The second story was a growing South Asian unease with the successful Australian attempt to claim the moral high ground in world cricket. Australians don't like it but the country's cricketers are widely seen as potty-mouthed bullies who manage to get away with murder partly because they sledge strategically and partly because the Australian definition of 'hard but fair'—filth on the field and a beer off it—seemed to have been swallowed whole by the umpires and match referees who supervise international cricket. Every time Ponting tells television cameras that after 2003 the Australian team cleaned up its act and then cites figures to show that Australian players have been brought before the match referee much less often than any other major Test side, aggrieved Indian supporters put this down to Australian hegemony. They remain convinced that umpires are willing to sanction shrill petulance (jack-in-box appeals, visible disappointment) but not manly truculence (obscenity, lewdness and intimidation) because the first is directed at umpires while the second stays between players. This sense of being hard done by is reinforced by the pattern of bad decisions suffered by touring teams in Australia, Kumar Sangakkara's appalling decision being perhaps the worst in recent times.

Australian cricket is hegemonic for the best possible reasons. Australia has had the best cricket team by miles for more than ten years, its coaches have, at one time or another, have tried to drill Australian skills into other national squads, its sports science and its training methods are cutting edge and Channel 9's cricket telecast has taught the world how to cover cricket. But because its players fetishize a hardnosed take on the game, they, unlike the West Indies in their pomp, are universally unloved and in recent years the Ugly Australian stereotype has been rendered uglier by Ponting's charmless leadership.

Indians don't think much of Ponting for several reasons. His first tour was dogged by rumours of bad behaviour, his second tour was an embarrassment (he scored less than a dozen runs in three Test matches), his onfield aggression struck Indians as offensive, his unlovely habit of spitting into his palms and rubbing them together left desis wondering how he got people to shake hands with him and not only did he look remarkably like George Bush, he behaved like him too.

Bush invaded Iraq and then managed to get the invasion ratified by the United Nations after the fact. Anglo-American rhetoric about the legitimacy of pre-emptive war is similar to Australian cricket's argument that bullying (so long as it wins matches) can be justified as robustness. 'Hard and Fair' in the world defined by Bush, begins to read like 'Shock and Awe'.

It is in this charged context that the just concluded Test series between India and Australia unfolded, and in the second Test at Sydney, the two grand narratives of 21st century cricket, India's growing economic clout and Australia's cricketing hegemony, met like unsheathed live wires. It didn't help that the tension between the two teams had been personified. Sreesanth and Harbhajan Singh took it upon themselves in the recent one-day series between the two countries to answer sledging with fevered aggression. Harbhajan went on record to say that Australian behaviour was 'vulgar' and that they were bad losers. We are now told that he had a run-in with Symonds in Baroda, so when Sreesanth didn't make the squad to Australia, he was, for the Australian team, the Ugly Indian.

From the Indian point of view, the Sydney Test was a textbook illustration of the way in which an Australian series is loaded against the opposition. The Indian team got a slew of awful umpiring decisions, the Australians did their tiresome all-in-the-game-mate routine, Clarke exploited a gentleman's agreement to claim a dodgy catch, Ponting disclaimed a catch and then unsuccessfully appealed for another that he had obviously grounded (and, post-match, barked at an Indian reporter who questioned him about it), then reported Harbhajan for racially abusing Symonds.

	The most satisfying part of Hansen's judgment is his characterisation of Michael Clarke as an unreliable witness © Getty Images

When Mike Procter upheld the Australian charge and banned Harbhajan for three matches he brought the two live wires into contact and the lights nearly went out on the game. Indian players have been on the receiving end of the match referee's kangaroo court before and know it to be dysfunctional. Procter is a notably inept match referee who presided over the shambles created by Darrell Hair and the Pakistan cricket team last year. For him to have taken the word of the likes of Michael Clarke, who as a batsman had stood his ground after being caught off a massive edge at slip and who as a fielder had confidently claimed a bump ball catch, over the testimony of Tendulkar who insisted he hadn't heard 'monkey' being said, was the final straw. The most satisfying part of Hansen's judgment is his characterisation of the slippery Clarke as an unreliable witness.

I think it's likely that Harbhajan called Symonds a monkey, but judgment can't be based on what I or anyone else thinks: it rests on what can be proven. There was no corroborative evidence in the Harbhajan affair and the hostilities of the Sydney Test had destroyed any trust between the two sides, leaving the Indian team in a state of thin-skinned rage at being robbed. Procter managed to compound this mess by unequivocally finding for the Australians without explaining how he had come to his conclusions.

This is when India flexed its muscle, but the 'India' in question wasn't the BCCI, it was the Indian team. Anil Kumble and Sachin Tendulkar, the two most senior players in the Indian side, one its best bowler and the other its best batsman for nearly twenty years, put the BCCI on notice. They insisted that the Board stand by Harbhajan and made it clear that the team was unwilling to go on with the tour if Procter's decision wasn't reversed.

Journalists who think the BCCI used the occasion to assert itself are just plain wrong. The Indian board has no interest in cricket as such: witness the absurd schedule it framed for the Indian team. Left to itself, the Board would have hung Harbhajan up to dry (as it had sacrificed Bishan Bedi over the 'Vaseline' affair decades ago) and gone on with the tour: it was Tendulkar's ultimatum that goosed them into action. Press criticism of the BCCI's brinkmanship in chartering a plane to fly the team home from Adelaide if the appeal went against Harbhajan, could just as well be directed at the Indian team, because I'm certain that the old firm, Kumble & Tendulkar, had something to do with the arriving one-day specialists being quartered in Adelaide in solidarity with Harbhajan.

I suspect the reason for this last flourish was the report that Judge Hansen was likely to consider new audio evidence that had not been made available to Procter. The tapes didn't have Harbhajan saying 'monkey' but they had Hayden telling Harbhajan that a word he had used amounted to racism. My guess is that the possibility that the Australians would spin this as clinching evidence, drove Kumble and Tendulkar to circle the wagons in Adelaide. And here's the thing: it worked. The Australians agreed to press the lesser charge. Having set up this eyeballing contest, they blinked.

Is this the end of the rule of law as we know it and the onset of anarchy? No. On the evidence of the third and fourth Tests, it feels more like the dawn of a new age of civility on the ground and a possible end to sledging. There was a time in Test cricket (a very long time) when Australia and England were more equal than the rest and the game survived that asymmetry. It'll survive this one.

A shorter version of this post appeared earlier in the Telegraph, which can be read here

The best take ever on this whole affair. Worth spending the time on your article dude. Rock on.

Very well written, Mukul. One of the few articles I've read on this entire affair that I agree wholeheartedly with. The reaction of the Australian and, to a lesser extent, the British press is a reaction to an a shift in the balance of power in cricket towards Asia, not outrage at the recent decision. Kudos to Judge Hansen for calling a spade a spade and saying in Sydney, it was Symonds who broke the agreement made in India. For the first time in a long while, Australia are seeing a team challenge them both on and off the ground and they don't like it. More power to Team India, and, as you put it, the old firm of Kumble and Tendulkar.

Very well written, Mukul. One of the few articles I've read on this entire affair that I agree wholeheartedly with. The reaction of the Australian and, to a lesser extent, the British press is a reaction to an a shift in the balance of power in cricket towards Asia, not outrage at the recent decision. Kudos to Judge Hansen for calling a spade a spade and saying in Sydney, it was Symonds who broke the agreement made in India. For the first time in a long while, Australia are seeing a team challenge them both on and off the ground and they don't like it. More power to Team India, and, as you put it, the old firm of Kumble and Tendulkar.

Now that is a sensible no partial post unlike some of the utter crap being dished out in the australian media or the indian media for that matter

welcome back mukul.

Excellent column!!
Absolutely spot-on. Cricket will move on from this controversy to see better days ahead.

Great post Mukul. Apart from Michael Clarke being called an unreliable witness, I would also add Hansen's damning of Andrew Symonds attitude of "Test match is no place to be friendly". It just goes to show what a low-life Symonds is.

The article is a precise summary of facts and emotions... though the comparison with George Bush is slightly hyperbole....

Interestingly, Aussies lost the appeal because they fought it like India of past - amotionally; They didn't have facts and evidence and just ganged up saying "We heard our mate being abused" and the versions of different Aussie players were inconsistent.

They could do better to present facts and separate emotions from it.... India has learnt the art now... probably after Virender Sehwag appealing & Tendulkar ball tampering incident in S. Africa

If BCCI flexed its muscles on its own- then I am proud to say that I am an Indian. The Aussies can make all the noises they want. They get personal and they are like a bunch of kids who want to win at any rate. If we are to uphold the law the second test result should be banned from the records.

It is their modus operandi from the days I started watching cricket. They take the main guy in oppsoition and then mold an attack on the guy - first using the stupid press - Muthiah, Shoaib, Prabhakar, are few examples. Then they take the attack to the field. Using the umpires, referees who shamelessley go along with the Aussies.

The tourist will be playing against 20 players in the ground and a lot more out of the ground. If the Aussies had won the 17th they would let go of this issue. But now they are hurt and are bound to cry for some more time.

Let them wake up and smell the coffee. IF there is no India or Indian players the game is dead and we are positively arrognat about it.

what a remarkable article by mukul.this is a smart reply to the blind aussies media

Well put and oh well, I am sure there's going to be a few replies here that do not agree. What's this about gentlements agreement regarding catches or anything else for that matter. Since when did the players make catching decisions. Sporting or not, rules are rules. What are the umpires there for, getting a tan!!!! ok, if there's technology involved in making decisions, so be it, third umpire. Not the players. I don't see sledging/fighting of any sort in soccer, well yellow carded and maybe red carded. Cricket is different, sledging directed to an opposing player should be dealt with the umpire and put a stop to it, I don't see other countries sledging as much as the Australians do. oops I forgot, that must be a new ruling in the games that applies to only Australia. I am sure other countries do, but hey, OZ is ranked no1 for a long time now. As for GILCHRIST, now there's a sportsman, I will surely miss him. Not just a great cricketer, but a sportsman too.Good luck to both in IND & OZ

While this is a largley a good piece of writing, I still have some concerns about the balance of it, or lack thereof, specificially in relation to the 2nd test.

-Michael Clarke is still convinced that he took the catch, which was the underlying part of the agreement-was the player sure. He's not the first and wont be the last.
-The umpiring favoured Australia, but it wasnt as lopsided as it seemed. Laxman and Sachin's non-LBWs for example. (not to mention the balancing of poor decisions against Aust in the 3rd/4th tests)
-Pontings catch that was given not out was debated post-Test as to whether the fact it touched the ground made it a non-catch. The definition of controlling his body was the main issue, and not clear cut. He was within his rights to appeal.
-Michael Clarke should have walked, no question. But so should have Ganguly-and Harbhajan when bowled! by Pieterson previously.
-By agreement, Ponting had to report Harbhajan once the accusation was made. Not his fault.

More tiresome tripe from a subcontinental journalist with an obvious agenda of attempting to legitimize the appalling actions of the BCCI. For every point mentioned in this article, you can find opposing views with an equal level of legitimacy to that which you state here.

Thanks for sensationalist journalism at it's best. As if there's not enough of that going around.

I think this is a fair charecterisation of the events. when Australia saw the going tough on the third day, they resorted to this. It was designed to rattle Harbhajan and the Indian team. I mean Brett Lee can defend himself. he did not have any problem with harbhajan slapping him on the back side, people do it all the time.

Mukul,

Good one. You have exactly reflected the mind of a cricket fan. I really doubt that the Australian cricket team will learn lessons from this series. They will try to find some ways to sledge the other teams and which can be terms as friendly talk.

What a ridiculous blog. It provides further evidence that there is no future in cricket between Australia and India. Australia is rapidly moving toward leaving the ICC and forming a new body with other nations that respect the umpires, officials and the rules of the game. India will not be invited to join

Mukul,

Good one. You have exactly reflected the mind of a cricket fan. I really doubt that the Australian cricket team will learn lessons from this series. They will try to find some ways to sledge the other teams and which can be termed as friendly talk.

Hello Mukul
Great article. Two main points which I felt have not been covered by anyone so far.
1. all this would not have happened, if Steve had referred the third umpire. Why have a third umpire is my question. As crucial a series as this, surely Steve would have known that and he is getting on in age, one should definetley consider the option of using the third umpire. Why did he not refer to this option is my question. External pressure is something that australia puts on these umpires during home series. I have followed most of the series from New Zealand, and all visiting sides get the same result every year. What is being done about it.

Question 2. through times gone by, the rest of the cricketing worls knows what the australian teams have dished out to visiting players on field. There have been far worse things than calling a player an animal. This seems rather school boyish. Why is the complaint of the australian team being upheld to set a preceident using a visiting team

Bravo Mukul, Spot on and well written. I have lived in Aust for 35 years and it's fascinating to see how the Aussie press, Channel nine, CA and certain members of the ICC are so defensive and clumsy in their efforts to cope with a new world order based on meritocracy and finacial reality.

Very well said Mukul. One other thing I would like to add - the Aussies are just plain irritated (maybe scared is too strong a word) that the Indian team has been challanging them over the last 8 years or so. The Sydney test showed how desperate they had become to win against their best opponent.

Just like all the other Indian reporter, you say that the Indian players did nothing wrong , but everything that the Aussie's did was wrong, wake up to yourself. If the shoe was on the other foot and you were an Australian would be be arguing that the Indians were the one's who were not playing in the right spirit of the game, of which it did happen on more than one occasion. India is just jealous that they cannot beat a great team like Australia who have lost some of their stars and are not quite as good a team as they were last year, but still India could not beat them, To me India has failed.

Extremely well-written and thoroughly unbiased as compared to some of the articles posted even by former cricketers. I usually read articles and never comment on them , but Mukul ,I had to write somethin about this one .....absolutely fantastic and impressive

Can't say how delighted I am to read this post. Not that India's actions have been vindicated but some important things have been laid out in clear.
Thanks for the article.

Further to my length-restricted post previously, the other issues I couldnt fit into my response;

- The facts are that the Australians have been reported much less than most other teams in the last few years, whereas India is one of the worst. Attempting to justify or ignore this fact by categorising what is ok and what is not ok is clearly not your job. It is for the ICC to determine what is ok, and what is not, and based on their rules the Australians have not transgressed at all in the last year (India 7 reports). Both teams were guilty of overappealing and not walking this series.

- I think the comments about the link between Ponting and George Bush are at best tenuous and at worst, misleading and sensationalistic.

Both teams had moments that shouldnt have been proud of. That said, the guilty should be shared equally, not all on Australia.

Perhaps what needs to be considered is whether the trouble that has followed India in recent years is a coincidence or not.

Great article. One point- out of approximately 1.3 billion citizens in cricket playing nations, why is it not possible to select about 20 world class umpires and a similar number of match referees. Why is it that inept, useless officials like Bucknor and Procter keep surfacing all over the place, time and time again? Umpires and referees are paid decent wages. Even with a really tough "entrance exam" I am sure hundreds of worthy would-be umpires would emerge from India and other countries. One gets sick of seeing the same faces at all the matches. And who says a match referee has to be a retired ex-test cricketer?

Finally an article from you that I totally agree with. Without Tendulkar, our board would not have fought for Harbhajan nor they would have fired Greg Chappell.

It also needs to be said that Bhajji issue has totally overshadowed the adventures of Mr Bucknor and Mr Benson at Sydney. The score line says 2-1 but the best Australia deserved was 1-1 and quite possibly a 1-2. People can say all about losing three wickets in an over, but momentum plays a big role in any sport. Had the umpiring been fair, India would have been on top right from day one at Sydney.

one of the best articles on the issue. Specially about BCCI. It would have totally caved in and left the players high and dry. One thing I couldn't understand is why the term "monkey" is racial vilification. Is it really a racial slur in Australia? Nevertheless, great article.

one of the best articles on the issue. Specially about BCCI. It would have totally caved in and left the players high and dry. One thing I couldn't understand is why the term "monkey" is racial vilification. Is it really a racial slur in Australia? Nevertheless, great article.

we all know what happened in australia and your comparsion of cricket controversy to iraq war is disgusting and stupid.

i have a lot of respect for the jornalists of cricinfo (of which i'm a big fan of). i am very impressed with Sambit Bal and thought he is the best of the lot. Well, Mukul Kesavan will give him a good run for his money. this is an excellent piece of journalistic analysis. i only thought Sambit and maybe Roebuck were capable of such. i'm a Sri Lankan and was keenly watching cricinfo for the AUD-IND series coverage and loved the whole thing. keep up the good work guys. btw, i agree and hope that things will improve in the future (i still feel hard done by the sanga decision from rudi). i wanted SL to end the aussie run of wins and do it before india (we have our friendly rivalries too). look forward to the ODI's.

- Well written, to the point, balanced and succinct
- Rashid Lafif incident is well worth mentioning (claiming a catch), so did ponting and clarke

Well said, Mukul. If you have not done so already, please send this to Mr. Peter Roebuck. Lastly, I think the Aussie bullies did get away even now! From what I read Symonds started this thing with Harbhajan in Sydney and while the latter was fined 50% of his pay, the former was not punished at all! I wish someone point this to ICC (BCCI?, please wake up!).

Its a great take on this whole affair, the whole world including every Aussie knows what happened in Sydney is utter crap and if we reverse the decision India would have won the series 2-1, I hope and pray more journalists can take a impartial view on the whole episode and clear some air...

A very hard-hitting article Mukul, but it does raise a few fair points. Its interesting to note the sharp polarization between cricket fans, each side's strong endorsement of one "story" while rejecting the other. But here are some things I think are unfair:
1) You shouldn't categorize one side as being Australian (Western) and the other being Indian (Asian) and justify further statements based on these classifications. Its unfair to say "Indians don't think much of Ponting..." etc; with all due respect, I don't think you will ever be qualified to speak on behalf of every Indian. The same applies to references on anything "Australian"
2) You have compounded this (quite deliberately) by bringing in the Bush comparison. Apart from being petty, how would you react to being compared to a terrorist for sympathizing with the Indian team's cause?
As with many sharp disagreements today, one wonders whether if it will ever be understood that pointless one-sided harangues ever achieve anything?

This is one of the best articles I have read on the Harbhajan saga. Great job, Mukul.
Rajan

Thank you Mukul for succinctly capturing the core essence and emotion behind the whole sydneygate episode. I hope ponting and the rest of the grumpies read this...Way to go!

“Justice Hansen did not have the full history of Harbhajan Singh's previous code of conduct breaches”

Justice Hansen would have delivered the same verdict, even if he has the full history of Harbhajan Singh.

In incident Harbhajan was provoked, I believe and I think every one in cricket world does the same; whole bungle was plan gone wrong by Australian cricket.
Over and above there is no proof of charges.

Mr. Speed could you please, arrange a hearing for provocation, which was done by Andrew Symonds and supported by Ricky, Mathew and Michael.

I believe there was no bungle, but it is cry over cry again. Even by!

Win in sport is not above all, Important is playing game and taking part in it fairly

Ishwinder Singh

Thanks Mukul. I do wish to take issue however with your view on Michael Clarke. First you say it was a 'dodgy catch' then 'bump ball catch'. The first is in doubt, the second seems definitive. The camerawork is unclear on Clarke's catch. You cannot be sure it was not a fair catch and OK to claim it. He can't know that the video will be inconclusive. You, and many others, assume he cheated but have no evidence for it. The video of Dhoni's claimed catch of Pietersen is conclusive - where is your 'slippery' name-calling of Dhoni - or he is permitted to be in error? Clarke looked foolish standing his ground but no less so than Harbhajan when clean bowled by Pietersen. So can Harbhajan be trusted? I also fail to understand why stnading your ground off a big nick is worse than standing your ground off a fine nick. At least you will be given out. Somehow Clarke is 'slippery' but a batsman 'standing his ground' on a fine nick is merely a non-walker exercising his right to an umpire's decision

gook one mukul ... i guess the australian media is yet to read the full transcript of the judgement or just too cocky / arrogant (as usual) to accept the truth ...they did not see this coming in their wildest dreams...and if this sickening mental degradation goes away from the game, it will be a boon ... and cricket will be the ultimate winner.
Australian system may be good in producing good cricketers....but first they need to teach them to be good humans.... i like their cricketing skills...but i have absolutely no respect for any of them ... and that is a shame

Yet another article which draws more issues into account to deflect the single issue raised. We should not be arguing if we like the way Ponting and his men go about playing cricket, the quality of the umpires, or accusing players of being unreliable, or cheats or liars. We should not be judging Harbhajan character based on previous indiscretions. We should not be worried about who runs world cricket, or the motives of the BCCI or CA. The single issue is simply do we accept racism or racist comments? Many will agree that Harbhajan most likely called Symonds a monkey. Many will agree calling Symonds a monkey is a racist comment. Yet few seem to think that the comment was unacceptable. Symonds and the rest of the Australian team are vilified for trying to abide by the laws of the game and stamp out racism. Meanwhile Harbhajans actions are justified. Sadly all this has shown to me is that we, the world cricket community are not ready to say no to racism.

Thanks, that helped me get inside the Indian mindset without making the Indian mindset sound absolutely unequivocally correct. I think I agree with most of what you said, although I think you don't find the Indian brinkmanship repulsive enough, and I feel the Indian/world view of Aussie sledging is only half true. But its perception that counts. The Aussies need to clean up their act, I am particularly disappointed with Andrew Symonds, previously a favourite of mine. Hopefully this decision is the end of the matter.

For the most part a fair and evenly balanced piece. To be so uncharitable to Procter is in my opinion over the top. Surely Pakistan for example knew they were likely to forfeit the Oval match last year when they refused to return to the ground. Likewise it seems almost certain that Harbijan did use the monkey slur as suggested, and maybe if the Indian team want to take the moral high ground on the issues of the Sydney test he should come clean. Never mind a bit of sledging, are we to believe that a few words on the field are somehow a greater issue in the game then bringing 2 right hand gloves out to bat? or throwing a tantrum and threatening to go home if we don't get our way. I would also ad that if what you say is true and the BCCI caved into player demands for no reason but money then cricket is in greater trouble then your saying. If every time an Indian is upset the BCCI acts as it has, regardless of truth or the potential damage caused, then God help Cricket.

Have been wondering for a long time why no one in the media played on the looks of Ponting and Bush. Certainly, they resemble each other in more than one way. However, it should be noted that Ponting is one of best in his profession. To mention about Bush, I may need to borrow from the vocabulary of Aussie cricketers.

Sensible and impartial, kiran.. are you kidding? I love how the author glossed over some of the disgraceful and hypocritical behaviour of the Indian team in the tests after Sydney. What a joke.

Stick to writing fiction, Mukul, because fact is not your forte.

It's interesting that you have no trouble convicting Clarke of being 'slippery' (by which I read 'having intentionally done the wrong thing') on the basis of your own opinion and yet you are not willing to convict Harbhajan on the same basis.

J. Hansen's judgement makes interesting reading. In it, contrary to what you've written here, it states that neither in criminal law nor in sports tribunals is independent corroborating evidence strictly necessary in order to form a guilty verdict. Procter was perfectly entitled to convict based on the evidence presented to him if he felt the burden of proof had been satisfied. He's a decent man who works hard and it is sad to see him continually denigrated here. Believe it or not, he is not part of some anglo conspiracy to ruin your lives. There isn't one.

It was Sharad Pawar who threatened to call the team home to India if Harbhajan wasn't found not guilty.

Can we all please forget Sydney now? All this anger from all sides is a waste.

The Aus/Eng used their positions to beat the westindies by bringing in the 2 bouncer rule and to let their players get away with bad behaviour. And to call reverse swing as cheating since they didn't understand and now the same guys are expert commentators on reverse swing. Not one apology to the Pak bowlers. Now India is using their money. Neither is fair. Like we say to Australia, if you want to give it, be ready to take it. One can only use the weapons they have.

Good article. I hear that australians are fuming over this verdict. Pray why? It was symmonds word against harbhajan. And tendulkar's word against hayden,ponting,symonds,clarke. The former has a cleaner image then all the 4 combined(ask any non indian even about this. No one likes the aussies)
So without proof indicting harbhajan on charges of racism is plain horrible.
Now the second part - when aussies use the m**f, bastard etc why do they assume these words are not as bad as a racial slur. Who gave them the right to decide what is sledging and what is not.
They started a war with guns and are now complaining that the opposition has come in with tanks. They should not be tolerated. Either you shut up and play the gentlemens game or play like men and take back what the opposition dishes out(which is what i like in a mens game).

What a complete load of rubbish. This Indian team has been nothing short of a disgrace. They whigne and complain at every opportunity and will tell the world that they have the strongest batting line up in the histroy of cricket, yet have not achieved anywhere near the results of the Austrailian TEAM. It is a sad day that the ACB caved in to the cries of a bunch of sook's. You say that the cricketing establishment is agianst the Indian team and that umpiring is bad. Answer this, How many Indian umpires are on the elite panel. Answer 0. They are not good enough and this current Indian team is not good enough.

interesting read, although the comparisons between Ricky Ponting and George Bush were a bit much, unsubstantiated and unjustified as were the implications that the Iraq war influenced Indians opinions and views of Australian cricketers. And it was apparently in that "charged context" that the current series controversies evolved, I don't believe it totally undermines the article by any means but shows that emotions were running high in the author and looking to exaggerate the prior feelings that Australia and India had before the current series.

1. Hansen: "I hope international cricketers don;t share your opinion" to Symonds when he gave that stupid reason for starting the slanging match. Very good.

2. He really mucked Clarke as you say. Excellent.

Both these were a result of carrying the mythical "mateship" of Australia to an extreme. Ponting has in the past said he knows "Symonds needs to belong" - so it can be said that its not Bhajji, but Symonds that has a history("stand up fo rmy mate"). And being the only colored player on the Oz team, obviosuly, he is precious to his "mates".

Frankly, we are sick of this OZ myth about mateship - as also "mental distintegration", "baggy green". Its time they also stopped all that crap talk about "spirit of cricket agreement made by Steve Waugh" - its just plain spin (much like the matehisp myth).

Oh, and about Bhajji giving a sendoff to Ponting in 1998 (or whenever), I do remember seeing Ponting giving a big shove to Bhajji - nobody talks about it. Kangaroo courts as you say

W O W !!
Beautifully written.

I have read almost all recent articles published about Australian Cricket and Harbhajan episode. But what Mukul written here is the most suitable conclusion of the whole matter. Thanks Mukul, we expect more such articles in future

Superb perspective on the Shift in World Cricket. Thank you.
I am concerned about the character of the Australian Cricket Team. Led by a captain who has been caught out lying about serious issues (eg: covering up for Symonds drunken omission against Bangladesh), the team is caught in a horrifying whirlpool of deceit. Excessive and aggressive appeals are deplorable in their own right; but when the shrieking is coupled to an obvious "not-out" appeal, then the integrity of the team is tarnished. LBW appeals from short square leg??? Cover point calls for a snick behind??? However, with each successful immoral appeal and immoral decision not to walk, Australian cricketers trade integrity for success. Once forfeited, it will be hard to regain.
It is a great sadness to see the retirement of Adam Gilchrist. A model of integrity to generations of young Australians. Yet he was scorned by his team mates for his attitude. Long live Gilly.

I had read an earlier blog by you that said, "If Harbhajan said it, ban him for life". I hope you have read Judge Hanson's judgement that said that even if Harbhajan said it, he would not have been able to punish him because of the provocation.

I hope you realize where you were wrong and where the judge was right. It is a subtle point that many people were just not getting and thanks to the judge for putting it so succinctly.

Mukul's article it is a very Indian centric piece of writing. While I do not condone some of the actions of the Australian cricketers, the Indian cricketers are not blameless. There were Indian players not walking straight away when they were clearly out, plus I believe that they also did their share of sledging.
After the debacle of the Harbajan appeal it is clear that the ICC do not run world cricket, it is run by the BCCI contrary to what Mukul would have us believe. The BCCI is interested in only one thing - MONEY and will use their muscle to achieve their own ends with no thought about the game of cricket.
Over the years teams from the sub-continent have endeavoured to get their own way. Umpires have been hung out to dry by India, Pakistan & Sri Lanka. I refer to Emmerson, Hair & Bucknor because they tried to apply the rules. Pity that India's bluff was not called. A good sportsman does not threaten to go home if he doesn't get his way. India is not a good sportsman.

Your naivety when it comes to world-class sport betrays the fact that, as a sub-continental, you are unaware of what goes on in the modern professional arena. Though you profess a certain dislike of the english rule of cricket, you want to uphold the 19th century english amateur ethos. Why in excess of 1 billion sub-continentals can be consistently outperformed by 20 million Australians at olympics after olympics is testament to the fact that australia has an effective, efficent sporting program, India far less so. Rather than admit we live in the 21st century and adopt a realistic approach to professional sport, you espouse Victorian age ideals. India will continue to be a diletante sporting nation when it should be a powerhouse if you people continue thinking this way. Professional sportspeople perform for the public for a living, it's their job. Sub-continental cricketers have a poor work ethic. It's that simple (and it shows in your fielding). Wake up India!

A well written article that makes some good points. As an Aussie, interesting to read a thoughtful Indian take on the situation.

However, I disagree with your comments about the Indian board (and players). I think the conduct of the BCCI and the Indian players in threatening to pull out was disgraceful and compromised the fair carriage of justice. The right decision seems to have been made in the end, no thanks to the petulant display of the Indian board and players. I think your last paragraph is erroneous in its conclusions and an equally good outcome could well have been arrived at without childish threats to call off the tour.

Nevertheless, hopefully all countries (not just Australia and India) can learn from this episode and improve their conduct in the future. I know many Aussies are sick of some of the antics of their team, and frankly cricket would be better off with less sledgers and more gentlemen.

Nice one... a big post made simple and interesting with its content. Hope Team India continues its dominance off field and surpasses Australia's dominance on field.

"leaving the Indian team in a state of thin-skinned rage at being robbed" The Indian team is always thin-skinned. Did you see Symonds or Hussey say a single word about being given out incorrectly in Perth ? Did Australia say a word about India appealing when Clarke hadn't hit it in Adelaide, they were quick to claim that Gilchrist could tell Dravid hadn't hit it in Sydney. And then proceed to spit verbally at Clarke and the umpire Bowden after he gave the correct decision Its cricket, what goes around comes around, India need to grow up and realise this.
I'm also amazed at the general public, cricket players,offcials and media that can't tell the difference between sledging and racism.
Heres a quick lesson
"Its a bat not a fishing rod" = sledging
"big monkey" = racism
Imagine if an Australian player called Singh a monkey!!! Imagine if an Australian bowler celebrated like Singh did when he got Ponting out!! "fielder had confidently claimed a bump ball catch"=your opinion=wrong

please find a way to get this into an australian newspaper. good stuff.

So the fact that he said Harbi probably did racially vilify Symonds is OK
So the fact that the Indian team carried on like small children and threatened to boycott the tour because of poor umpiring is OK. As for the rubbish about the disputed catch by Clarke i am yet to see an angle that proves it was a bump ball, and if you want to see a much worse example look on youtube at Dhoni claiming a catch off Peterson bounced about 40 cm in front and he claimed it. (Ponting had completed the catch when the ball was grounded and never lost control of it.) I also did not see this level of rubbish occuring when India got the rub of the decisions in the Lords test last year
The bizzare whitewashing of the indian teams behaviour is unbeleivable, where was the outcry when Yuvraj did not walk in the first test, or how about Dhoni calling catch every time a spinner bowled a ball
The question that should be asked is if the situations had been reversed would the discussions be the same.I think not

This is of a piece with all the biased reporting and commentating seen and heard on both sides of the firing line.

Granted the Indians were diddled out of the Sydney Test. Granted that Mike Procter is an ass. (His comment "I know all about racism being South African" is like Adolf Eichmann being an expert on anti-semitism) and that his conduct and decision at the initial hearing were inept andincompetent at best and biased and racist at worst. Granted that visiting teams get the worst of all officiating Down Under. You still can't stage a sit down strike and declare to the world that you won't move unless there is an acquittal. The verdict was given, an appeal was lodged and that's it. Wait for the appellate hearing and put your case as strongly and forcefully as possible. Kumble & Sachin are fine players and gentlemen and tremendous role models. However, in this instance they have fallen short of their own high standards.

to be contd.

This is of a piece with all the biased reporting and commentating seen and heard on both sides of the firing line.

Granted the Indians were diddled out of the Sydney Test. Granted that Mike Procter is an ass. (His comment "I know all about racism being South African" is like Adolf Eichmann being an expert on anti-semitism) and that his conduct and decision at the initial hearing were inept andincompetent at best and biased and racist at worst. Granted that visiting teams get the worst of all officiating Down Under. You still can't stage a sit down strike and declare to the world that you won't move unless there is an acquittal. The verdict was given, an appeal was lodged and that's it. Wait for the appellate hearing and put your case as strongly and forcefully as possible. Kumble & Sachin are fine players and gentlemen and tremendous role models. However, in this instance they have fallen short of their own high standards.

to be contd.

well done, you have got the truth right. The Aussies should read this.

I think this whole tour has turned in to a war between the Australian and Indian media, with both sides fanning the flames then trying to out do each each in expressions of moral outrage. I would be much happier to have the scores reported. If I want opinion on the game, I'll find a mate and a beer. Personally I will be much happier when this tour is over. It may have been better had India just gone home for there is very little positive left in this farce

Sorry but this is not the best take on the matter or an impartial analysis. Far from it.

In this long drawn out tirade against the australian team (although they deserve it), you fail to mention that whether Harbhajan said "teri maa ki" or monkey - he was also sledging! And Sreesanth is worse. You can't put all the blame of sledging on the Australians, the Indian team is also guilty of this - 2nd only to the Australians.

So even though the charges have been rightfully dropped, I wouldnt celebrate it as a moral victory.

Amazingly written. Should be a mandated read for all Australian and Indian players and officials involved.

A wonderful post. A very balanced and clear take on the whole saga down under. I like the way you use the phrase "old firm of Kumble & Tendulkar". Kind of adds to their statesmanesque presence in he team. Also a brilliant last paragraph - The 3rd and 4th tests saw civility - a refreshing change for the game on the whole. Keep writing.....

Well done. You are spot on, on the whole issue.

Amazingly written. Should be a mandated read for all Australian and Indian players and officials involved.

Great article. A very balanced view of the whole saga.

it was worth reading it.

What a relief to read something that is closer to the truth than anything that has been said and written so far about this whole affair! I have been following cricket news closely and here's what I think started the whole thing rolling. Andrew Symonds made a comment when Australia toured India in the recent 7 one day series. This is what he said about India's celebration after winning the inaugural Twenty20 World Cup. "Something has been sparked inside of me, watching them carry on over the last few days," Symonds told AAP. "We have had a very successful side and I think watching how we celebrate and how they celebrate, I think we have been pretty humble in the way we have gone about it"

This sure sparked something in the Indian fans...

Let us concentrate on Harbhajan's behaviour on field alone. What he did was utter nonsense not in line with a national player's behaviour. Taking a few hundreds of wickets or a few thousands of runs will never make a good player.
You are playing under the tri color for a great nation and has to uphold values above all.

By becoming a party in the ugly incident Sachin also lost some glitter, I should add.

I cant believe this stuff gets published. Why don't you blame the Australian Cricket Team for the troubles in Kashmir while your at it. Big picture boys is that the ICC is scared to lose the cash cow that is Asian Cricket and would rather sully the good names of reputable people like Mike Proctor, Steve Bucknor and a dozen Australian Cricket players and umpires along the way. Bad decisions in Australian pale into insignificance compared to decisions that were made in Asia during years gone by. There is a reason Nuetral umpires were brought into the game and it had nothing to do with Australian decision making. So when pointing the fingers at the people who have been bringing the game into disrepute, look in your own back yard first.

A well written article. Congrats for explaining a few things. Hope this will be read by the australians and even Peter roebok who was hurt immediately when his former countryman Procter was touched

Well written ! By the way, Clarke is being seen as the next Australian captain. The legacy seems to be going into worser hands.

Well, I am at least glad to see that you are not naive or arrogant enough to think that Harbhajan never used a racial slur. But I am sorry, the sad thing here - almost as sad as the racist comment - is that the Indian team and the BCCI were unwilling to abide by their governing body's decision - the ICC. That's anarchy. Shame on you BCCI. Isn't this going to be fun from now on? Why shouldn't any other team complain to get umpires removed when they don't like the calls? For that matter, we'll just run home like crying babies when we disagree with the ICC. Pathetic. I need to just watch cricket on the field and shut myself off to all the shenanigans off the field. The only thing I am pleased with is that from now on Harbhajan will go down tainted like Barry Bonds - a great player with an asterix. In Harbhajan's case: *racist

I have to say, the comments I'm reading seem to miss the point. Sure, the aussies got it stuck up 'em. Woo. Those last two matches, Perth and Adelaide, were good for the state of the game. But Harbhajan... well, if he made a racist slur against Symonds, he should have been strung up and made an example for those in the game that think this is acceptable. The ICC have caved on this one, the Australians have caved and it is despicable of both of them to allow the continuance of the tour to outweigh the need to enforce racial vilification rules. It's a great tragedy we need them at all, but there are some bad eggs, and they are everywhere (in all teams) and they should be made an example of, not get off on a soft plea deal. This isn't about Australian Hegemony vs. Indian Power, this is about racism and the day the powers that be showed us that money was worth more than decent human behaviour.

What utter drivel but i see the Indian bloggers surprisingly agree with you. Why dont you mention the fact that Ganguly has come out and said the Clarke catch carried but he stood to wait for the umpires decision or does saying it was a bump ball make better reading in India. How would you or anyone else that wasn't within 10 metres of that ball know that it was a bump ball are you seriously paid to write this.
Face facts you lost a test because a part time bowler took 3 wickets in the last over of a game so go and cry somewhere else.

Perfect Analysis, Mukul.
The Australians would have learnt their lesson and Cricket will get better.

Younger players should watch the Youtube video of Dravid and Slater to learn how to respond to unwarranted abuse and invective instead of retaliating. Report every instance to the umpire and see how long the habitual offenders maintain clean rap sheets. I heard Gautam Gambhir on Tv and read an interview with Robin Uthappa that they were prepared to give it back. There's no future in competing with the Aussies for title of Worst Behaved Team. Bhajji replied in kind to Symonds and look what happened. He's the bad guy. It doesn't matter if he was acquitted of racial abuse, he was still punished for offensive behaviour.

If Harbhajan said those words he should have got harder punishment, but there is no proof what so ever (the witnesses are not trustworthy). But Australia and its supporters have records of open racism. I mean one should have some shame. Your filth smell from miles and you are telling it smells bad.

Very Objective.

Australian cricket teams have been behaving badly for years. The Sri Lankan teams who have toured here have been treated even worse than the Indian cricket team. At that time most of the Australian media found no fault with this bad behaviour and even encouraged this as winning was all that mattered to keep everyone relaxed and comfortable( remember John Howard' catch phrase). At that time the media demonised cricketers like Arjuma Ranatunga who had the guts(pun intended)to stand up to the Aussie bullies. It is high time that everyone realized that bad behavior by pack animals is just not tolerable on the field or off it. In this scenario every dog will have his day and worms shall turn.
All the incidents I can remember during the last 20 years is always when their are 11 Aussie fieldsman and 2 opposing batsmen who have the potential to change the game. Is there more selfishness, arrogance and cowardice than this. All cricket fans, commentators and reasonable human beings take note.

Your article is good. It would have been perfect had you addressed why symmonds got let off from the judge. Ideally that clarke should have got punished and what about the match referee..??

Very well articulated, insightful and thought provoking. Good Job my friend.

I still don't get the Sydney test though....

1. No penalty for Mr. MaanKi although he provoked Bhajji.

2. Where is the 5 match ban Mr. Proctor for Punter and Puppy? They both claimed (and in one instance successfully claimed Sourav) grounded catches.

What about the exessive appealing in the last few overs in Sydney?

What happens to Mr. Benson? He was a partner in crime with buckeyed Bucky....

Your views please?

Okay !! I will go with what Mukul has said. But few questions still remain unanswered.
1-Since when are cricket accusations handled in a normal court of law???? didnt even happen for the Oval incident. why now? If this is true, cant Bhaji sue Symonds for defamation? surely his image was harmed in all this? that wud be that normal reaction.
2-A chartered plane was ready to the indians home? is that true?
3-ODI players being sent to another city? what was that all about?

I'm not on either side. If the Aussies are famous for sledging, Indians have their share of sledgers with sreeshant as their leader. There is no point is pointing fingers at the aussies. And since when is a 2-1 drubbing in a series a success???
Please.. for the sake of the game.. wake up !!!!

Very well articulated, insightful and thought provoking. Good Job my friend.

I still don't get the Sydney test though....

1. No penalty for Mr. MaanKi although he provoked Bhajji.

2. Where is the 5 match ban Mr. Proctor for Punter and Puppy? They both claimed (and in one instance successfully claimed Sourav) grounded catches.

What about the exessive appealing in the last few overs in Sydney?

What happens to Mr. Benson? He was a partner in crime with buckeyed Bucky....

Your views please?

It's that simple (and it shows in your fielding). Wake up India!
..........

I wonder which team's wicket keeper decided to retire after putting down n number of catches..look who's talking about poor fielding!!

mukul - you are wrong when you say that clarke was a bump ball - there is no evidence to support that clear cuit view - clarke believes he caught it , uindians believe he may not - but there is no clear evidnece- go back and check your videos
these questions need to be answered :
1.why did habhajan and tendulkar clearly change
their position - initially they denied anything was said, and then perhaps miraculously , a week later, they both remembered that harbajhan had said maa ki - which happens to sound like monkey conveniently -
2. wht did harbhajan say " he started it if he said nothing - or a punjabi term?
3. does tendulkar speak punjabi - or does he just know the filth ?
4.why did kumble try and apologise?
5.why would you believe tendulkar who has been convicted of ball tampering aka cheating - ahead of symonds, hayden and clarke- who was accused of not walking
the joke is really on the indians who believe that they are in the right and that racism has not occurred

An article well written, a series of events really well summorised yet incomplete. I feel a point missing, and that is who suffers the brute of the controversy in the end. The Sub-continental teams go out to play cricket in the spirit of the game itself, a phrase very foreign in nature, yet we practice it though none of the creators of it do. I mean to say its cricket,we play, we play to win. Not to stage a drama with unwanted twists and turns of controversy and finally a verdict resulting in loss. That's right!losing, something every competitive team hates,and after all said and done there are no changes in that, Pakistan lost the series in England and India lost one downunder. Well Pakistan had already lost it in England before the controversy but India lost it here with all the playing cards in hand. Let the tides be turned and the end result of all controversies should atleast be once resulting in a Sub-continent side winning!!!

Ah...the sound of aussie breast beating...that alone was worth the read!

With great power comes great responsibility. India has a great opportunity to become a leader in world cricket, and need to behave like one this includes but is not limited to:

1) Not forcing ICC decisions with hysterical reactions culminating with the entire Indian team effectively waiting on the tarmac with their bat and ball ready to go home

2) Blindly defending Singh's behaviour when there seems to be little doubt that he actually said the word monkey.

3) Burning effigies of anyone and everyone who displeases you.

4) Covering up embarrassing losses by blaming umpires

5) Attributing bad umpiring to some sort of insidious Australian plot

6) Assuming that all actions by "white" nations are motivated at "keeping the brown man down".

FYI - Cricket Australia decided to downgrade the charge, not the players, they feel betrayed and let down. That's not my opinion, that is straight from a few players I have spoken to.

biased much?!?

You don't think the rules and regulations of the game should be respected? you don't see a problem in the Indian team (or the board) basically blackmailing cricket australia with the threat of boycott if the decision was not reversed?

Bhaji had the right of appeal and it seems that he may well have been found innocent by Judge Hansen but the fact that the India team would not have faith in the appeal process and the Indian board and the ICC would tolerate a threat to abandon the tour because of an appeal outcome is unacceptable and threatens the stability of our game.

In a real court of law no-one can say that "oh if i'm found guilty i'm going home". I have lost all respect for the indian team. Real men should face up to what they have done and accept the consequences and play the game under the laws laid down. Trying to mix the issue in with the past and the Aussie's attitude is just smoke screens, where is the respect for the rules and regulations of the game.

Mukul,

I've been drawing parallels between Dubya and Punter both in their looks and actions and was pleasantly surprised to see you say the same. Excellent article btw...

Prabu

Just reading some of the comments. Seems like the Aussies in here lack common sense.. you just cant please them unless you say bhaji was guilty.

Keep up the good word.

Why Mr. Symonds not punished for starting the abusive language during the match and Mr. Proctor (Match referee)for his based dicision and all the fuss created by his unbelievable decision, is he blind, if not he is base and not fit to be referee, to believe charactor like M Clark, R Ponting, and not accepting witness like Sachin.

It's worth reading Mukul, no matter how strong is the Australian team on the ground yet they need to show respect unto others and should be ready to face to the music otherwise.
But I think the remarks from Ponting on this judgement still show glimpses of the stubborness and hegemony of the Aussies,

Above all, ICC's acceptance of the blame to provide insufficent material towards the case is just an attempt to pacify the Aussies, Instead ICC should have been ready to accept the blame on the whole, as to how they dealt with all this and a simple issue was made complicated by them.

I must say whatever the case may be , at the end of the day Harbhajan has been proved not to be guilty and it does count above all.

Interesting article! One wonders why people allow emotions to rule the roost all the time. This is another article of that nature. Both sides were at fault. India has just as bad a name in world cricket as Australia, if you look closely. But for different reasons. Neither can claim the high ground that is talked about!

The sad thing in all of this is the ICC. Where has it been hiding? Didn't do anything about Gavaskar. Didn't do anything to help Proctor. Didn't supply the judge will all hte history needed. Why? It comes back to politics and that is what is ruining cricket internationally more than Australia winning or any team's attitude. The inept workings of the ICC are unbelieveable. They don't care about anything except money. It rules the roost as far as their decisions are concerned. Until that changes cricket is in for a rocky road ahead.

So is it all history now. Unfortunately not. The "bad" blood will continue to live within, whether that be in Australians or Indians. Sad!

Wonderfully summed up the whole controversy between India and Australia. Kudos to you Mukul for giving us a deeper insight into the whole drama.

Well said Mukul, its a lessen to all the aussie players and supporters. Now they will have the tail in between their legs and try to concentrate on cricket.

My previous post was repeated instead of the continuation.

Young Indian players should watch the YouTube video of Dravid and Slater and learn how to deal with sledging and abuse in a dignified manner. Retaliating in kind as some of the youngsters like gautam Gambhir and Robin Uthappa have promised to do is not the answer. The players have two better options:
a) Report every abuse to the umps. Let's see how long they maintain a clean rap sheet.
b) Better still do what Shwag and partydid to Brad Hogg. Their handling of him has probably resulted in a lifetime ban from test cricket rather than the paltry fine he would have copped from the Match Referee.

well said Mukul! I still believe that these 4 Aussies planned everything in the dressing room.

Indians are the masters of spin, having been cultivating it for centuries, so they think they see it in everyone else. Australians are loudmouths, unsubtle and straightforward. They didn't spin anything. They were simply out-manipulated by a race who value saving face above everything else. This article simply reinforces that.

This is in response to the post by carl Jackson
"Australia is rapidly moving toward leaving the ICC and forming a new body with other nations that respect the umpires, officials and the rules of the game. India will not be invited to join"
What a lot of rubbish. Australia will have to play with themselves and perhaps the umpires. Carl Jackson does not seem to know that majority of Cricket playing nations abhor the Aussies and their antics on the field!

It may seem balanced, but all it is doing is throwing in a line about the future at the end meant to gloss over the fact this is yet another black and white article, where one side is completely at fault. The Indian spinners have appealled almost Warne-like through the entire series, culminating in a disgraceful appeal by Harbhajan vs Michael Clarke in the last test, which led to an even more disgraceful episode from Dhoni and Kartick. You would think they would not carry on like that after the pillaring in the press Australia got after Sydney. Yet here they were, and not a word about it. When Kartick spat at Clarke's feet as they were walking off, I was amazed. Is he that stupid I thought? I am surprised Clarke didn't do something stupid such was the rude and downright ugly performance by Kartick. How about Ganguls not walking when he was so clearly caught in that last test? Not a word! Australia were silent in the last 2 tests, yet India maintained the rage. Look at your own as well.

Except you forgot one thing....Ganguly s the one who said Clarke didn't take the catch yet you neglected to mention he also stood his ground after being obviously caught by Hussey in the last test. He surely knew that was not a bump ball!

why is it , after all thats happened during these tests between australia and india . nothing has been said about dinesh kartick behaviour during the 4th test in adelaide, when a close in catch appeal was turned down . dinesh pointed his finger at the umpire and proceded to verbally abuse the batsman clarke while walking off for the tea break.. when he finally stoped his abuse, he spat at clarkes feet. the replay of course showed not out , close but good decision umpire. now that sort of thing is most definatly not in the spirit of the game.. down right disgusting, but not a word from anyone.. not even clarke if that tantrum came from an australian, they would be banned by the icc , acb and condemed by the media and rightfully so.

That was absolutely fantanstic Mukul. Very well written :-)

What happened shows the emergence of a new India, we will not take things lying down. It is evident in our cricket and elsewhere in the country. It is about time that the Australians realize that their attitude is not acceptable. Hats off to Harbhajan for taking them head on. Just as you try and score the target set by the opposing side, you also need to give back their on field behaviour.

Mukul there's one thing you always to do - elicit extreme reactions from readers.

There's one aspect, however, that has been well highlighted in your blog. That of Michael Clark being labelled unreliable by the Judge, and 'slippery' by you.

It is a true reflection of the traditional Aussie way of boorish thinking that this same slippery, spitting-in-his-palm character has been chosen to succeed Ponting! How I wish Hussey was the heir apparent...

Really accurate depiction. This is one of the best articles I have come across.

I think this is a classic example of the difference between Australian and Indian culture. When Darren Lehman says "black c**t" as he is walking back to the Australian dressing room in a game against Sri Lanka he admits he made a mistake, publicly apologizes, and rightfully receives match bans. When an Indian calls Symonds a monkey, they deny they made a mistake, blame everyone else, rejoice that they got one back over the Australians. As for Pontings "unlovely habit of spitting into his palms", it just goes to what a load of tosh the article is!