Double Standards?

[BK Eaglesfan]

Yep, you're dead right about this, no doubt about it. There are certain things as levels tho, and I think thats where I arc up. Everyone does it, some more than others.

The same rationale has been applied to Geelong fans, including myself, for going into bat for Gary Ablett.

Fotunately as a Geelong supporter, I find we are usually pretty honest with ourselves about these sorts of things, more than most (Eagles and Collingwood are good examples you've used) and perhaps thats what appeals to me about the Cats.

Herein lies the problem. You have now separated Geelong supporters from the rest, and I'm sure in your heart of hearts you believe that, but what's your rationale for claiming Geelong fans, are distinct from the other 90% or so of the Australians in the country who are the traits you are concerned with?

Many, many Geelong fans would be the very same general Australian fans that bother you, or has it just worked out that all the reasonable Australians happen to be Geelong fans? See what I mean?

 

[krisholio14]

Herein lies the problem. You have now separated Geelong supporters from the rest, and I'm sure in your heart of hearts you believe that, but what's your rationale for claiming Geelong fans, are distinct from the other 90% or so of the Australians in the country who are the traits you are concerned with?

Many, many Geelong fans would be the very same general Australian fans that bother you, or has it just worked out that all the reasonable Australians happen to be Geelong fans? See what I mean?

I don't think Geelong fans are more reasonable than any other, but we are more reasonable than Eagles (I won't include you in this, you actually talk some sense) or Collingwood fans.

No one will admit it now because of the premiership thing, but I think most fans would agree that Geelong fans are among the most reasonable going around these days (Melbourne based ones like myself anyway ).

Applied to cricket, I agree that every team has their moments, but yes, I believe Sri Lanka are pretty reasonable, not necessarily the most reasonable, but more reasonable than Aussie, Indian or PAki fans for example.

One thing you are totally right on is that it IS a matter of perception, as is anything in life, and those perceptions will vary from country to country, state to state, team to team and person to person. No matter what my views are, the world would be an incredibly boring place if everyone agreed with me and vice versa

 

[BK Eaglesfan]

I don't think Geelong fans are more reasonable than any other, but we are more reasonable than Eagles (I won't include you in this, you actually talk some sense) or Collingwood fans.

No one will admit it now because of the premiership thing, but I think most fans would agree that Geelong fans are among the most reasonable going around these days (Melbourne based ones like myself anyway ).

Applied to cricket, I agree that every team has their moments, but yes, I believe Sri Lanka are pretty reasonable, not necessarily the most reasonable, but more reasonable than Aussie, Indian or PAki fans for example.

One thing you are totally right on is that it IS a matter of perception, as is anything in life, and those perceptions will vary from country to country, state to state, team to team and person to person. No matter what my views are, the world would be an incredibly boring place if everyone agreed with me and vice versa

I'm not actually going to disagree with you on the Eagles.

However, by elevating even Geelong fans above West Coast and Collingwood as an example....a large majority of fans of all 3 clubs are Australian. Yet, Australians as a nation of sportsfan you classify as a particular way. Then you've split Australians into at least 3 groups based in who they support in the footy.

Where do you put a Sri Lankan Collingwood supporter? Is he reasonable when following cricket, and then less so when following footy. Or is he one of the better Pies fans?

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

There Is A Double Standard, The Whinging Indians Tried Every Thing To Even Draw With The Aussies At Sydney, Change Of Outfield Conditions, Delaying Time Significantly , Thru The 4 Failed Run-ups Per Over By The So-called New Gun, The Sledge Hammer On The Pitch, The Two Gloves Of The Same Hand, Dravid Ha Ha Ha, And Still Could Not Match The Aussies Despite Their Worst Fielding Display In Years, Possibly A Decade.
In Relation To Warney, He Only Did What The Rest Of Us Wish We Could Do. Bertrand Is A Toser Trying To Hold On To Some Fame After The Bloke Who Made Him Something Was Proven A Crook, One A.Bond. Who's Greatest Fame Is Still Being Mentioned In The Old " Leaving Next Door To Bondy " Song.
Get A Snot Rag, India And Try Something Else, Your Still The Only National Side In World History Two Have 4 Current Or Past Captains Still In Your Side Talk About Insecurity.

 

[arzach]

Come on! How do you expect us to keep going around in circles if you guys are going to make such thoughtful, reasoned responses

Diablo, that was a good post a few back, while I don’t completely agree with everything you’ve said, I can certainly respect and appreciate how you’ve reached your conclusions.

Now that I’ve got that disgusting love-in out the way…

I think there needs to be a distinction made between the teams players, the team officials and fans when making judgments on these issues. I’ve only been considering the behaviour of members of a team or team officials when commenting on these situations. I don’t really believe that the team or its officials can held responsible for the actions or views of its fans?

How can you say Martians are too precious, or Neptuninans always fly off the handle. Do you think the 1 billion people of India or the 21 million of Australia hold such similar views on these issues that they can be regarded the general consensus of the whole population? Here’s a scary though, the majority of both the Indian and Australian population probably don’t give a stuff about cricket, full stop.

With regard to the general population, firstly the majority of people that make a population are morons. Secondly, we’re just a bunch of schmucks on an internet forum, who cares what we think? It’s the teams and officials that need to be judged, as they are the ones professionally responsible for their conduct. The players for how the conduct themselves on and off the field and the officials for how they deal with situations.

 

[BK Eaglesfan]

I think there needs to be a distinction made between the teams players, the team officials and fans when making judgments on these issues. I’ve only been considering the behaviour of members of a team or team officials when commenting on these situations. I don’t really believe that the team or its officials can held responsible for the actions or views of its fans?

Interesting and fair point.

Much of the feeling towards the Australian cricket team has come from people saying they don't like the team itself, but support every other Australian sporting representative.

So I would ask diablo, if by some freak of nature Hayden, Gilly, Ponting and Clarke were all naturalised Sri Lankans tomorrow, would you still support Sri Lankan cricket?

 

[Illinois Nazi]

There Is A Double Standard, The Whinging Indians Tried Every Thing To Even Draw With The Aussies At Sydney, Change Of Outfield Conditions, Delaying Time Significantly , Thru The 4 Failed Run-ups Per Over By The So-called New Gun, The Sledge Hammer On The Pitch, The Two Gloves Of The Same Hand, Dravid Ha Ha Ha, And Still Could Not Match The Aussies Despite Their Worst Fielding Display In Years, Possibly A Decade.
In Relation To Warney, He Only Did What The Rest Of Us Wish We Could Do. Bertrand Is A Toser Trying To Hold On To Some Fame After The Bloke Who Made Him Something Was Proven A Crook, One A.Bond. Who's Greatest Fame Is Still Being Mentioned In The Old " Leaving Next Door To Bondy " Song.
Get A Snot Rag, India And Try Something Else, Your Still The Only National Side In World History Two Have 4 Current Or Past Captains Still In Your Side Talk About Insecurity.

**** Me, That's Hard To Read!

 

[Tyberious Funk]

Let's go through a few of the points here...

A more reasoned post than your first, but still flawed. Let's examine why...

About the three examples I raised in the OP.

In the absence of evidence otherwise, a player should be treated as innocent until proven guilty. The difference between the examples you cite, and the counter-examples that others have cited, is the lack of evidence. Let's see what I'm talking about...

The Mark Waugh and Warne betting situation, while appearing harmless enough to most, proved to be a much greater danger later on (though not involving Australians). My major issue is that, like India in this situation going over the top about having their integrity questioned, I remember Aussies doing exactly the same. Only a small few admitted it was a dangerous situation they put themselves in, and that in a certain way their actions compromise the game. The reaction was 'Hey, we are Australians and we don't do that sort of thing' and got indignant that Aussie players could even be vaguely linked to illegal betting.

Mark Waugh and Shane Warne were found guilty of taken money from a bookmaker for pitch and weather reports. They both thought it was so harmless that they made no attempt to hide the fact. Everyone in the team knew they were doing it. Sure, in hindsight, it seems foolish. But this was before there had been any betting scandals in cricket. And they stopped it the moment they were told. But there is NO EVIDENCE that they did anything other than accept money for pitch and weather reports. So why shouldn't we believe their version of events? Unless you want to convict them without evidence.

Compare this to, say, Mohammad Azharuddin who was found guilty of match fixing. Now THAT is guilty. What about Jadeja, who was found guilty of being involved with match fixing and banned for five years... but somehow ended up being allowed to play domestic cricket. How did THAT happen?

I had a bit of a read last night about the Brett Lee chucking investigation, and yes, it was thrown out pretty quickly. However, I have watched him bowl closely, and there is no doubt that he was throwing his fast one. Shoaib was no different then either, difference later is he continued to throw it, whereas Lee has continued to modify his bowling to get the best out of himself, therefore doesn't bowl anywhere near the sort of speeds he was bowling at consistently five or six years ago. You say theres no evidence. I say go back and watch some tapes of his early years. As it stands now, with the rules being changed, it it is no longer a problem anyway. Again tho, it was mainly the Australian cricket communities reaction to the allegations that grated. 'Hey, we are Aussies, we don't do that sort of thing, and you've got a cheek to even suggest it'.

Firstly, your claim that no Australian was prepared to accept that Lee was a chucker is just plain bollocks. There were a number of articles at the time that agreed his action was suspicious. Examination as per the protocol at the time exonerated him, and the only "evidence" you have that he chucks is your own personal opinion. You'll excuse me if I don't hang, draw and quarter the guy.

Compare this to Murali, where the EVIDENCE has been significant. Biometric testing PROVED he chucked... just the rules were shifted to accommodate him.

Again, another example where the evidence in one case was extremely scratchy, whereas the evidence in the counter case is conclusive. Are you seeing a pattern here?

Likka made the point for me on Warne and his drugs issue. What he didn't say was that most Australian cricket fans believe it was an accident, where as I believe he was cheating. Sure, he got a ban, but it was only half what he would have got if the pissweak ICC had have looked into it more and found more to the story, rather than taking Warneys word on it and letting it go. I can tell you right now, if a player from any other country had been caught in the same situation as Shane Warne, there would be plenty of Aussie fans queueing up to let everone know they smell a rat and there is cheating involved.

And finally... again, the EVIDENCE against Warne was that he took a dieuretic. In the absence of any other evidence, we cannot say he was taking a performance enhancing drug. Was his excuse flimsy? Sure. But in the absence of evidence otherwise, what else can you do? The ACB had a rigorous testing regime in place and he had never tested positive in the past. So it's not like he had "form". There were also reports that there were absolutely NO traces of steroids in his system, even in minute quantities. And while dieuretics can help mask other drugs in the system, there are often very small traces left (usually too small for a conviction). Warne had nothing.

Compared to the evidence against Akhtar which proved he was taking a performance enhancing drug. Not a masking agent, but NADRALONE itself.

Now the point with mentioning all of these was not to say that the Australians are the only ones doing these things, or that they do them more than any other. The point is that these things WERE done, and the Australians got so indignant about it all, as I say, like they never do ANYTHING wrong.

On the contrary. I think you'll find that most Australians subscribed to following the EVIDENCE. At least I hope so.

Am I starting to sound like an episode of CSI?

To those who are suggesting the Sri Lankans are bad sports, even worse than anything Australia has done, I ask for examples. I mentioned that I wasn't happy with a couple of the things Arjuna did when he captained us, but I don't remember too many other occasions (apart from the ongoing inflammation in this country over Murali's action), where we have been genuinely bad sports.

You ask for examples, and then completely discount two of the biggest blights on the game. In fact, I would cite Arjuna's actions as one of the worst in the history of cricket. One of the fundamental principles of cricket has always been to respect the decision of the umpire. He completely changed that. And not only did he argue on the merits of EVIDENCE to support Murali, he argued on the grounds of RACE. And the fact that he managed to win, paved the way for this current trend we are seeing in world cricket... where a team cries racism as soon as they don't get their own way.

The day he marched off the field in protest at Murali being called was the day cricket, or at least the game of cricket as I know it, died.

I like a lot of the players in the Sri Lankan team, but I could never support them while Runnatunga was involved. And not as long as Murali continues to play.