Can anybody explain it?
Australian cricketer Symonds has done it again. This time he abused Indian cricketer Ishant Sharma after he dismissed Symonds in Sunday match at SCG. Ishant naturally retaliated. But only Ishant has been summoned by match referee.
Last time Symonds abused Harbhajan Singh. Bhajji also retaliated. But only Bhajji was summoned by match referee and was punished. Symonds was not even asked why he abused Bhajji. It revolted entire Indian nation and BCCI and Bhajii’s punishment had to be revoked. It came out very clearly during the proceedings that Symonds had started it. He had abused Bhajji but no action was taken against him.
This time also he has started it. He had abused Ishant. But match referee has not summoned Symonds. Ishant may be punished but why not Symonds?
I do not understand it. Can anybody please explain to me why the person who abuse get away without any punishment and the abused person is only punished? Does the person who is abused has no right to feel bad?
Symonds has become a habitual abuser. He should be severely punished. It will not be unfair if he is suspended from the game of cricket for ever. What do you say friends?
Hello,
Cricket even today is considered as a white skins game.
If there is any opposition to that, like the one which happenned recently, where BCCI had to intervene on the Bajji-Symonds racial issue, it was given the colour of money power.
Regards,
SERVICE TO ALL
jmalhotra
Symonds and some more cricket players are not playing cricket in a sportman spirit ..they should be taught a lesson ..rather than being biased with them…