Re: Judge would not ban Harbhajan even if 'monkey' taunt was true

On Jan 31, 8:06 am, aravindan...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Because the video evidence Judge saw showed that Symonds started it,
for which Symonds also agrees, even if the alleged word was used, he
would not apply 3.3

Fromhttp://sport.guardian.co.uk/cricket/story/0,,2249546,00.html?gusrc=rs...

The Aussie media is spinning the ICC goof up big time. They have made
it look lke if harby's previous bans were known to Hansen he would
have banned Harby under 3.3.
The judge's reasoning is if you pick a fight and abuse another player,
retaliatory statements from the othe guy will be viewed in context of
the first abuse not in isolation. the Aussies are refusing to accept
this. If they accept this sledging becomes unacceptable in the future
as any abuse directed by them on other teams will bring strong
retaliation and this judgement will be used as a standard.
In this light I consider Darren lehman also bit unlucky, we do not
know the words the Sri Lankans used, to abuse him on the field before
he came up with the f... bl.. c.. remark.
Steve Waugh's team was better in this regard to their off field
behaviou. Notice Steve Waugh's constant respect for Ganguly. Steve's
men conducted themselves fairly well of the field. Ponting's men are
absolute disgrce to Australians.
.

Relevant Pages