Sign of things to come!!

[flanflinger]

I hope this is not true, but these are the comments from a member of the crowd directed at Monty, as reported by Sydney's Daily Telegraph

Give us a wave Monty. You can't speak English you stupid Indian, I'll have to say it in Indian. What are you doing playing in the English side, you're not English.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ausve...ry/267740.html

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...006069,00.html

Sadly I feel this is not the first incident we will see reported, Cricket Australia insist they will stamp this kind of disgraceful behaviour out, and I hope they do...

[Occasional Fan]

Me too. I'm afraid that a lot of advance discussion of this issue may be counter-productive though, as there will always be a few nutters who will be trying to test the authorities' resolve. Let's hope the authorities show the resolve they promise, the real fans make appropriate complaints to their neighbours if their neighbours get out of hand and, above all, that we get cricket on the front pages again, not this sort of stuff.

[Aussie-Yank]

I find the article to be highly questionable with the following quotes;

The Daily Telegraph witnessed a fan call the left-arm spinner a "stupid Indian who couldn't speak English".

While no official complaint was made, it is understood the England camp has been subjected to abuse since touching down in Australia just over a week ago.

The Daily Telegraph understands that both Panesar and South African-born Kevin Pietersen were also abused while playing in the Prime Minister's XI match at Manuka Oval, Canberra last week.

Ok, firstly if the Daily Telegraphed witnessed this so-called abuse - why did they not report it to the officials at the ground?

Secondly all they are saying is that it is understood - they are not saying that it actually happened.

Thirdly, if this racial abuse is actually occuring and the English are not lodging a complaint then the English Players should be calling for the ECB to step in.

To me this is a perfect example of reporters making a story rather than reporting the news.

[greg]

No surprise.What do you expect,they did the same last winter to the South Africans.

[flanflinger]

Greg,

Quite right and I have heard Australians claiming it wasn't them, then.. now Aussie-Yank is in denial. Let's face facts, there is clearly a problem with some Australians and racism.. and it needs to be tackled and tackled hard, in the same way that the FA in England have done their hardest to kick it out of football...

Denial doesn't help...it just leads to acceptance, and these types of comments should not be considered acceptable...

[Ernest]

ff while not condoning any racial abuse Panesar may have suffered, I really do believe that making this public just made things worse.

Originally Posted by cricinfo

Panesar, who underwent counselling from the team psychologist, Steve Bull, ahead of England's trip Down Under,

It was telling the world that Australia are a racist country, and made Panesar look a soft target.

[flanflinger]

Ern I agree,

As it is though most top sportsmen visit or have access to sports pshcologists, so I really don't see what the big deal is!! But making into a special case by making it public was very odd indeed.

[Aussie-Yank]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

Greg,

Quite right and I have heard Australians claiming it wasn't them, then.. now Aussie-Yank is in denial. Let's face facts, there is clearly a problem with some Australians and racism.. and it needs to be tackled and tackled hard, in the same way that the FA in England have done their hardest to kick it out of football...

Denial doesn't help...it just leads to acceptance, and these types of comments should not be considered acceptable...

FF, Where do I state that I have denied that it happened? - I have questioned the accuracy of the article, I was not there and you I believe where not there either - yet you state the article is 100% correct - obviously it has to be because its in the paper.

There is as much racism in Australia as there is in any country in the world, and people in crowds who are racist will make comments. But lets get a few facts straight shall we;

1. The article does not say who heard the comment, who said the comment. No report was made at the ground that comments where made and the ECB did not lodge a complaint about racist comments.

So where is your proof that the comment was made other than from that article? (So if "Mony" or "KP" came out and said they have, then it was said as far as I am concerned - but they have not and nor has the ECB, all the article did was say that it was understood they have received the comments).

2. The term Kaffir is not used by Australian's, they would use words associated with black. So these comments would have been used by people from South African back ground, who may or may not live in Australia. If the comments where reported in using a colour terminology then it would be totally different. I noticed that there have been no reported racial comments made in relation the the West Indies touring Australia - funny that is in it.

But don't let me stand in the way of a good story.

[Occasional Fan]

A-Y, I understand the point you are making, but surely it is also fair enough for FF to rely on what the papers report, at least to some extent (you haven't specifically denied it, that's true, but FF also hasn't suggested that the paper's report is Gospel truth)? The language which the Daily Telegraph uses is not at all unusual: "The DT understands that ..." is a standard journalistic formula for something which one of its reporters has heard at second hand but not witnessed at first hand.

Now, as with all newspapers in the free world, one man's meat is another man's poison. You may be sceptical of the DT when it uses this formula; others, including FF, may see such a formula as being enough to rely on. Both positions are fine to adopt. My limited experience with Sydney's papers is that I don't think much of the Telegraph, but personally prefer the Herald. But they are both more or less serious papers and it would be unusual (to say the least) for either of them to report something for which there is no basis at all - even hearsay or second hand evidence. Papers aren't looking for a forensic standard of evidence to support their publication of news - hearsay is often enough. Generally, though, again in my limited experience of these two papers, there is no smoke without (at least a little bit of) fire. No-one's saying that the alleged comments made to Panesar were continuous or huge in volume, but the DT is quoting exact words, and as you yourself say, the DT itself witnessed a "fan" saying of Panesar that he is "a stupid Indian". That is a pretty strong report for a newspaper to publish, and I'd say on the balance of probabilities that, if they are publishing it in these words, then it did happen.

There is another question, which is a difficult one to answer: assuming it did happen, then it is, by definition, news; but is it newsworthy? As an isolated incident over which no-one complained, there's at least an argument that it is not. So, would the Telegraph have been doing more of a service to Australia, cricket supporters and the game of cricket in general by not reporting it? Again, there's at least an argument that it would. But, of course, that doesn't sell papers!

[greg]

Maybe we haven't complained yet as we are waiting for the test series to make a stand against it?

I would back them 100% if they did.