I saw the third episode of "An Aussie go's Bolly" last night which included the genesis of the Symonds "monkey" taunts during the Nagpur ODI in late 2007.

Pleasing to see Gus Worland (Hugh Jackman's mate) confront a "monkey chanting fan" in the Nagpur stand after he acted like a complete goose.

Also pleasing to see his interveiw with Andrew Symonds after the match where the issue was not shirked by either of them, and the dignified way both of them talked about it.

I saw the pre cursor to next weeks episode based on ODI's in Mumbai and elsewhere including more visual prop's targeting Symond's.

Ricky Ponting has obviously told Andrew Symonds if there are any issues in regard to this matter to take them to him and he will act.

Ponting acted as a captain who put's his players first and popular uninformed opinion second.

Ponting and Symonds have grown in dignity in my opinion through this.

Yeah I saw that episode it was one of the most disgusting crowds I have ever seen, people talk about Australia being racist in the crowds. I have never seen racism like that in the Australian crowds. I would never go to the cricket in India.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

I didn't see that episode, or any of them for that matter, but i find i hard to believe that the entire crowd acted like that.

Could it be a case of selective journalism?

Now what i have seen when watching games in India is generally a bunch of people that are enjoying the spectacle. It's not as if you don't hear big cheers when an Aussie hits a nice shot, or see the Indians waving the 4 or 6 signs.

Now i have never been to India, but almost everyone i have talked to say the country and it's people are awesome.

To impugn an entire people by the actions of the minority is crazy. Just remember, Australia has hardly a perfect record in this regard and this situation is a two way street.

In anycase. Any show broadcast on the hate and fear spewing FOX network has to be treated with healthy cynicism.

Selective journalism is a common tactic used to undermine a person or group. The anti-globalism movement is a perfect example of victims of this tactic.

__________________

I'm just going to go out on a limb here and say that you have some serious problems with the Fox News Channell. However, the Fox 8 channell is a separate organisation. Besides which, I saw that show and it makes no attempt at all to impugn an entire nation- in fact, although I've only seen that episode, it seems that Gus got on fine with the Indians that he met, and that most Indians were portrayed very positively in that show (the only exception being the guy who made the monkey chant in the first place).

If indian crowd is racist, why is that not a single west indian cricketer was ever taunted ?

Dont think the crowd that behaved so... ever had an estimate of what they were doing. we are living in a world where rules change with miles. A word monkey can be a mere nickname to tease someone in india(am sure in australia too) whereas the same word if uttered in another country may have deeper ramifications. would call it cultural difference.

Having said that ..m very sure bhajji called symonds a monkey..deliberately...no doubts at all..given the record of his behaviour. Indian legal experts stepped in and diverted the case as maki (mother) so that it goes the vilification route and not the racial abuse route. whats bad is symonds told bhajj not to do it and even then bhajj did that..

Now then...(Mark nicholas way)...aussie cricketers have to understand that there are things they say which hurt other circketers more than a monkey word..and they do it all the time...

Please do not try to judge a different country by a set of western parameters.

__________________
Tendulkar - A gift to the game of cricket

That message should not be limited to Oz cricketers alone, but to many in England and New Zealand as well, ie where there are predominantly "Western" players and audience. I have lived and worked in the UK for 23 years and the level of double-standards and hypocrisy still amazes me. I have been called a b*****d many times for trivial matters and told off for not treating it as a joke and at the same time accused of rudeness and primitive behaviour for inadvertantly pointing a finger (straight forward, NOT up) at someone! Many posters on this and the sledging thread seem to think that calling someone a monkey is racist while exchanges of the sort that transpired between McGrath & Sarwan (irrespective of who was at fault) are acceptable. That might be so in England, Australia and certain other places, but in in the subcontinent certain phrases acceptable in the West can spill blood whereas calling someone a monkey is usually treated as the mildest of insults, if at all. I an definitely not saying that Australians and the English should accept the subcontinental norm; each society should be aware of the others' sensitivities and behave accordingly......that is what usually known as "civilization".

It is those double-standards in the UK that have led me to believe, Ern's protestations notwithstanding, that there is still too much of the Colonial attitude left in the English mind.

The last comment, Nostromo, is surely a generalisation, and to be honest (like Ern) I find it a bit difficult to take. I don't think colonialism has a thing to do with the main point here - and it's a point on which in the end I think we all agree. That is that, whether the accident of our individual births gives us a passport of a former colonising nation or a former colonised nation, the way to successful international relations in the 21st century, and to successful personal relations through all time, is founded on mutual respect. That, in my somewhat naive view of the world, is the only thing that matters, and it involves recognising that we don't all express ourselves in the same way.

As part of that, we also have to be able to accept assurances from individuals with whom we deal - and it should be much easier to do that with individuals than it is with groups of any size - that "no offence was intended". This means that, if a bloke in a pub in Australia calls me a Pommie bastard and tells me it was not intended to offend, I should believe him (and actually I do, because I know that the Australian version of English uses words which we Poms might consider a bit rough rather more easily than the British form of English does). I would likewise be very happy if Symonds accepted Harbhajan Singh's assurance (if offered) that "monkey", when used by Harbhajan, was not intended to offend. It seems to me that if Harbhajan had said "Sorry, mate, I didn't mean to offend" and Symonds had said "Thanks, mate - but please remember that it could be considered offensive over here", we would have had peace, harmony and education all round. That must be better than what really happened, surely?

In fact, when I really think about it, I can't think that in all of my travels I have ever come across anyone deliberately trying to cause offence - but I can think of several occasions when potentially offensive words have been used and people, in a completely friendly and polite way, have said "You shouldn't say that here, mate, because ...". It seems to me to be much better than jumping automatically to the conclusion that offence was intended.

__________________
Money won't buy you friends. But it gets you a better class of enemy.
Spike Milligan

[quote] On principle what you are saying is true, but I can assure you that in reality it sometimes does feel like a "generalisation" to those of us who have been at the receiving end time and again. I am now 52 years old and having spent the first 29 of those in India and the next 23 in the UK, can reasonably claim to have seen the best and worst of both worlds. My opinons are based not personal experience alone, but general observation over the years and I think I am intelligent enough to draw a fair conclusion. I do not consider myself bigoted in the least and am prepared to criticise my own countrymen without hesitation when necessary....and I am the first one to accept that there are numerous occasions; for example, I have never supported Gavaskar's blind and near-fanatical anti-Western rhetoric on just about everything. But having lived and worked in the UK for 23 years and swallowed repeated discrimination, unfairness and insults, I really sometimes wonder what I am really doing here. I keep telling myself that this is the price that I am paying for coming to this country for a selfish motive in the first place - looking for a so-called 'better life' - and so just put up and get on. I know full well that when I retire in 9 years time, I'll just turn and walk away without so much as backward glance; I can assure you that there are many professionals from my part of the world who feel exactly the same way though very few would actually be willing to admit it. No matter what you like to think, with a few exceptions either way, the majority of non-Caucasians in this country (and probably elsewhere in the West) are subtley treated as second-class citizens who are tolerated and no more. Just take a look at the general opinions on the columns of Guardian Unlimited and similar and you will see what I mean. If that sort of "us and them" attitude is not a remnant of colonialism, I don't know what else is; but then, we probably asked for it.

Agreed, but both of us know that it seldom happens in that nice way that you suggest, certainly not on the cricketing field. The Indian crowds chanting that monkey slogan must have known that it would have upset Symonds far more than it would have done a local, but they still carried on anyway; in the same way, don't expect me to belive that the Oz or English players using the b-word or similar to subcontinental players are innocent of its significance in other cultures. We are increasingly living in a dog-eat-dog world and I guess it is natural for any given "dog" to find sanctuary among its own kind.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

I never said entire crowd, your the one adding that word to this topic. You seem to be very dismissive of something as you say, you have not watched.

No one has "impugned" anyone, your the one bringing this up. I dont know what "impugn" means but in the context of the theme of your post I doubt it is complimentary.

And their are numerous threads on this site critising "Australia's less than perfect record" but it just so happens this is a thread about India's less than perfect record, I consider your comments to be off topic.

Now if you had of said "I hate Rupert Murdoch" at the start of this post things would have been simpler. Now considering "Fox 8" is also home of "Family Guy", "The Simpson's", "King of the Hill", "America's next to model" etc

I suppose all of those should treated as "fear spewing"

Symonds hijacking "the anti-globalism" movement absolutely takes the cake though