Australia v India
-
@NTA said in Australia v India:
A small group ejected. Good. Even if it wasn't racial, the rest of the crowd is on Dickhead Notice.
Bans for all.
You want them all banned even though you don't know what they did, or even if they did it?
@Crazy-Horse "bans for all those found guilty"
Bloody lawyerville up in here
-
Some are calling for life bans on social media. I'd be happy with 5 years so they can be rehabilitated from stupidity.
@Crazy-Horse clause : IF FOUND GUILTY.
@NTA said in Australia v India:
Some are calling for life bans on social media. I'd be happy with 5 years so they can be rehabilitated from stupidity.
@Crazy-Horse clause : IF FOUND GUILTY.
I am guessing they are just getting evicted at the most. It would be hard to convict them of anything. You would have to prove exactly who said what, who did what. You would need multiple witnesses prepared to give up their time for court.
-
This one was from the trouble yesterday
https://twitter.com/melindafarrell/status/1348121849796853762?s=19
-
-
Unless those who get accused make admissions they would probably be more likely to receive a ban. At the most I am guessing it would only need to be on the balance of probabilities to ban someone, to prosecute requires beyond a reasonable doubt and that can be pretty hard to reach.
-
Unless those who get accused make admissions they would probably be more likely to receive a ban. At the most I am guessing it would only need to be on the balance of probabilities to ban someone, to prosecute requires beyond a reasonable doubt and that can be pretty hard to reach.
@Crazy-Horse yep. I'm not in favour of prosecution - Venues NSW ban would be enough as it covers a fair few locations in and around Sydney.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel convicts. Cant trust them. #neverforgetunderarm1981
-
The comments were something about how many wives Siraj had or somesuch.
That's third hand from a reporter on the channel 7 feed.
-
@NTA said in Australia v India:
The comments were something about how many wives Siraj had or somesuch.
*Wine - Siraj/Shiraz.
@NTA said in Australia v India:
@NTA said in Australia v India:
The comments were something about how many wives Siraj had or somesuch.
*Wine - Siraj/Shiraz.
Lost in translation?
-
So this is in part a colossal misunderstanding, and in part a result of yesterday's events.
On the news, they report the same thing and that police have concluded their investigation.
@NTA said in Australia v India:
So this is in part a colossal misunderstanding, and in part a result of yesterday's events.
On the news, they report the same thing and that police have concluded their investigation.
Bugger. I have already unpacked my whip. We are going to have to start public floggings before the investigation from now on!
-
@NTA said in Australia v India:
So this is in part a colossal misunderstanding, and in part a result of yesterday's events.
On the news, they report the same thing and that police have concluded their investigation.
Bugger. I have already unpacked my whip. We are going to have to start public floggings before the investigation from now on!
@Crazy-Horse said in Australia v India:
@NTA said in Australia v India:
So this is in part a colossal misunderstanding, and in part a result of yesterday's events.
On the news, they report the same thing and that police have concluded their investigation.
Bugger. I have already unpacked my whip. We are going to have to start public floggings before the investigation from now on!
Unfortunately in this day and age there will be people (maybe on this site) more upset that no racism took place than if it did! -
@Crazy-Horse said in Australia v India:
@NTA said in Australia v India:
So this is in part a colossal misunderstanding, and in part a result of yesterday's events.
On the news, they report the same thing and that police have concluded their investigation.
Bugger. I have already unpacked my whip. We are going to have to start public floggings before the investigation from now on!
Unfortunately in this day and age there will be people (maybe on this site) more upset that no racism took place than if it did!From Sporting News, by Tom Naghten
<em>"Police satisfied spectators didn't r a c ially a b u s e Mohammed Siraj
Police won't be pursuing charges against the men ejected from the SCG for allegedly a b u s i n g Indian bowler ...Six men voluntarily left their seats to be questioned by police ...
Sporting News understands the men deny making any comments of a r a c i a l nature, while this has been supported by spectators in the bay around them."</em>
The Sporting News report goes on to report angry scowling by Cricket Australia spluttering "unacceptable" and an agitated Justin Langer, who was a fabulous opener, full stop, expressing "outrage" and everyone else jumping aboard what appears to have been the wrong popular opinion band wagon!
I have read elsewhere an account that:
<em>"An Indian spectator in the area later stated that there was nothing a b u s i v e said, just good natured banter. After he had been clouted all around the ground by Green they called out to Siraj, “Welcome to Sydney, Shiraz”."</em>
and that:
<em>"Cricket Australia has apologised to the spectators removed from their seating today after being accused by Indian players"</em>
It would seem the ejected spectators have lawyers. I trust they give the Australian Cricket Board a good bit of financial grief for instigating public humiliation of innocent fans on national television, and a reminder that their primary responsibility is accuracy and truth, not the urgent rush to be conspicuously politically fashionable.
-
So it seems the people sitting nearby agree all that was said was " Welcome to Sydney Shiraz"?
I want to know if that is what Siraj heard. Did he mishear? Or is that was what he thought was worthy of stopping the game for 15mins?
Is that what was reported to the umpires and then the police?How many times will Broad need to stop a Test match next time he's in Aussie? Or Smith in England?
The broadcasters should reconsider whether they should show live shots of the crowd in instances like this. Showing them just encourages the self righteous mob to attack.
-
So it seems the people sitting nearby agree all that was said was " Welcome to Sydney Shiraz"?
I want to know if that is what Siraj heard. Did he mishear? Or is that was what he thought was worthy of stopping the game for 15mins?
Is that what was reported to the umpires and then the police?How many times will Broad need to stop a Test match next time he's in Aussie? Or Smith in England?
The broadcasters should reconsider whether they should show live shots of the crowd in instances like this. Showing them just encourages the self righteous mob to attack.
@Duluth said in Australia v India:
So it seems the people sitting nearby agree all that was said was " Welcome to Sydney Shiraz"?
I want to know if that is what Siraj heard. Did he mishear? Or is that was what he thought was worthy of stopping the game for 15mins?
Is that what was reported to the umpires and then the police?How many times will Broad need to stop a Test match next time he's in Aussie? Or Smith in England?
The broadcasters should reconsider whether they should show live shots of the crowd in instances like this. Showing them just encourages the self righteous mob to attack.
Now I think about I’m fairly sure the crowd merely asked Hadlee if he was a banker, definitely a legitimate question back in the semi pro days.
-
So it seems the people sitting nearby agree all that was said was " Welcome to Sydney Shiraz"?
I want to know if that is what Siraj heard. Did he mishear? Or is that was what he thought was worthy of stopping the game for 15mins?
Is that what was reported to the umpires and then the police?How many times will Broad need to stop a Test match next time he's in Aussie? Or Smith in England?
The broadcasters should reconsider whether they should show live shots of the crowd in instances like this. Showing them just encourages the self righteous mob to attack.
@Duluth said in Australia v India:
The broadcasters should reconsider whether they should show live shots of the crowd in instances like this. Showing them just encourages the self righteous mob to attack.
There should be enough CCTV at the ground to cover the job. Particularly when there are only 10k in.
The misunderstanding is going to result in - at least - a refund of tickets, no doubt.
