackmail.
If you have done something to create trouble for someone (either knowingly or un-knowingly) and then demanding money to keep your mouth shut is not blackmail, then I really know what blackmail is!
November 8th, 2006 at 2.55 pm
In fact, blackmail is the crime of demanding payment in return for not revealing damaging information, so I suppose it’s back to school for you mate.
Hair did no such thing. Invest in a dictionary before you start throwing such accusations about - and perhaps look up libel when first you open it. Hair really should consider litigating against some of those who have lined up to attack him.
November 8th, 2006 at 3.33 pm
slips, either you have not bothered to read the contents of Hair’s email or you do not want to ack that what he put down on email suits the definition of blackmail to a T!
November 8th, 2006 at 5.04 pm
being australian.. how many games have you watched in which hair has umpired?
have you watched every test match of pak that hair has umpired? i have and i can safely say that he shares your views about “sub-cons” i.e. assume guilt… on the other hand he assumes innocence for other teams..in your world view this would be the “right” approach so you are in favour of hair.. in my opinion an umpire should have no preconceived notions about the teams playing and should base the decisions on that particular game..
i was watching a hair umpired test match with an australian friend.. it was eng vs pak in which he didn’t give out clear nicks that everybody could see.. and even he was shocked..i shrugged my shoulders and said.. hair is just being hair.. then when collingwood got a massive inside edge that the keeper took way down the leg side.. he wasn’t given out.. so hilarious.. there are sooo many examples of this..ALL of which i ignored and gave hair the benefit of doubt.. however.. he also penalized a pak batsman for walking down the pitch.. when he only took half a step on the danger area.. he got the player to go back.. i.e. cancel the run.. next ball.. he gave him lbw to a ball that was clearly going down leg.. then he warned a spinner twice in another game and took him out of the attack.. and the list goes on and on.. all umpires give wrong decisions from time to time… simon taufel has also given many wrong decisions against pak.. BUT.. his mistakes are not one sided… watch all the tests of pak under hair and then you can form a more educated opinion on what the problem is…
if you detest sub-cons so much you can choose not to watch games that involve “sub-cons” or maybe start a movement to not play sub-con teams..
i certainly wouldn’t care.. just like your interest seems to be only australia-england.. my interest mainly lies in india-pak matches..
in case of cheating.. yes.. sub-cons have cheated as have other teams.. however, umpires should not base their decisions of what has happened in the past.. pak have tampered with the ball especially when tampering wasn’t an issue.. it only became an issue in 1992 when pak destroyed the english batting line up with reverse swing.. so as an umpire i can make up my mind and say pak always tampers the ball… which isn’t the right way of doing things.. even if in fact pak does tamper with the ball in every match.. in the justice system.. you have to assume innocence until proven guilty.. not assume guilt from the start.. that is my view.. if your view is assume guilt in the case of sub-con.. then in that case the removal of hair was obviously not the right decision..
pak should have kept playing..not playing on was absolutely the wrong thing to do.. but that is separate from the issue of hair.. hair vs pak had been building up over many years.. and it just completely boiled over that day… kind of inevitable really..
i am also ready to give hair the benefit of doubt.. i don’t know if he is racist or not.. maybe his bias is very subconcious.. buried deep inside his brain somewhere.. but on the evidence to me it seems very one-sided against pak..
he asked for 500,000 off the books to shut up about the issue and said you can give what ever reason about me leaving cricket..not very honest at all.. it doesn’t matter what the amount was.. esp. when he said he was taking a stand on principle.. and the next day is sending an email which says pay me off and i don’t care about taking a stand..
we both have brought up unrelated issues such as background of corruption and aussie past.. both are unrelated to the issue of hair and his umpiring.. lets just base the issue on the games in which hair umpired pak.. show them to a neutral person and i have no doubt that they will be able to see a clear bias… all the people who are supporting hair.. i’m sure have not even watched the pak/hair matches.. they are basing their views just on him being on the panel.. it is possible to be on the panel.. while being biased against 1 or 2 teams..
November 9th, 2006 at 6.15 am
Hmm, not a very pleasant debate here — insults flying.
For what it’s worth, I think Hair’s sacking was dodgy, and his emails did not constitute blackmail by any definition of the word. It does seem as if undue influence was exerted from the subcontinent and the ICC didn’t show much spine.
On the other hand, making blanket accusations of corruption against Asian teams is both silly and provocative. There’ve been major scandals with “whitey” teams as well, And you can’t say Pakistan, for example, aren’t going about rooting out wrongdoing in their own team, witness the harsh drugs bans on Shoaib and Asif.
November 13th, 2006 at 8.25 pm
“I’ve not done anything to any Asians - my two best friends are Sikhs, but they don’t consider themselves Indian, they’re Australians”…
So as long as Asian are NOT asians, Slips does not have any issues with them!
Wow!
November 15th, 2006 at 3.21 am
No Saurabh, that’s not what I meant. The last time I checked, both still had brown skin and practised their faith. However, they have nothing but contempt for Asian values. It is they who have detailed the level of corruption in both India and Pakistan. It was they who informed me that it was just a way of life in the region, and I would never see a change in this. They refuse to have any business dealings with these countries, and they are both ashamed and embarrassed by the mire that is the sub-continent. They decry Asian values, and have adopted Australian values. My argument has nothing to do with skin colour, and everything to do with social practice.
As far as my friends go, they are two of the most honest and upright people I have ever met. I admire them and their extended families. I admire their faith, and spend a reasonable amount of time at their temple, and within their community. Despite being a practicing member of my own church, I see no reason why I should not - it’s not religion or racism that informs my opinion of the sub-con, it’s outright contempt for your institutionalised corruption.
Comments
« Abandon all hope ye English that enter here? | Main | Photos of England arriving in Australia »
