Can I first say that I like Peter Roebuck. I think that he always is an interesting and engaging commentator and writer. I own all of his books and have enjoyed them immensely.
However, I can help but feel his piece in the SMH today was poor (and I’m trying to be kind here). Really, take this, for example:
What on earth have Harbhajan's dependents got to do with it? How does this change his guilt or innocence? Is Roebuck attempting to suggest that a suspension will cause nine people to go hungry? Should only bachelors be suspended? What if they’re helping out their mum? It really is nonsense.
Similarly, he writes off the comment as a simple overreaction, but it is funny that it's the only black guy in the side that gets called the monkey. I guess it would have been an understandable ‘overreaction’ for Symonds to whack him with the bat then? I know I would if someone who has already been warned threw a racist slur at me. To be honest, I thought Roebuck was a bit smarter than falling into the trap of attempting to justify that sort of thing. I can just imagine the column if Ponting called Tendulkar a monkey and jumped around like Harbhajan did on day one! Are 'intemperate’ Indians unable to be held to account for their comments? He’s treading some very dodgy terrain here.
And comments like "There is no justice for them [the Indian team] in this country, nor any manners" is nonsense and feeds their persecution complex. Absolutely, they got some poor calls, but then again Tendulkar was plumb in front on 15, and I don't hear them whining about that.
Pointing out that Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist, Clarke lack grace and are bullies is hardly new or earth shattering. I would imagine the feeble Indian resistance to collapse the way that they did pretty much confirms going in hard against them. If the best that they can do is Hogg calling someone a bastard and some conspiracy theories about Bucknor being paid off, then I don't really see how this is worthy of sacking a captain. Roebuck needs a breath of fresh air and a cold shower I reckon.
As for the bit about not shaking hands and jumping about, first I would steer him to any time that India wins anything if he wants to see some poor winners, and second, Hussey, Gilchrist and Lee were straight in to Kumble shaking his hand, so I'm not sure where he's got that from.
I don’t really like the style of the current side, and to be totally honest, Hussey and Hogg are the only two guys I like to any degree (although Stuart Clark I’m ‘meh’ about I suppose). However, I guess that (being Australian, a bloke, and having played a few sports both contact and non-contact) I can’t stand nancies, sooks and hypocrites. The implication of the Indians is that the Australian’s can dish it out but not take it, I might cop that, but race is the one area where we’re not supposed to cop it. The notion that Symonds should “cop it sweet” is exactly what he did the last time Harbhajan called him a monkey. I would expect the media to be straight at Ponting's throat if he was aware of racial abuse and didn't make a complaint. The same goes for Kumble.
Also, Roebuck, in focusing on the poor sportsmanship of the Australians, completely overlooks the time-wasting tactics and silly appeals that the Indians regularly indulged in during the test. Moreover, he completely skirts around the ‘monkey’ jibe. The Indian line of “he never said it... BUT if he did say it, we don’t think that it’s racist... AND anyway, Hogg called Ganguly a stupid bastard” is just childish, and does nothing but inflame the situation. Roebuck doesn’t even go there (although the article was probably fired off right after the end of play, it reads like it).
To me, the real issue is the implied threat to call off the tour pending the outcome of the appeal. That is just plain blackmail and any of Ponting’s misdemeanours pale in comparison.
Sadly, this does not surprise me. One of my first memories of Indian cricket is Gavaskar threatening to walk out of the MCG test because he didn’t like an LBW call, and pretty much every tour since they have threatened at some point a walk out, so why you would extrapolate (as Roebuck has) that it must be all Australia’s fault is disingenuous at best.
However, I can help but feel his piece in the SMH today was poor (and I’m trying to be kind here). Really, take this, for example:
"Harbhajan Singh can be an irritating young man but he is head of a family and responsible for raising nine people. And all the Australian elders want to do is to hunt him from the game. Australian fieldsmen fire insults from the corners of their mouths, an intemperate Sikh warrior overreacts and his rudeness is seized upon. It might impress barrack room lawyers."
What on earth have Harbhajan's dependents got to do with it? How does this change his guilt or innocence? Is Roebuck attempting to suggest that a suspension will cause nine people to go hungry? Should only bachelors be suspended? What if they’re helping out their mum? It really is nonsense.
Similarly, he writes off the comment as a simple overreaction, but it is funny that it's the only black guy in the side that gets called the monkey. I guess it would have been an understandable ‘overreaction’ for Symonds to whack him with the bat then? I know I would if someone who has already been warned threw a racist slur at me. To be honest, I thought Roebuck was a bit smarter than falling into the trap of attempting to justify that sort of thing. I can just imagine the column if Ponting called Tendulkar a monkey and jumped around like Harbhajan did on day one! Are 'intemperate’ Indians unable to be held to account for their comments? He’s treading some very dodgy terrain here.
And comments like "There is no justice for them [the Indian team] in this country, nor any manners" is nonsense and feeds their persecution complex. Absolutely, they got some poor calls, but then again Tendulkar was plumb in front on 15, and I don't hear them whining about that.
Pointing out that Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist, Clarke lack grace and are bullies is hardly new or earth shattering. I would imagine the feeble Indian resistance to collapse the way that they did pretty much confirms going in hard against them. If the best that they can do is Hogg calling someone a bastard and some conspiracy theories about Bucknor being paid off, then I don't really see how this is worthy of sacking a captain. Roebuck needs a breath of fresh air and a cold shower I reckon.
As for the bit about not shaking hands and jumping about, first I would steer him to any time that India wins anything if he wants to see some poor winners, and second, Hussey, Gilchrist and Lee were straight in to Kumble shaking his hand, so I'm not sure where he's got that from.
I don’t really like the style of the current side, and to be totally honest, Hussey and Hogg are the only two guys I like to any degree (although Stuart Clark I’m ‘meh’ about I suppose). However, I guess that (being Australian, a bloke, and having played a few sports both contact and non-contact) I can’t stand nancies, sooks and hypocrites. The implication of the Indians is that the Australian’s can dish it out but not take it, I might cop that, but race is the one area where we’re not supposed to cop it. The notion that Symonds should “cop it sweet” is exactly what he did the last time Harbhajan called him a monkey. I would expect the media to be straight at Ponting's throat if he was aware of racial abuse and didn't make a complaint. The same goes for Kumble.
Also, Roebuck, in focusing on the poor sportsmanship of the Australians, completely overlooks the time-wasting tactics and silly appeals that the Indians regularly indulged in during the test. Moreover, he completely skirts around the ‘monkey’ jibe. The Indian line of “he never said it... BUT if he did say it, we don’t think that it’s racist... AND anyway, Hogg called Ganguly a stupid bastard” is just childish, and does nothing but inflame the situation. Roebuck doesn’t even go there (although the article was probably fired off right after the end of play, it reads like it).
To me, the real issue is the implied threat to call off the tour pending the outcome of the appeal. That is just plain blackmail and any of Ponting’s misdemeanours pale in comparison.
Sadly, this does not surprise me. One of my first memories of Indian cricket is Gavaskar threatening to walk out of the MCG test because he didn’t like an LBW call, and pretty much every tour since they have threatened at some point a walk out, so why you would extrapolate (as Roebuck has) that it must be all Australia’s fault is disingenuous at best.
Comments