That is what this cricinfo artcile does quite wonderfully. Interesting comparision b/w Lara and Sachin - and the attitude of Aussies towards them. Also puts the Miandad Lillee incident in proper perspective.
Fighting fire with a flame-thrower Champions Trophy 2006
Fighting fire with a flame-thrower
Fazeer Mohammed
October 23, 2006
The table tennis ball bounced past, blissfully uncontested, as I was still rejoicing in the magnificence of following through on a fearsome smash, utterly convinced that the point was already mine.
"Don't try that again if you not prepared for it to come back," said one of my uncles, a better-than-average table tennis player and cricketer who was using my grandmother's dining table to teach me an important lesson that remains as fresh as the day it occurred more than 30 years ago.
Last Wednesday's verbal clash between Chris Gayle and Michael Clarke in Mumbai brought home the relevance of that bit of advice, and also reinforced the belief that when it comes to the concept of "do so ain't like so", Australia's cricketers are the unrivalled world champions.
In his tour diary entry on the incident, Gayle inferred that Clarke was the instigator of the confrontation, and while conceding that his protracted tirade against Clarke deserved some form of punishment, it was disappointing to see the man who triggered the whole thing - at least from the Gayle's perspective - get off scot free.
It also did not go unnoticed that the match officials made no report of the incident until the next day, by which time Ricky Ponting, the Australian captain, had already passed his judgement in implying that the only way the credibility of the disciplinary process would be upheld was if Gayle was brought to book.
Of course, from the moment the matter came within the purview of match referee Mike Procter for investigation, the issue was no longer if Gayle should be disciplined, but what would be the nature of the censure. It was not surprising either that Clarke was absolved.
An outstanding allrounder that he was, Procter clearly lacks an even hand in arbitrating matters that involve Australia, South Africa and New Zealand. An outrageous charge you say? Well, what other conclusion is there after his response to journalists' queries that the Aussies were getting away with an abundance of excessive over-appealing in last November's series against West Indies, stating that players from those countries are more aggressive, and that had to be taken into consideration? In other words, there is one rule for those three and another for everyone else.
It was heartening to hear Ramnaresh Sarwan - who led the side superbly in the field in the absence of the injured Brian Lara - in his post-match comments alluding to the Gayle-Clarke tete-a-tete and suggesting that players who like to dish out should be prepared to get some back.
Sarwan knows only too well how to give back, his instant response to Glenn McGrath's malicious remark on the fourth afternoon of the Antigua Test in 2003 causing McGrath to completely lose his cool. I wonder if John Howard, the Australian Prime Minister, would have been so eager in rallying to the defence of McGrath in the furore that followed the incident if he knew what his compatriot had said in the first place.
Every team in every sport, at one time or another, engages in baiting the opposition, winding them up to try and trigger a loss of concentration. But it is more than a little annoying that, having legitimised and institutionalised an underhand practice as "mental disintegration" (the pretentious terminology of former captain Steve Waugh), the Australians recoil in self-righteous indignation when they find themselves on the receiving end.
Which is why, in the sporting context, if you want to upset the best in the world, sometimes to have to fight fire with an inferno. The opponent strikes a match, you respond by burning down his house. It is an overreaction, but an overreaction with a purpose - to let him know in terms that he can best understand that you're not taking any foolishness.
Lara is a past master at being both an instigator and flame-throwing responder, especially against the Australians, which is why they fear him so. They will always speak in the most glowing terms about Sachin Tendulkar because they think they have his measure as far as beating them off his own bat. But they can't handle Lara, what with the ability to dissect and destruct with his scything blade, while at the same time sallying forth with enough caustic lyrics to keep them on edge.
In this context, I'm reminded of Javed Miandad's attempt to test the sweet spot of his bat on Dennis Lillee's head during Pakistan's 1981-82 tour of Australia. Miandad was no doubt saying more than a thing or two to the fiery fast bowler, which was a bit of a reversal for Lillee, who was accustomed to having the last (very strong) word, especially against timid players from the Indian subcontinent.
Put off his stride by Miandad, Lillee kicked him on the back of the legs on the way back to the top of his mark. As anyone with any sort of broughtupsy would know, to kick someone, even lightly, is just about the lowest form of degradation towards another human being.
It necessitated a strident reaction, and as Miandad drew his blade back in a backlift higher than anything ever managed by Lara, the presiding umpire stepped in to save Lillee from the response he deserved. Do so really ain't like so, and they need to be reminded of that occasionally, even if it costs 30 per cent of a day's pay.
Typical cricinfo biased article.The only physical incident mentioned is Lillee.No mention of the fact that Gayle used his shoulder against Clarke.He actually advocates using violence against the Aussies.According to him Lillee deserved to be hit with a cricket bat.Over reaction is ok,as long as it is against the Aussies.As an Aussie supporter I am getting tired of the garbage spouted about the Aussies.This writer had to go back to the past to find some ammunition to use against the Aussies.A glossing over of the McGrath incident when the comment that set him off was about his wife who was battling cancer.McGrath started it,he got it back,but he did not get physical.The Windies fast bowlers used intimidation for years,and when Waugh challenged one of them,he was physically threatened.Selective memory by the writer.As to the over appealing by the Aussies,I believe the umpire laughed at that claim and asked if the person posing the question had ever umpired in the sub continent.
The main point is that Aussies are the ones who always provoke and rile up their opponents, but act all self righteous when someone responds. Ponting talking about the spirit of the game. Please...
No that is not the end of the story. Getting physical is not some kind of line set in stone. Aussies do not have a license to utter disgusting things to anybody they feel like and get away with it. The little Pup was lucky daddy Gayle didn't slap him..
Because Gayle says something it must be true?The impression from most commentators was that Gayle started it.I quote from cricinfo.
Clarke weathers a Gayle Chris Gayle has always been one cool dude, with his stand-and-deliver sixes and refusing to field anywhere but in the slips, even when successive captains have discreetly suggested that business seldom gets done that way. It must have been preying on his mind, that limbo between being a liability and turning into a leader, with Lara off the field sporting a sore back. A defeat imminent against Australia in Mumbai, he seemed to have decided that it was time to act. After an early wobble, Adam Gilchrist and Michael Clarke were cruising along. Gayle ignored the grizzled veteran, focusing instead on Pup and began an extended exchange of pleasantries. Exactly what transpired is anybody's guess but since matters didn't culminate in a head-butt, no lip readers were pressed into service. Judging from Gayle's demeanor it's unlikely that he was cracking just 'Yo' Momma's so stupid' jokes or those of the 'it's red, it's round and weighs five ounces' variety. Clarke throughout appeared to maintain his cool, even managing a smile, which clearly outraged commentators who felt that the umpires were seemingly oblivious of what was going on. As it turned out the officials had taken notice and next day, Gayle was fined 30% of his match fee. The widespread suspicion was that Clarke couldn't have been so innocent after all and that he had provoked Gayle by calling him a "second class citizen", something which Clarke later vehemently denied, claiming that his own working-class origins would never make him stoop so low. Gayle had the last laugh, though, as West Indies beat Australia by ten runs End Ponting has a point about consistency. This from the Guardian a while back
Inzamam turns the Leeds air blue at umpiring errors Now we know a little bit more about Inzamam-ul-Haq. He might pray in Urdu but he swears in English. Inzy is a deeply religious man, but three bad decisions against Pakistan by lunch was cause enough to let rip with a choice piece of Anglo-Saxon. Bob Woolmer, Pakistan's coach, is another gentle man not given to emotional outbursts but if the International Cricket Council receives a bill for repairs to a laptop, its screen smashed after colliding with a Headingley dressing room wall, it should sign the cheque immediately. END Care to explain why Inzy wasn't charged for that incident yet McGrath was fined for swearing at himself in a match last year here in Australia,and RP was fined for swearing at Fletcher?Like I said,selective memories.
Ponting was fined for mouthing obsenities 4 feet away from the "follow in" camera which beamed pictures and sound to an audience of millions and 10 feet away from a score or more spectators which included women - directing his abuse at a non player, 20 feet away on the first floor balcony.
I know why Ponting was fined.He swore at Fletcher.Inzy swore at the umpire,why wasn't he charged?Why wasn't he charged when he questioned the umpire in the ODI match against England?Exactly the same offence Ponting was fined for.Inzy kept on at the umpire when a catch was claimed and ruled to be not taken cleanly by the 3rd umpire.Like I said consistency would be good,and I am glad to see Ponting finally speaking out on the issue.
Originally posted by send in the clowns: I know why Ponting was fined.He swore at Fletcher.Inzy swore at the umpire,why wasn't he charged?Why wasn't he charged when he questioned the umpire in the ODI match against England?Exactly the same offence Ponting was fined for.Inzy kept on at the umpire when a catch was claimed and ruled to be not taken cleanly by the 3rd umpire.Like I said consistency would be good,and I am glad to see Ponting finally speaking out on the issue.
I'm not saying Inzy should not have been fined. What I am saying however, is that the two incedences ought not to be compared. Countless cricketers curse at umpires decisions and if caught doing so openly they get rapped for it. Inzy slipped the net .... granted.
What Ponting did was to swear loudly in front of a close-up audience, with his vitriol directed at a NON player. Subtle difference
t also did not go unnoticed that the match officials made no report of the incident until the next day, by which time Ricky Ponting, the Australian captain, had already passed his judgement in implying that the only way the credibility of the disciplinary process would be upheld was if Gayle was brought to book.
Of course, from the moment the matter came within the purview of match referee Mike Procter for investigation, the issue was no longer if Gayle should be disciplined, but what would be the nature of the censure. It was not surprising either that Clarke was absolved.
I don't know if it says anything about the double standards of the Aussies.
I do think it shows Procter in very poor light - for the umpteenth time.
Cameras and microphones are on the pitch,so I am sure the world heard Inzy swearing,along with the spectators at the ground,and I am positive that the umpires heard him,whereas they would not have heard Ponting as he was on the sidlines and the match was still in progress.You are trying to say swearing on the pitch is ok depending on who hears it,and that is not stated in the rules.I have no problem with Ponting being fined,he lost it,and he paid the price,but I do have a problem with hypocritical articles that state Australian players get away with murder,and the poor little sub continent nations have to sit back and take it.I have shown two instances,of it not being the case,there is many more.
Forget it sitc ... you're missing the point. Yes, Inzy swore, should have been fined but got away with it. Yes Ponting was fined because he was caught at it. Ponting did it under the cameramans lens and mic (as he passed him heading for the gate to the pavillion). But, it's not about Aussies and Subbies - it's about who got caught and who didn't!
Originally posted by send in the clowns: A glossing over of the McGrath incident when the comment that set him off was about his wife who was battling cancer.
I sympathise with the problems in the Mcgrath family, but he was asking for it. Can't really blame Sarwan for it.
Originally posted by send in the clowns: Cameras and microphones are on the pitch,so I am sure the world heard Inzy swearing,along with the spectators at the ground,and I am positive that the umpires heard him,whereas they would not have heard Ponting as he was on the sidlines and the match was still in progress.You are trying to say swearing on the pitch is ok depending on who hears it,and that is not stated in the rules.I have no problem with Ponting being fined,he lost it,and he paid the price,but I do have a problem with hypocritical articles that state Australian players get away with murder,and the poor little sub continent nations have to sit back and take it.I have shown two instances,of it not being the case,there is many more.
Thanks for clearing that up. And here I was thinking that the West Indies were situated at the other side of the world.
Put off his stride by Miandad, Lillee kicked him on the back of the legs on the way back to the top of his mark. As anyone with any sort of broughtupsy would know, to kick someone, even lightly, is just about the lowest form of degradation towards another human being. END The strangest part of that article.I would put spitting in the category of the worst form of insult,but I would not call it the lowest form of degradation,I can think of a lot worse.I have always hated people spitting on others.It is disgusting.A light kick in the leg would not bother me,and certainly would not lead to me picking up a weapon to use against them.That is a coward's behaviour.I hope Lillee was punished for the incident,but I guess he was because the author would have pointed out he wasn't punished at all.As I said a hypocrite.Maybe somebody should ask him what punishment Inzy received for going after a spectator with a bat,but that may have been justified in his mind,because Inzy was picked on by the spectator.One of those writers who blame the Aussies for umpiring mistakes.
As far as I am concerned when it comes to cricket the Windies are part of the sub continent.Sri Lanka, Pakistan,Windies and India all speak as one against the big bad colonials.
Originally posted by 12thman: No that is not the end of the story. Getting physical is not some kind of line set in stone. Aussies do not have a license to utter disgusting things to anybody they feel like and get away with it. The little Pup was lucky daddy Gayle didn't slap him..
Gayle is lucky he didn't start slapping anybody. Blokes like Roy can handle themselves very nicely if Gayle wants to play rugby instead of cricket.
Originally posted by send in the clowns: As far as I am concerned when it comes to cricket the Windies are part of the sub continent.Sri Lanka, Pakistan,Windies and India all speak as one against the big bad colonials.
Originally posted by send in the clowns: Cameras and microphones are on the pitch,so I am sure the world heard Inzy swearing,along with the spectators at the ground,and I am positive that the umpires heard him,whereas they would not have heard Ponting as he was on the sidlines and the match was still in progress.You are trying to say swearing on the pitch is ok depending on who hears it,and that is not stated in the rules.I have no problem with Ponting being fined,he lost it,and he paid the price,but I do have a problem with hypocritical articles that state Australian players get away with murder,and the poor little sub continent nations have to sit back and take it.I have shown two instances,of it not being the case,there is many more.
Thanks for clearing that up. And here I was thinking that the West Indies were situated at the other side of the world.
I must say his Geography is pretty bad, according to him Africa is a country!
