My last words on the cricket monkey furore:
I think New Zealand Judge John Hansen reached the obvious conclusion. No disrespect to match referee Mike Procter, but the judge knows what he’s doing. Far-reaching decisions like this need to be based on evidence.
I found this part of the transcript interesting:
[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.
Witness Matthew Hayden didn’t hear Symonds swear or provoke Singh, but he heard the Indian retaliate.
Even Symonds conceded, according to the transcript, that Sachin Tendulkar was nearer to the incident and Tendulkar claimed he never heard the monkey phrase: “Mr Symonds accepted that Mr Tendulkar of all the participants was closest to Mr Singh.”
Clearly the allegation was very serious but the evidence flimsy. I go back to my original points that Harbhajan should never have been charged with racism. At worst he was guilty of sledging, albeit under provocation.
×0
