Reem With A View

"Names and attributes must be accommodated to the essence of things, and not the essence to the names, since things come first and names afterwards." – Galileo

Andrew Symonds should have been banned

I was very disappointed after going through the Justice Hansen report as Symonds has been proven guilty of STARTING THE WHOLE thing.

Here are the excerpts:

[12] It is apparent that the heated exchange arose because Mr Symonds took exception to the appellant patting the bowler Mr Lee on the backside. I have reviewed the television evidence of what occurred. It is clear that Mr Lee bowled an excellent yorker to Mr Singh who was fortunate to play the ball to fine leg. As he passed Mr Lee while completing a single Mr Singh patted Mr Lee on the backside. Anyone observing this incident would take it to be a clear acknowledgement of “well bowled”.

[13] However Mr Symonds took objection to this and at the end of the 116th over he approached Mr Singh telling him he had no friends among the Australians in foul and abusive language. Mr Singh became angry and responded in kind. It was accepted by Mr Symonds that some of Mr Singh’s response was in his native language

“MR MANOHAR: I put it to you that apart from the other Indian abuses he said to you the words “teri maki”?

MY SYMONDS: Possibly, I don’t recall, I don’t speak that language.

MR MANOHAR: Thank you.

HIS HONOUR: But you accept that as a possibility, My Symonds?

MR SYMONDS: As a possibility I accept that, yes.”

Mr Symonds also gave evidence that in the course of this angry exchange that he initiated and provoked Mr Singh called him “you big monkey”.

[14] Mr Symonds appears to be saying that he finds it unacceptable that an opponent makes a gesture that recognises the skill of one of his own team mates. In the transcript he stated:

“MR MANOHAR: You had any objection to that patting on the back?

MR SYMONDS: Did I have an objection to it? my objection was that a test match is no place to be friendly with an opposition player, is my objection.”

If that is his view I hope it is not one shared by all international cricketers. It would be a sad day for cricket if it is.

Read the entire Justice Hansen judgment here: The Judgment of Justice Hansen.

I strongly feel that for self-admittedly INITIATING the on field argument and THEN playing the victim card PLUS, refusing to acknowledge sportive spirit (gestures like Harbhajan was patting Lee for bowling a superb delivery are rare in modern sport, when competitors rarely acknowledge their opponent’s skill), Andrew Symonds should have been banned for “deliberately bringing the game into disrepute”. At minium 10 tests as he manufactured a serious racism charge against poor Harbhajan.

Shame on you, Andrew Symonds. Hope you NEVER get a lucrative IPL contract, unless you publicly apologize to Harbhajan.

Advertisements

Filed under: Sport, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses

  1. Ray Dixon says:

    Andrew Symonds was not found “guilty” of anything, he was only chastised by the Judge, but so what? You cannot be banned if you’re not charged with anything in thre first place. India made no complaint against Symonds so I guess they don’t believe he’s “guilty” of anything either.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Archives

%d bloggers like this: