Add your glib Western responses:
Calm should not be mistaken for peace
IT is time to have another crack at the glib Western response to the Harbhajan affair. The debate has become altogether too cosy. Several points need to be made. Yes, a lot of skin creams are sold in India. Yes, every ad in Indian magazines seems to feature light-skinned youths. Yes, India has its castes and colours. It is imperfect. But it has also had in recent years a Sikh president, a Muslim prime minister and a white, female, Catholic divorcee leading its main political party. Other nations should be as lucky.
Yes, a lot of fake tan is sold in Australia. Yes, every ad in Australia magazines seems to feature well tanned youths. Yes, Australia has its ethnic groups. It is imperfect. But it has also had in recent years Cathy Freeman running at the Olympics, a multi-racial cricket team, and increased immigration, and a white, female, unmarried Deputy Prime Minister leading the country. Other nations should be as lucky.
We also allow unmarried, bilious English commentators of dubious moral character into the country. We grant them permanant residency and feed and water them. Truly, the lucky country.
Posted by: nick | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 10:51 AM
And we also allow them to say Ranatunga is "pugnacious and crowd-pleasing".
Posted by: Tony T | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 11:30 AM
'Pug-like and rabble rousing'
Posted by: nick | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Gold, boys - gold.
And I reiterate: Spanky's a cvnt.
Sad thing is - Murali notwithstanding - aside from one period I've always liked the Shrees. Guess what period that was - when that lazy fat prick was 'leading' their side. Talk about outside the spirit of cricket. I'm sure that now he has a broader platform he'll be even more obnoxious (he made his intentions clear the other day) - but that will, of course, be all the West's fault (right Spanky?).
Speaking of Murali, I wonder if anyone has considered that the egg-throwing assasins were merely young lads out for 'fun', with no greater agenda than that. I suppose that wouldn't read as well, would it?
Posted by: 13th Man | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Oh god, he's going to write a bloody book isn't he. All of these endless, increasingly bizarre justifications for the initial 'lets sack Ponting he doesn't shave all that often' column feel like he is going to collect them all for some sort of dreadful essay collection.
And, dammit, his columns are getting worse. I don't think I understood a word of this last one. I know Roebuck would say that this is because I was born here or something but I'm not totally sure he's right...I think he might just be...totally nuts?
Posted by: Horace | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 02:02 PM
13: One of the articles I read yesterday seemed pretty comfortable with the idea that the eggers had no idea who they were egging and that it was, in fact, your general run o' the mill Aussie egging.
Horace: Spot on. I looked at the article for ages wondering what the frack was going on and concluded it could have been reduced down to half of the last sentence of the last paragraph "we need gooderer manners." All the rest was just fluffy, addled nonsense.
Posted by: Tony T | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 03:10 PM
'fluffy, addled nonsense' - should be the SMH's byline.
Posted by: nick | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 03:18 PM
Mea culpa - tagline. Wow. I said sorry! I feel better now.
Posted by: nick | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 03:20 PM
Crumbs! Berty, Pip, Algernon and I are frightfully sick and tired of these continued naughty, naughty comments of the loveable, humble Mr Roebuck. He said to pay no heed to such tosh and remember that we always have a rollicking good time after one of his articles is printed. We sit around his study and read it together then its piggy back time, where we take turns and he gives us a jolly good ride around the study. Gosh, he calls it After Reading Bleeding, for some reason.
Posted by: Wiggins | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 04:00 PM
Wiggins, boy, is that an After Cash Rash on your behind?
Posted by: nick | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 04:19 PM
Just as an aside, Boo made a very valid comment in response to someone who opined that Rollerboy was too low to look Roy in the eye. Boo said that the photographer had likely cherrypicked the shot looking for that response. Spanky berating Australians (again) because some fool threw an egg at Murali (actually using the Indian/Monkey God defense, he was probably emulating the great man's action) is tantamount to me castigating over a billion Indians because one idiot raped and shot an Australian teenager.
Posted by: nick | Monday, February 04, 2008 at 09:53 PM
So Spanky is writing articles about himself now? It's not going to be long before he starts referring to himself in the third person.
Posted by: astrovic | Wednesday, February 06, 2008 at 02:21 PM
WTF, how far is spanky up India's bum. Nagraj Gollapudi wrote this lttle gem:
"Peter Roebuck, who captained Viv Richards and Ian Botham at Somerset, and enjoys something approaching Tendulkar-like status in cricket writing himself, reckons it has to do with the sentimentality of Australians."
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/baggygreen/content/story/333897.html
Posted by: David | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 05:32 PM
TLS: The Little Spanker.
Posted by: Tony T | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:14 PM