CRICKETNDTV.com - Australia in India, 2008

NDTV | Profit | Khabar

Make us your home | Sitemap | Newsletter |

CRICKETNDTV.com - Australia in India, 2008

Search

Forum

Gautam Gambhir banned for one Test: Is it a biased decision?

It was a correct decision.. Physical contact is not acceptable in any for m of any game.. Kills the spirit of the game...

manjeet

The entire world is probably more or less Racist.. After having traveled across the World for quite some time now, i can say that with a certain degree of certainty.. Yes the Gambhir ban was unjustified when you look at it in conjunction with the Watson punishment..more so if you equate Watsons penalty to Zaheers incident earlier.. I really think that World needs to think hard and act fast to curb Racism, else be bold enough to accept that we ALL are racist, no point in being a hypocrite an wear the veil of One World One Humanity razzle dazzle, lets stop fooling ourselves

D

The Aussies know that they cannot win In India fairly-squarely so they have as ALWAYS come down to their shoddy behaviour....The trouble is that when they do it so blatantly then it is all part of the game and on-field activity and Blah blah.... but look when they are at the receiving end then their arse get's all sore and they are helped by the maa-ki's of the game!!!!!

Aditya

yes.why test ban and not o d i ban?as gambhir was in form,mr broad preferred to help white team

virajit s lele.

What ever it is Gambir should not have done a physical contact. Rather he could have finished the run and complained to the umpires and also to the match referee upfront also calling captain to intervene by halting the game for few minutes. This would have jolted Ausiees considerably considering the impact in media as well as subsequent steps thru BCCI to ICC With a very strong note dropping the respective Australian player from the current series to proceed further

P S Sri Charanyan

it was very wrong decision for india. we know very well they are our guest .but it does n't mean they will do mistakes .every time they are doing . it is not possible for india to ignore.nlknlmlm

NIBEDITA

The decision was not biased but it was really biased in favour of Australians when Katich escaped with a 10% match fee fine. The latter was biased because many predecesors with similiar foul lost at least 20-30% match fee.

S Chandra Sekhar

The decision was not biased but it was really biased in favour of Australians when Katich escaped with a 10% match fee fine. The latter was biased because many predecesors with similiar foul lost at least 20-30% match fee.

S Chandra Sekhar

Yes. he is deserved to get one match ban

shaam

Wangdi

WE Indians are very sincere & honest in what we do. We beleive in not harming anybody and get going. THe worst offenders are from Australia, Soth Africa and then Pakistan, England. Pakinstan also has mastered the art of sledging, we should also master the art of sledging and and in the present situation we are financially stronger and are feeding all other cricket boards & ICC. There is no doubt in anybody's mind that we are financial muscle and super power in Cricket. We need to show it and encash it, the other coutries have done on the past. In the context of Gambhir there is no doubt offence has been committed, but provocation has been there and hence this offence. THe punishment given is toooooo streneous compared to other offences we have seen in the past.

navak

Yes, it's raw deal. Most of the times, asian cricketer are fined than other(s). No matter what happened on the field, it has been viewed world over, and was Chris Broad sleeping! He must be following the foot-steps of Mike Procter and Mike Dennes. BCCI is not strong enough to protest like the Sri Lankan Cricket Board in the case of Muttaiah Muralitharan, when Aussies stated him to "chucking" as they couldn't just play him. Now, it is the turn of Gambhir and, who knows tomorrow it may be the turn of Mendis!!

Sudhindra Nidamboor

ICC will follow the rules of code-of-conduct, its the player who must not get under the trap, Gautham could have take the expamle of Sachin, Kumble,Dhini & Dravid they never had hard time with ICC, never.

mohammed ziauddin

This is high time that we all should ban Referees and should teach a lesson to them that they will not commit such mistakes. Its stupidity that we all listen to the decisions and keep on moving with life. Its a good thing that BCCI is acting very aggressively in this manner. England players, Aussie players and their respective boards are hand in glove when it comes to the question of Cricket laws. This has to be stopped. First of all, change the fucking cricket rules for sledging. Second, wipe off those referees and umpires from officiating cricket.

krish

This has always been the case. I donot know how ICC can only penalise Gambhir.There cannot be a clap with only one hand.ICC is totally baised.It is high time India stood up and show the world that we control the game and we are the ones who is always at the recieving end.

Venkata Krishna H.P.

Yes it is clearly a biased decision. The reason is Gambhir was consistently provoked by the australian fielders on the first day of the third test. But Shanewatson was fined only 10% of his match fee. When Zaheer khan was fined 80% of his match fee during First test just for a single verbal chat, match refree Chris Broad said that giving respect to the opponents is very important. Even after getting involved in verbal chat for more than 3 times, why Shanewatson was fined only 10% ?? Its clearly a Biased decision by ICC. It seems like ICC itself doesn't want Australia to lose the series thatwhy Gambhir was banned

kumar

Yes it is a biased decision

karthik

Ofcourse it is biased decision. But we must learn to stop complaining and show our anger in the end result. Kumble should have opted out of third test itself. Resting Harbajan is only to accomodate kumble. Ishant has to work hard on his fielding. Even for the fourth test dravid has to be replaced with yuvraj singh. We must groom allrounder like Irfan pathan to fill the fifth bowler slot. With four bowlers it is always going to be difficult to take 20 Aussie wickets.

T.S.Rajesh

A biased decision?? We Indians always have a different lookout!!!! We talk of justice all the time but when the 'victim of justice' is an Indian player, we are just not ready to accept that. We in fact try to find a conspiracy theory behind the incident and just don't feel that justice was made. This was absolutely clear after what happened in Sydney and now in Delhi. I agree that Watson was left with a very mild punishment, but that doesn't justify what Gambhir did. In India, killing a person out of revenge is also considered a murder and the punishment remains that of a murder. Wasn't there enough evidence that Gambhir was guilty? Justice Sachs clearly mentioned in his judgement that there was no need to further hear from anybody as Gambhir had already pleaded guilty and there was enough visual evidence to confirm that he was playing with the spirit of the game. He also clearly mentioned that the decision was being taken in a haste without waiting for any justification from Gambhir or BCCI because there wasn't enough time to start for the fourth test and any delay would have surely impacted the selection of indian team for the test which surely would have been a worse scenario. Grow up guys. BCCI is just playing with our emotions!!!!

Sultan

The ICC Appeals Commissioner Justice are only eyes and eyes without ears. I challenge Shane Watson to reveal in public the comments he used to disturb the rhythm of Gautam Gambhir on the ground. He would never do it. Everyone knows what language the Australians use when sledging.

Moeenuddeen

OF course undoubtedly 100% biased decision. SHAME ON ICC

Manu

When we pass a judgement on whether the ban on Gambhir is a biased decision, what are we basing our opinions on? Are we comparing the punishment handed out to Gautam with that of Shane Watson? If that is the case, then I don't think the comparison is fair because the two offences are different. Watson's offence is deemed to be less serious by the ICC's Code of conduct. However, given that Zaheer Khan was fined 80% of his match fees for verbally abusing Hayden, I think Watson got away slightly lightly. I have no complaints about the ban on Gautam. People who have observed his behaviour and general attitude will, no doubt, agree that, even though he is extremely talented as his performance in the series testifies, he is a very arrogant person. Gambhir has absolutely no reason to be arrogant, given that he is still new to the side and is in the process of establishing his place. He should take the cue from his senior colleagues, Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, V.V.S. Laxman and the recently retired Anil Kumblke. Their achievements far outshine Gambhir's, however, their conduct both on and off the field has been absolutely exemplary. That is why these players command such a lot of respect all over the world. Gambhir should understand that no one has any time for arrogant fools. One hopes this ban will have a salutary effect on him. It is really unfortunate that the BCCI is arguing with ICC on the matter.

Satyaranjan Sarkar

the Aussies always did these kinda things when they dominated world cricket. now when they r getting a taste of their own medicine, they cant take it!! grow up guys... again, the person who provokes is the greater criminal. watson provoked and gambhir reacted... if u r not prepared to face consequences of ur actions, better not do it! u cannot do some stupid thing and expect the other person to react in a way u want! this shows how cowardly the aussies are. they could not get him out and as usual they tried the dirty game with him... and gambhir gave it back, which is quite natural.

Mathew Parambil

only if GG would not have hit SW. Cant go against the book. But SW should have been treated with more severe than wht he got.

kunal

Bccci should not accept the decision as it is not fair on gambhir part

kapil

Yes, it is 100% biased. Of course, I don't support Gambhir's actions, but the same treatment needs to be meted out to Australians, whether it is Ricky Ponting (protesting the umpire's decision) or Shane Watson / Simon Katich (who provoked Gambhir. It is high time BCCI puts it's foot down & question the ICC why only Asian players are given harsh penalties & not white players. Gavaskar rightly pointed out this fact, though it was obviously not well received.

Krishna

I don't think so, it was a biased decision, as far as the part of Gambhir is concerned. Gambir could have avoided this physical attack, irrespective of the provocation by Watson. Instead,he could have complained to the umpire or the rival captain or his own captain, what Watson had hurled at him while running between the wickets.

Sreekumar Pillai

I don't think so, it was a biased decision, as far as the part of Gambhir is concerned. Gambir could have avoided this physical attack, irrespective of the provocation by Watson. Instead,he could have complained to the umpire or the rival captain or his own captain, what Watson had hurled at him while running between the wickets.

Sreekumar Pillai

Yes its a biased decision. The race and colour has once again given a biased decision. What Gambhir did , deserves punishment but when the hearing was to take place on Friday, what was the need to rush to a decision. The accused has not been given a chance. If the judge was not biased and he felt proper justice has to be done he could have given Gambhir a chance to put his case. Austrlians behaviour and proking nature has been ignored while arriving at a decision regarding incidents involving in this match. The India's top batsmen were provked time and again, which anybody who can see was able to see on telivision screens.laxman was also provoked, and all this was done witha purpose. They wanted to distrupt the concentration of Indians and the comments coming in newspapers and news channels by ex-austrlian players is also a tactics of austrlians. Austrlians are most unfair team in the world and still the colour and creed of a person is given importance in this world it will continue. If by chance India is able to convince any judge it is termed as putting pressure with money power. If Austrlians feel that Indian crickters and board is unreasonable why are they playing in IPL. All are mad about money and still want supermacy based on colour and creed

kumar

Australians are bad sports and cannot accept anyone challenging them. They always target performer so that they mentally succumb to their pressure. In Sydney test they targetted Harbhajan as he was performing and now they targetted Gambhir because he was performing. ICC is biased towards Asians and we must raise our voice.Only 10% fine for Watson who provoked and one match ban for Gambhir who retaliated. Punishment is one sided. In the least, Watson should have been fined 100% or Gambhir should have been fined 100% instead of one match ban.

SUBRAMANIAN Y.

Yes it is a biased decision based on the racisim. He shopuld have been given a chance to submit his view point of view. First the decision has been tken by a while and then again the appal has been ehard by the while. I reallywonder why there is no Asian innthe appellate tribunal.

mm pande

vivek pandey

Its absolutely nonsense and clearly a partisan ruling. While I agree this is not a contact sport but then Shane Watson should be banned as well

Jai

If the player violate the rules of ICC, then he should be punished. No matter whom the player is and which team is belongs to... rules is made for everyone and it is good to punish the guilty....

S.Chandrashekar

Not at all! But we are a biased people!country!Soooo.......

willie

I DONT THINK IT IS BIASED. IT CLEARLY VISIBLE THAT GAMBHIR HAS DONE IT ON PURPOSE

Dhiraj

Yes, of course - the decision is in favour of Aus., this may help their bowlers morally, Their should have been some time frame for Gambhir atleast.

sshankar

I do not think so. Physical abuse in any form is meant to be banned and moreover Gambhir pleaded guilty in the earlier arbitration. BCCI can't fingure each and every thing.

monica

The "Bait" has been well taken. The thorn in the flesh has been removed with utmost precision and execution by the aussies. Well before debating on the decision, it is to be well introspected by the Indian cricket management as to how well the aussies have executed in the removal of in-form batsman Gambhir. This is by far a blow to us as Gambhir was strking the willow really well. Having said this, yes the nature of the decision is certainly quite puzzling indeed. Well - the reaon being - as the law across the globe says, that highest punishement/penalty is generally offered to the perosn who motivaties a deviation from a said rule rather than the person who commits it. Agreed that Gambhir was at fault, but who was the reason behind it? Who provked him? It is shane watson - and he being released with a lesser penalty and this indeed showcases mockery of all sorts. With due regards, we don't want to start any continent war of words, but then the refree should note that any decision that has be taken - should be taken with the having both the sides in the balance. That would be the harbinger for the game in the future. Having said this, the bottom line would be - yes mate it does look a like bad decision and by doing that the refree has added sweet and spice to the gravvy. Cheers..

Narasimhan

It is not the first time when an Indian and Aussie go for a spat and the match refree(Especially Chris Broad) catch the Indian player. In this respect i respect PCB over BCCI, as they try not to bring these controversial umpires/refrees for their home series matches. Atleast BCCI should show their power in ICC on this in the forthcoming series to have a normal cricket match so that the youngsters of the Indian team can play freely

Sudhakar

Yeah, i think he deserves it becasue he shoudn't be physically abusing players on the first place. He should concentrate on his game rather than get in to verbal or physical fights.

Chinny

yes its totally biased....an appeal woudl involve listening to the accused.It just shows that cricket has been white dominated...its disgusting..shame on ICC and Cricket Australia

Amit

yes its totally biased....an appeal woudl involve listening to the accused.It just shows that cricket has been white dominated...its disgusting..shame on ICC and Cricket Australia

Amit

ICC is biased for the last 10 years towards asians.

Sudhakar

Its a fair decision. I mean one cannot and will not allow BCCI to show one-upmanship every time. There is some limit to the open show of fist pumping by BCCI. It needs to stop.

Ashish Patil

Yes, its defenitely a biased decision. I dont mind the ban, but I do mind the 10% on Watson. Is this a joke on Asian players or what? Watson shows his fist (having an intention to hit Ghambir with the fist). Tell me, is that sledging. No. Its calling somebody out for a brawl, or asking for trouble. Watson is as equal at fault as Ghambir. BCCI is right in protesting the ban. No player ahs the right to block another player from taking runs. Same goes for Katich. And Katich escapes Mouthing and Blocking Ghambir. BIAS all the way. ICC has show a racial attitude towards India always!!!!!!!!

Jack

HECK YA its biased. You gotta be a fool to beleive anything otherwise. ITS A SHAME things like this still happens with ICC. RACIST ! totaly unconstitutional. No fair trial given and ONLY player from the sub continent BANNED.

Manoj Kumar

i think it is really baised... it is against natural justice and fundamental right of the person. the best way BCCI can deal this is to include Gambhir in the playing eleven and see what the ICC can do?

siji

No..Cricket is gentleman's game. Every player should uphold the spirit of cricket. Aussie rowdism is not an excuse for Indian counter part.

Saral

Fully biased. Why did Zaheer got fined 80% of match fees for running around and Shane Watson only 10%......time BCCI exerts more muscle in appointment of ICC judges as well.

english

yes it is very biased decision as the comissoner never gave chance to ghambir to put his defence it has always happen to indian or asian cricketer in general bcci should protest strongly which they have done n hope for fair result

huseni

No. It's not a biased decision. He was banned because it's a repeat offence. He was already warned once. Physical contact is wrong. Now BCCI is flexing it's muscles just to make him play in Nagpur. But I guess the decision by Broad was fair.

Ram

I would really agree that Goutam Gambhir deserves a ban of one test match but, at the same Shane Watson's 10% match fee deduction seems funny.. and raises many questions about Asian players getting repeatedly victimised for ICC rules. In such case, I feel there will be a definite need of two match refrees (one from Asia) to be appointed for matches like this.

Vijay Chennamalla

I think the decision is correct, but still the decision making is lopsided to ensure the fairer sex gets away with much more like how Johnson got away with. We will have to live us second class citizens as like it or not the ICC ARE RACISTS when it comes to the sub continent

Kaushik Majumdar

Yes, it is. ICC is always against Asian crickters and leave Aussies scott free which is a known fact to all.

Balasubramanian C R

I think the decision is a fair one - we should not compare what the Australian got. People like Gambhir, Sreesanth etc need to reminded that this game evolved long before they were born and will continue mush after they call it quits. Physical contact deliberately - no way. It is a justified punishment. Hope he will learn from it.

Rajesh

It cetaintly is not a fair one. The provocatuer gets off lightly and the perpetuator faces the hangman. But therm skin colour rules, I guess, in the ICC- which I consider the most ridiculous organisation the world has ever known. I think the time has come for the BCCI to pull all stops and prevent this apparent prejudice towards white skin in cricket. As for as Aussie cricket is concerned, the less said the better. Their cricketers are boors and if they are ambassadors of Australia, God Help Australia!

sanjay karanth

Hmmm,,,I think Its time we say A big NO to MR austrilia and there cheating team, U knw 10% fine, means , u go ahead with furhter sledging,and provking, I think , India team now needs a Sledging Coach,,, than a legal lawyer to fight ,

Syed

No it is not biased decision! Cricket is a gentelman's game and it should be treated like this. We all know the Ausi roots.. It will take them time to change their genes.

Amit

In my view, Gambhir clearly deserves this ban and I hope he learns from it. Aggressive tactics should be used, first of all, to keep yourself pumped up and also, to disturb the opponent's concentration. The key thing here is to maintain a cool demanaour by not getting affected emotionally. Aggression is actually to keep yourself pumped up, to give your full on the field. It should not disturb your concentration. I hope Gambhir learns this lesson and continues to be aggressive.

arjun kumar

Is Chri Broad a qualified match referee? What about Watson showing the hand (does it not become physical). Gambhir should have argued that as Watson showed his hand while taking the first run he took a detour to avoid any physical contact during the second leading to the slight collision that was never intentional. To plead guilty is tame unless he does not want to play the Nagpur test for any other reason.

chinnabs

One test ban for Gambhir is biased decision by match referee. I am condomed ICC decision to ban gambhir one test. It is unjusfied.Why ICC finish Indian every time? ICC must give the answer to our Indian cricket lover people.

v. raveendran

Gambhir should be banned and thats totally proper. He did intentionally elbow watson. But we should in all fairness apply the physical contact rule to the following situations too retroactively: 1. Simon Katich holding down Gambhir when he attempted a single 2. Michael Clarke using a Rugby tackle on Sachin in the CB series second final. If these two get a one match ban now; then Gambhir can be banned for the Nagpur test. Also Shane watson needs to be fined 80% of his fee for mouthing off after dismissing Gambhir. For too long the aussies have bullied other teams into submission not anymore. Its time to Whup their cheating asses back to their

Madhu

He deserved the punishment. In fact, it should have been a two or three-match ban. Going out of his way to elbow a player cannot be condoned (just as showing your teeth, Sreesanth style, abusing 'Maa ki" etc also cannot be). The way TV channels have projected the story and running polls and forum discussions, I won't be surprised if a coward ICC manages to reprieve Gambhir in time for the Nagpur Test. You can always find another Justice Hansen!

P. Kumaran

This is the tactics by Aussies to get at important people from the opposition. If they cannot get them out thru cricket, get them out thru other means. This time, logic used is physical contact. Then why Zahir was fined 80% for just excessively showing his excitement at the fall of a wicket? Why Harbhajan was banned for abusing and Watson was fined just 10% for abusing as well as obstructing. Indians should also learn this tactic. Instead of reacting to their tacticts, they should trap them. They should complain to umpires and referees every time they are abused or obstructed and hope that action will be taken at least once.

SUDHIR

The easy go attitude of match referee on Australian has justified verbal spat is acceptable on ground and players can resort to such attempts to disturb the opposition players. Hence, Australians can be answered in their own language.

Abhishek

YES it is a biased decision and it is repeating all the time. Last year happened in Australia and now in India. This is a harsh decision and BCCI should take strong action against it. Australians always call for a sportsman spirit but do they know what does it mean. Earlier Gilchrist put comments against Sachin and now they are targetting Gautam. They always attack the player who is strong against them. They go for win by hook or by crook. If i would be a BCCI chairman i would have made a strong appeal against this decision. Please BCCI wake up , our team players need your support.

Naresh

Do we still have to debate on this ? This fact has been known since a long time now. We all can just "hope" the Asian Cricket Powerhouses reacts strongly to all these biased decision(s). After all, it is the ACP (read : Asian Cricket Powerhouses) that pump in the maximum funds to keep cricket alive.

Vikram Parekh

YES it is a biased decision and it is repeating all the time. Last year happened in Australia and now in India. This is a harsh decision and BCCI should take strong action against it. Australians always call for a sportsman spirit but do they know what does it mean. Earlier Gilchrist put comments against Sachin and now they are targetting Gautam. They always attack the player who is strong against them. They go for win by hook or by crook. If i would be a BCCI chairman i would have made a strong appeal against this decision. Please BCCI wake up , our team players need your support.

Madhu

It is the lowest possible sentence to G. gambhir. As a cricket lover and having a bit of knowladge about the game, i was expecting more for this type of action.He should know that game is more impartant than individuals. It was a shameful act on behalf of him, first he did the wrong thing and then make the expression to the world that i does it delibrately.

khurshid a dar

Referee himself says that Gambhir was provoked. Can anybody understand the logic. Provoker was fined only 10% of match fee and provoked was fined with 1 Test ban that too liniently, says the gentlemen. All match referees are heavily biased against India. They are all jealous about the prosparity of the Indian cricket.This was the tactic employed by Aussies to get Gambhir out of their way in the next test.

sudhir

Partially biased given that Watson was fined only 10% of his match fee - he desreved more given that he provoked Gambhir to hit him. But Gambhir was wrong - he need to learn. Another aspect, I could not understand why Zaheer was fined 80% of the match fee for mocking a batsman that has got out whereas Watson only 10% even though he showed lack of sportsman spirit for with a player who was playing the game. This is definately biased.

Manpreet

The ban on Gambhir is totally biased. I saw the incident and all the stuff leading up to it. First of all there was hardly any contact. If the big tough Aussies can't handle that then they shoud quit cricket and go crying to their mamas. Besides the verbal abuse, Watson raised his hand as if to hit Gambhir when he ran the first run; anyone can see that. Of course he wouldn't dare hit another player but the mere fact that he would give the "dhamki" is dispicable! As Gambhir said he didn't need to elbow Watson as he was wiping the floor with their faces. It was the Aussies who were desparate for anything to unsettle Gambhir. All this needs to be taken into account by people evaluating the charge.

Allan

The guy got double ton,he can even punch a jab at the opponent.....grow up boy, learn sth from Sachin and other genteman cricketers, if not join boxing or taekwando....

hope

I justify Gambhir's ban as he is guilty for what he did. It's a different issue that he is proved by the Aussies. He is not new to cricket at International level. His act should be mature enough to react smartly. But yes I don't justify the Chris Board verdict on Watson, he too responsible for the major cause. Chris is always has a bias attitude towards Asian team. If Zaheer has fined 80% of match fee in his last match for just a small altercation, why Watson left with 10% fine?

Ashok

Yes, why not katich and Watson who delibrately blocked him ? Australia need either umpires help for winning& now Chris Broad helping them to Demoralise a opponent player, whom they fear.

A.Paramanathan

Any body who saw the telecast will agree that Gautham deiberately elbowed Watson.He got away lightly with only one ban should consider himself lucky.We should be bold enough to call a spade a spade.Immediately I saw the incident about Gambhir I told my son he is in for trouble. People who reach higher levels of performance should also maintain levels of coolness,because of their behaviour the team could suffer. After all Gautam has played well in the test matches and because of this fool hardy stupidity he can cause ripples in the performance s of thye next test,since the opening stand in most of the test matches have been good. This is a classical case of using brawn and not brain.

M.S.SHARADA PRASAD

No . Not at All . This is not the first time Gambhir is doing this . Earlier it was with Afridi and now it is Watson . He is becoming a habitual offender and it is not good for him as he has just started his career and has a long way to go . No doubt that he is talented but that only doesn't guarentee any player a place in the team . Ultimately the game is much bigger that anybody and anyone who is not abiding by the rules must be taken to task. I heard even Ravi Shastri telling that it is a correct decision . That clears any doubt of bias . Even Watson who was at the receiving end has been fined for verbal abuse. All the juniors must learn from senior players like Sachin, VVS, Anil and Rahul that one can command respect only by the way he bats and conducts himself on the field and not by being aggressive and elbowing the opponents .

Srinivasa Subramanian

Rubbish!!!1 Mr Chris Broad needs to change his mindset. It semms that we indians are still at the mercy of British Rule. Some one needs to remind Mr Broad how his own son was let off against India when he delibrately came in way of Saurav Ganguly in Oval last summer as the match refree was Mr Broad Senior. Absolutely biased decision.....

Soumo

The ban is not a biased action against gambir but there should also be a charge and ba to be imposed on Simon Katich for not allowing Gambir to take a run while gambir was trying to run hard. There shouls also be a 2 test ban to Kaitch to be imposed.

Radha Krishnan Janakiraman

It is a biased decision. No doubt about it. But I dont even approve Gautam's actions. If Watson got a mouth, Gautam too had one. No need to show his arm. That shows you are mentally weak. Remember Darwin's theory, only fittest will survive ! Remember similar tactics in Lagaan movie. When will you learn ?

hurray

yes of course it is a biased decision but cant help ...this is the rule and we gotta live with it....face it. same thing happened to the boy who took gun he was shot down by mumbai police and termed a terrorist while raj thackrey burnt mumbai ,ransacked the whole city , is scott free and no one has the guts to say anything to him or do anything...if you challenge the mighty and powerful you will be crushed and shown the door...so one should be wary of ones status before taking head on with them....gautum gambhir and the entire india team has to learn to respect aussies and not challenge them head on...nothing new old statement...or face the consequences.

Nikhil

the rules and decisions are always biased against people from the subcontinent. It all ends with the colour of the skin. If you are white you can get away with anything including using abusive language and instigating gesture and unsportsmanship . They are all poor losers. Watson should also be banned if Gambir is banned. the rules cannot be twisted and for the favour of the white skin.

ranga

GAMBIR SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE UMPIRES FIRIST WHEN HE FELT WATSON WAS DOING THIS ACT DELIBERATELY . HOWEVER THE COMMITTEE SHOULD HAVE ALSO ANALYSED IN DEPTH ON 'WHO HAS CREATED THIS ACT FIRST" AND GIVEN A UNBIASED PUNISHMENT. HERE THE DECISAION OF THE COMMITTEE WAS BIASED.

K.R.RENGANATHAN

Watson said something and then showed his fist - 2 items and only 10% fine, harbajjan said something and he was banned. is this Bias ? We should File a case against match refree for mentally harrasing our INDIAN players in the middle of the match. If they are insuch a hurry, they should have jumped immediatly before the next ball was bowled instead of waiting for till the day is over. If they want to wait.. y not till the end of the game?

Kiran

Becuase of such decissions from ICC Refree's INDIAN Public (Specially those like me) have stopped going to the cricket ground to watch the Match - After all its not a fare GAME - its becomming a NONSENSE Game. If its not Match Fixing, which is driving the spectators away its the ICC Match Refree who cannot see INDIA Do better..

Kiran

White refree are always against Indian and Asians.This is not new thing.

Sandeep

Please..it is really-really necessary to TEACH A LESSON to Boastful Indians.They often provoke the opposition even more than your 'so called' RUDE Australians! It is important to discipline Young Cricketers early in the long term perspective of the Game ! Not a biased decision at all!

Saurabh Dua

Yes it is a biased decision. It looks strange that Australia didn't report this issue, umpires logged in the complaint. And this factor should be considered. Players are meant to have skills of their game. I don't responding on sledging is a part of their skills. Previous record should always be considered, I don't remember if Gambhir was ever been banned for matches before. Still if somebody find it logical, should blame the cause behind this equally. Shane Watson is equally responsible and he should take care of the feelings of other, should appreciate Gambhirs inning, even he did in a footage - I think.

JK

it is the right decision taken by hte commitee. in the game no player is having a right to lose his temper as gautal did. with this decision it is the warning for other players not do repeat the incident. thats why it is not the biased decision. this is the shameful event done by gautam with oue guest thats why he has to bear the penalty. thanks

kamendra

Not at all. He was asking for it. As per ICC rules, if it was intentional elbow, then it can lead to 1 or 2 match ban. He got 1, he was also involved with some exchange with Katich which didn't help his case. Play hard, but fair please. It's not aggression but controlled aggression, plan and thinking which wins match situations. Gambhir is finally coming of age for the promise shown, and this will serve him good to control the aggressive part.

Prasath GSV

It is totaly biased decision. Still whites feel that they are the only authority to dictate cricket and want to supress the countries of Asia. Since India is the top revenew collector of ICC why India should not take controle of the world cricket.

A.D.Ghosh

no

AMRIT

No, it isnt biased at all. If some one provokes you, you can't hit him! Are we forgetting we are from Bapu's India and our customs dont guide us to misbehave with our guests? Anyways 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Harpreet

Surely it adds to the chain of biased decisions made in the past with the Asian players. Katich should also be banned for stopping Gambhir for taking a run in the same match.

PUNEET RAI

Certainly it is a biased decision.He could have been fined .may be with more%. Actually aussies seemed to be afraid of him. The root cause of trouble has been initiated by them only.

B.K.Sharma

No! It is not a biased decision because of every Australian behave very rudely against Indians and field umpires but no one can take steps against him. Why? Every time Indians suffer from this rule. Take Strong steps.

Ritesh Gajjar

At the outset it seems as a biased decision. Of course getting physical is not the right thing but at the same Watson has provoked Gautam to act. If Gautam can get one test ban then Watson also needs the same except that he was not physical but was verbal which is equally instigating. As Gavaskar has said provocator also needs to be punished not just fined 10% which seems to be unfair. But over all the game is getting in disrespect. Probably too much publicity is also being given.

d.n.das

Yes it is a biased decision. What else could explain Watson being fined just 10% of his match fees and Katich being let off Scott free.

Sukhmeet

This is a very biased decision of banning Gautam Gambhir, The entire episode started with Watson and earlier also Australian tried to come between his running. If some tries to provoke a gentleman like Gambhir we cannot keep quite...The punishment to Watson should be more and No Fine to Gambhir... This is really a step motherly treatment by Match Referee. The BCCI should fight to take stern action on the match referee itself and teach them a lesson that next time they do not take absurd decision like this.....

VenkatKrishna

Asians ARE CONTINUALLY VICTIMISED by ICC for sure!!! Gambir was simply too good for them and hence in desperation the aussies reverted to mouth wagging, aggressive posturing (Katich & Watson). Watch what Watson did as Gambir was running to complete his run...full arm raised into Gambir's face!! Gambir involuntarily reacted with the lightest of a nudge...just to say I am here & can respond, so back away! Lookat Katich's aggressive alcateration...he should have received a minimum 50% match fee fine. Watson deserved a lot more... I am certain much of this type of alcatertion is PLANNED by these people BEFORE the match!! Gambir deserved no more than a fine at the very most. ASIAN players have been systemmatically harshly victimised by ICI due to the Aussies. I AM DISSAPPOINTED THAT THE INDIAN BCCI and relevant Authorities JUST REFUSE TO PLAY!!!!!!!!!! Tell me what has the Afridi - Gambir incident have anything to do with this incident. Team India are only reacting to them...nothing more.....!!!!!!!!

bal

yes, this decision is biased. As always, the ICC seem to favour the Australians, not to mention the match refrees.

Vijay Kumar

It may be bias, but key question why dont our guys learn the art to give back in the right way, in this case why did Gambhir get do such an act. he could have as well used verbal exchange or stay quite and come and report to the Match refree where in Assie would be punished and the world would have hailed at him. lets not forget this is a gentleman game and its wise to keep the spirit up withougt loosing our self esteem.

Rajesh

So you think Gambhir should have reported to Chris Broad and you believe he would have punished Watson? Whom you're kidding?

Hemant

It is 100% biased decision. Earlier also this has been done to India. After Australia's humiliating defeat and Gambhir's 200 plus, Match Referee found this is the only way to encourage Aussies. Why didn't he punish Aussies.

nandakishor

gambhir should have just been fined 100% of his match fees, and watson 50%. or both should be banned for one test.

yatish

it is a fair decision. ghambir had intentionally elbowed which is clearly visible from tv footages. there is no place for such acts in any sport especially when U r playing a Gentelmen's game

ramesh

I definitely feel that it is a biased decision, how come Watson who provokes the issue is fined only 10% whereas Zaheer Khan in the last match was fined 80% of match fee and now it is Gautam getting 1 match ban. How does Chris Broad knows that Watson was only abusing Gambhir and not stopping him in his run up.

Shailesh

I think it's high time BCCI stopped making fools of themselves and the nation, off late there has not been a single instance when any Australian has been banned for their offensive language and behaviour on field.Simon katich did not get any warning for stopping Gautam Gambhir from taking a run, isn't this unsporting behaviour.We should not be taking this issue lightly, unless the Ban is not revoked we should call off this series.

Ajay

Its totally injustice done by the match referre to Gambhir. Gambhir should also have fined some % of match fees instead of one test match ban.

Santosh

Yes, as always it is a biased decision. The whole world knows how the ICC dances in the tunes of Aussie cricket. It is getting frustrating day by day how our Indian cricketers are getting fooled by the Aussies. The Aussies are so smart and technically excellent in the act of instigating opponents that they have reached a point where they fool the cameras, and above all the match referee who is no better than the blind-at-birth Dhritarashtra. The Indian players, as emotional fools as they are, easily fall into this prey and react exactly the way the Aussies want them to. It is a pity how our players fall into their well-planned strategies, and Aussies as always are a shameless group of players who rely more on their acting skills than their playing skills.

Indrajit Sengupta

It's not surprising. Because it happens always for the indian players alone. This is absolutely a bullshitting remark. Giving just 10% of the match fee fine for Watson and A match ban for Gambhir. BCCI should react for this. We have to show what indian cricket could do. I'm totally opposing this decision and I condemn this.

mark

Yes. Offcourse, it's a harsh decision and a biased one too. Gautam Gambhir was provoked enough to do that, if at all he has done it.

Amitabh Das

This is a biased decision and BCCI has to appeal against this . Gambhir was prompted by watson and gambhir has reverted back.hence thereis nothing wrong in this

CECIL WINSTON

NOT ONLY BIASED, IT PROVES WHITES WANT TO DICTATE THE GAME

ARBI

Yes. It is correct. Whatever happened on the field was visible to all of us. If GG had said anything, it would have be alright. But using your arm was definetely not required. This should be taken as a lesson.

Prashant

Yes. It is biased decision. Even though ban of Gambir justified, Watson should be punished more than 10% of match fee,

Ravishankar

squads

Are Dhoni and his boys the new leaders of world cricket? By beating the Aussies in the four-Test series, India has proved that it is now the world's best team.

Have your say

Blogs

Forums

Madhukar Prabhu
Beyond criticism

Santosh Kumar Mishra
The striker

poll

In what role would you like to see Sourav Ganguly now?

		Selector
		Coach
		Commentator
		Politician
		Other

Suggest a poll question:

Name

Poll

stats

			Most hundreds
			Most wickets
			Highest innings scores by a team
			Summary of results by captains
More »

About Us | Advertise | Feedback | Disclaimer | Investor | Careers | Transmission

© Copyright NDTV Convergence Limited 2008. All rights reserved.