Further comments, post Border’s comments

Alan Border has apparently commented that SG’s response to Ponting, particularly about his comments about David Hooke’s, is causing strain in their personal friendship to the point of breaking. Whether David Hooke’s death and the circumstances around it ought to be a matter of public debate or not depends on whether Hooke’s behaviour contributed in any part to the wholly tragic and unfortunate early demise of a cricketer. If that is indeed true then Cricket Australia and its greats ought to really be wondering if they have in any way have taken effective steps to educate Australian cricketers from getting into unfortunate situations such as the one Hooke wittingly or unwittingly may have gotten himself into. It is one thing to say that unruly bar behaviour ought to not lead to death. That is acceptable. It is another thing to say that people can engage in bad behaviour and also simultaneously expect the legal and moral climate of respect for other human beings sustain itself. Civility in society is both fragile and essential, though not the only factor, if one expects to not face a violent society.

But Alan Border’s comments begs another question. So according to Border, SG’s plausibly tasteless remarks about Hooke’s death, is straining his personal friendship to the point of breaking. But let us look at the hypocrisy of Border’s stance. Apparently SG’s remarks are offensive and cannot be put behind with a shake of hands and a beer at the end of the day, whereas the countless incidents of use of abusive language by Australian players on-field - whether it be suggesting that someone’s mother is a whore or their wife is a harlot etc., - is to be treated as just necessary gamesmanship, to be excused and forgiven with a handshake and a beer. Of course, Alan Border also does not seem to understand another thing. He talks about cultural backgrounds being different, but expects only an understanding of Australian cricketers when they call an opposing player a bastard. That is apparently the way Australians are brought up and play their cricket. But Border seems to forget that there are two people involved. What about when the cultural background of a player involves being offended by being called a bastard? It seems that according to Border’s logic that player’s cultural background and feelings ought not to count at all.

Ridiculous, plain ridiculous. Taking Border’s logic to its extreme conclusions, I think Indians should demand severing of all cricketing ties with Australia. Should not our sense of what is appropriate and not appropriate strain our cricketing relations to the breaking point? Haven’t the countless instances of abuse hurled at our cricketers by Australian’s long passed the point of forgiveness and resulted in severing of relations?