Ponting turned down apology offer

Peanuts! Get your peanuts here! Peanuts! Get them while they're hot!
I knew it would happen.

God, this is even better than LLL, and I never thought I would say that after yesterday.

I can't keep going, I'm laughing too much. Check you later taips.

Zat wrote:Peanuts! Get your peanuts here! Peanuts! Get them while they're hot!
I knew it would happen.

PMSL, you funny hobo!

Zat wrote:I can't keep going, I'm laughing too much. Check you later taips.

i know the feeling

doremi wrote:

HH_pink wrote:There's no prizes being awarded here, Zatty and taips.

Doesn't really stop them for competing to find out who is the bigger prick.

Kumble apologised to Ponting on Bhajji's behalf so that the series would go on without all the brouhaha of a disciplinary hearing.

Yes indeed a wise move and what one would've expected of someone like him. His post-match comment makes that much more sense to me now.

HH_pink wrote:

doremi wrote:

HH_pink wrote:There's no prizes being awarded here, Zatty and taips.

Doesn't really stop them for competing to find out who is the bigger prick.

Kumble apologised to Ponting on Bhajji's behalf so that the series would go on without all the brouhaha of a disciplinary hearing.

Yes indeed a wise move and what one would've expected of someone like him. His post-match comment makes that much more sense to me now.

And so does Bhajji's celebration after taking Ponting's wicket in the second gig.

I thought when I read that headline that Kumble had apologised for saying only one team had played in the spirit of cricket(cracks me up every time I think of that remark)in that test.Silly me.

Perhaps Ponting had "something to prove"?

Perhaps he thought that shaking hands and accepting the opposing captain's apology may been construed by others as him backing down from his set game plan of dobbing on Singh, whether it was due to a lack of evidence or a perception of a weakness on his (Ponting's) part.
That would never do I suppose ... as clearly Ponting was set fair on nailing the Bhajji....

noelene wrote:I thought when I read that headline that Kumble had apologised for saying only one team had played in the spirit of cricket(cracks me up every time I think of that remark)in that test.Silly me.

Yes you are very silly indeed.

Of course he had something to prove.He was on the grassy knoll.
He has a photo of fairies at the bottom of the garden.

noelene wrote:Of course he had something to prove.He was on the grassy knoll.

That was Bucknor.

Of course it was.

Merlin wrote:Perhaps Ponting had "something to prove"?

Perhaps he thought that shaking hands and accepting the opposing captain's apology may been construed by others as him backing down from his set game plan of dobbing on Singh, whether it was due to a lack of evidence or a perception of a weakness on his (Ponting's) part.
That would never do I suppose ... as clearly Ponting was set fair on nailing the Bhajji....

Ponting hasn't learned to shake hands yet. Buchanan had only just taught him to keep off the couch and do his 'business' outside by the time he left.

Refusing to talk to Kumble and Harbhajan man to man about an on field incident and instead running straight to the match referee's office? How very 'un- Australian'.

Allan Border and Steve Waugh must be spinning in their hammocks.

bliksem wrote:

Merlin wrote:Perhaps Ponting had "something to prove"?

Perhaps he thought that shaking hands and accepting the opposing captain's apology may been construed by others as him backing down from his set game plan of dobbing on Singh, whether it was due to a lack of evidence or a perception of a weakness on his (Ponting's) part.
That would never do I suppose ... as clearly Ponting was set fair on nailing the Bhajji....

Ponting hasn't learned to shake hands yet. Buchanan had only just taught him to keep off the couch and do his 'business' outside by the time he left.

:laule: :laule: :laule:

bliksem wrote:

Merlin wrote:Perhaps Ponting had "something to prove"?

Perhaps he thought that shaking hands and accepting the opposing captain's apology may been construed by others as him backing down from his set game plan of dobbing on Singh, whether it was due to a lack of evidence or a perception of a weakness on his (Ponting's) part.
That would never do I suppose ... as clearly Ponting was set fair on nailing the Bhajji....

Ponting hasn't learned to shake hands yet. Buchanan had only just taught him to keep off the couch and do his 'business' outside by the time he left.

Brings new meaning to the term "log cabin".

Had Bucknor been on the grassy knoll wouldn't he have missed?

He would've shot the Indian guy across the road instead.

Indian captain Anil Kumble has revealed that he had called up
Australian captain Ricky Ponting, after the third play's day of the
Sydney Test, requesting him to not press the charge of racism against
offspinner Harbhajan Singh. Kumble told a press conference in Canberra
on Wednesday that he, as captain, offered to apologise on Harbhajan's
behalf, if there was any offence caused.

Ponting, Kumble said, declined the offer and
said he wanted to see the process through after complaining to umpires
Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson at the end of the third day's play.

The operative word here is IF. Kumble didn't say Bhajji said it did he? He didn't say he was apologizing for Bhajji having done it. He rhetorically said IF Bhajji said anything deemed offensive then he was prepared to apologise for it. If something happens in the heat of the moment and if someone is trying to defuse the tension and says 'Look I am sorry IF anything my buddy said offended you, now lets have a drink." is not the same as saying, "Look I am sorry because my buddy racially abused you." Big difference. In India this is the approach taken most of the times when colleagues or friends have a spat and when someone is trying to broker a peace. It's not the same as saying he did it. Kumble as a captain didn't hear what happened and didn't know what happened on the field. So he was trying to be fair and wanted to find out whether his player was at fault or no and talk about it which is sensible indeed. So it was a magnanimous offer that Punter should have accepted to sit across the table and see and find out IF anything out of hand had indeed happened or IF there was any misunderstanding. Lets not forget even Punter didn't hear what had happened so he should have tried to find out what indeed had happened. Kumble showed sense in not merely taking his player's word on it at that time unlike Punter who probably made up his mind that there was something worth reporting without bothering to find out the truth. He declined. Kumble offered him a chance to get together and see IF there was anything that needed an apology. For all his Integrity and Right spirits that Punter claims, he was not interested in finding out IF there was anything that could have been misunderstood or solved mutually. Steve Waugh had suggested the same in his column that there was a cultural barrier at work here and that the two Captains should talk it out first. Kumble offered Punter exactly that. The runt had made up his mind Bhajji needed to be shown down. Too bad for him. Fact is both team Captains and players needed to have a one one one with respective board officials before this was taken to ICC. Kumble did the right thing and Punter took it arrogantly.

In the end this revelation will not help Symo feel justified in his claims. It is going to make Punter look even more stupid.

Quotes from kumble:

"I did make a request actually when that incident happened on that particular day,"

"And I envisaged that it would spiral into a larger issue. So that was the only reason. There was a hearing and now we've made an appeal. I'm sure things will be sorted out now."

"It's important that Ricky and I got together and spoke about it and then get together and address it,"

"It was not that the spirit of the game was attacked but the focus has been to ensure that better spirit prevails in the game. We [captains] are all equal partners to ensuring that cricket is played in the right spirit and, I'm sure moving forward, everybody will stick to that. On behalf of my team, I'm sure we'll play in the right spirit."

"I have no problems. What's the problem there? It was just a temporary setback. We need to move on. The game is bigger than the individual. As a nation we've played good cricket. I'm proud of the way Indian cricket teams have played over the years and we'll continue to do that.

"The relationship between India and Australia has always been good,"

"It was only meant for the Sydney game. I've respected Australian cricketers. I have great respect and regard for all the players who have played for Australia. It was just one of those incidents which everybody has seen and if people think I had a biased opinion, there has been a poll and people who have seen the game have also said it could have been better."


-----------------------------------------------------

Sorry perhaps my eyesight is failing me, obviously everybody here saw something i didn't...where did kumble say he offered an offered an apology to symonds or anybody else?

He simply warned ponting that there would be consequences for reporting an indian player for racism, we all know that you can't report an indian player for jaywalking without expecting a firestorm.

please don't yell wrote:Quotes from kumble:

The game is bigger than the individual.

Yeah right.

Oh look, a 30 line ramble from Vikas. What a surprise. And as usual, I fell asleep after the first line.

India has embarrassed itself in the eyes of the world with this incredibly sooky performance. I wonder if Punter offered the information outlined in this thread as evidence at the hearing?

skully wrote:Oh look, a 30 line ramble from Vikas.

Yep, the Indian Jerry Seinfeld.