I prefer listening to people on the Australian/indian sides who are disagreeing with their teams's position.

Peter Roebuck may have been called a dog and rat by flag waving posters, (hopefully they are banned now) but atleast I see him as an impartial reporter. Though I disagree with him.

Or Neil Harvey, saying Ponting "needs to look at himself". "... the captain needs to be stronger and keep his guys in line, ...I don't think they are very sporting." I wouldnt be surprised if those nationalists start calling Harvey the same names they called Roebuck. They are just blinded by patriotism unfortunately.

On the Indian side it was good to see Manjrekar and Abassi (pak) disagreeing with the removal of the umpire. Though I disagree with them.

What about clause 3.1.7 of the playing conditions that both teams signed ahead of the series - "Neither team will have a right of objection to an umpire's appointment."?

__________________

Does that also include the cricket Boards, media and public as well or just the team?

When i say "team", i refer the the national board. CA and the BCCI are bound by the laws of the game. Or should ireplace "are" with "should be"

__________________

Where can we find the full playing conditions ?

Another good article Indians should read is this one by Suresh Memon

Cricinfo - Some balance, please