• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Lehmann's outburst

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Who gives a rats whisker as to what McGrath actually meant.... if he uttered such a racial slur, that's enough for him to be punished.No one needs to look at what he meant, 'coz for that there is Websters dictionary that applies to all.
Of course. In terms of deciding a punishment, it only matters what was said. This isn't in dispute. It's just that the guy who wrote the article tries to guess what people like Boof and McGrath 'meant' and he tries to infer other things about them based on what they said under stress, which is just stupid because none of what he says can be proven. He's attempting to vilify these guys based not only on what they actually said but what he thinks they MEAN.
 

aussie_beater

State Vice-Captain
Top_Cat said:
It's just that the guy who wrote the article tries to guess what people like Boof and McGrath 'meant' and he tries to infer other things about them based on what they said under stress, which is just stupid because none of what he says can be proven. He's attempting to vilify these guys based not only on what they actually said but what he thinks they MEAN.
The main basis for the judgement of any criminal are his actions, and not on whether he was born with a "crime" gene or not.And the actions are all there is, that's known to others to judge you upon.So if someone opines that Lehmann is racist because he uttered those words then its his opinion..... just like your opinion that he isn't....no more, no less. People who don't know Lehmann personally don't have any way of knowing one way or the other, except for basing their judgement on what he said.
 
Last edited:

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The main basis for the judgement of any criminal are his actions, and not on whether he was born with a "crime" gene or not.And the actions are all there is, that's known to others to judge you upon.So if someone opines that Lehmann is racist because he uttered those words then its his opinion..... just like your opinion that he isn't....no more, no less.
Not at all. There is objective criteria present for what defines a true racist and under most definitions, Lehmann wouldn't fit the profile. I mean, how would you be able to call anyone a racist if there were no people who'd come before, looked at it objectively and decided upon criteria by which to at least try to objectively judge someone's actions/words? For example, I look upon the September 11th hijackers as murderers. Under most objective criteria, this is the case yet there are those who will tell you they are freedom fighters, in their opinion. Now if I were to show them the objective criteria which defines a murderer (premeditated act, result is someone dead etc.) and they upheld the opinion that they aren't murderers, just how valid would their opinion be? I could tell you that the sky is turquoise until I was blue in the face, despite all the objective evidence to the contrary; would that make my opinion remain just as valid as those who would argue that the sky is actually blue?

So no, I reject the assertion that someone who calls Lehmann a racist based upon one thing he has uttered has just as valid in an opinion as anyone who says different. As I've demonstrated above, there ARE invalid or wrong opinions occasionally. Not all opinions are equally valid. And if the objective criteria usually defined as that which typifies a racist is applied to Lehmann, again you'd see he doesn't fit the profile of someone who is a 'racist'.

If anything, if that criteria is rejected and no-one needs to provide proof for any opinion they hold AND those opinions, regardless of how improbable, are all equally, then by definition they are all objectively invalid. If all opinions were entirely subjectively and no more wrong than each other, then you could claim Lehmann is a racist and I could claim him to be an alien and neither of us would be provably wrong................mind, neither of us would be provably right either.

So in conclusion, Lehmann certainly did utter a racist slur. Of that there is no doubt. But to then use that (not you personally but others who do judge him unfairly) as your sole criteria for deeming him a 'racist', well you're on shaky ground.

If satisfying one piece of criteria for something made you automatically that, well you could convincingly state that any person who has kissed one of the same gender must automatically be homosexual, the rest of the criteria be damned! :D Same with racism. Saying one racist phrase does not a racist make. There are other criteria to be satisfied.
 

aussie_beater

State Vice-Captain
Top_Cat said:
Not all opinions are equally valid.
First of all, let me clear up that I am not saying Lehman is a racist.I don't really care if he is, as long as he or anybody else gets punished enough for any racist actions or comments.If someone is a racist at heart but his actions or words don't reflect it, then no one has a problem.Who knows what one has on his mind.Only the actions speak for oneself. And that's what is the fundamental point.

All opinions are subjective or else they move up in the category of a fact.What defines a true racist is debatable but what actions or comments are termed racist are pretty much universally accepted.And Lehmann's was one.And that's all there is to it.
 

royGilchrist

State 12th Man
I shyed away from reading the long article and TCs replies, too long :)

But AB sums it up very well.

A person who says something racist is not a racist, and a person who never ever says anything racist could still be a racist.

Still, what hurts people of color of a different race are irresposible comments like Lehman's, and not what is inside someone's heart.
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Top_Cat said:
So in conclusion, Lehmann certainly did utter a racist slur. Of that there is no doubt. But to then use that (not you personally but others who do judge him unfairly) as your sole criteria for deeming him a 'racist', well you're on shaky ground.

If satisfying one piece of criteria for something made you automatically that, well you could convincingly state that any person who has kissed one of the same gender must automatically be homosexual, the rest of the criteria be damned! :D Same with racism. Saying one racist phrase does not a racist make. There are other criteria to be satisfied.
I am not saying that he is a racist. I don't know the guy personally, haven't followed even his career all that much, so I can't give a convincing opinion re: that. However, he did utter a racial slur as you admit. Now, he didn't need to feel done in as he got a fair decision, his team was close to winning even though he was out. Why then would such a person utter such a cheap, thoughtless, hurtful statement (in the heat of the moment or whatever) if he didn't atleast privately hold that belief?

You all argue on the point that he has the reputation of being an amiable guy and had a spotless record regarding such incidents before this happened. What if it was this way: He had always held some racist beliefs, but had held himself in check till that moment when it slipped out in a fit of frustration and disappointment.

I know that a person's public image is what counts for or against him, but a slip of the tongue in an unguarded moment might give a better understanding of a person's true character rather than an otherwise carefully guarded public image, don't you think? Just an opinion on this affair, but isn't it eminently possible?
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
A simple answer:

Lehmann does not hold any racist beliefs, he did not mean what he said to be racist, it was probably a saying he learnt from growing up in a tough, hard nosed, not amazingly Politically Correct area of Australia...
 
Last edited:

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Lehmann does not hold any racist beliefs, he did not mean what he said to be racist, it was probably a saying he learnt from growing up in a tough, hard nosed, not amazingly Politically Correct area of Australia...
Which is primarily comprised of working-class (and I use the word 'working' judiciously :D), English migrants. ;)

And describing the area as 'not amazingly politically correct' is like saying Mark Ramprakash is over-rated. :D
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Top_Cat said:
Which is primarily comprised of working-class (and I use the word 'working' judiciously :D), English migrants. ;)

And describing the area as 'not amazingly politically correct' is like saying Mark Ramprakash is over-rated. :D
So your saying I'm right without actually saying it? :lol:
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Rik said:
Simple answer:

Lehmann does not hold any racist beliefs, he did not mean what he said to be racist, it was probably a saying he learnt from growing up in a tough, hard nosed, not amazingly Politically Correct area of Australia...
This is not an answer, simple or otherwise. You haven't answered any of the questions which I asked. You have just expressed your point of view, that's it. The reason I didn't make any such absolute statements is because I didn't know enough about the guy to do so. From your statement, you seem to know him/about him pretty well, maybe you are right......
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
anilramavarma said:
This is not an answer, simple or otherwise. You haven't answered any of the questions which I asked. You have just expressed your point of view, that's it. The reason I didn't make any such absolute statements is because I didn't know enough about the guy to do so. From your statement, you seem to know him/about him pretty well, maybe you are right......
It's as good an answer as anyone has come up with so far. Also T_C knows more about Lehmann and the area he grew up in, ask him.
 
Last edited:

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well I didn't really want to go into what *I* know about Boof but let's just say that, yeah he's been known to say politically incorrect stuff from time-to-time for sure. But as someone who's encountered many, many genuinely racist people in my time (against me, even), I just can't bring myself to say he's a racist at all. And I've spoken to him quite a few times. Something like what he said is a typical thing you'd hear from someone who lives where he grew up, too. Sometimes even as a term of affection, but I digress..........

I'm not trying to excuse the inexcusable at all but Boof is a great, generous BUT unsophisticated guy. He's quite rough around the edges and considering his level of education and upbringing (not intelligence, mind you; he's pretty damn sharp), it's concievable that he really doesn't realise the seriousness of what he said and in his own mind, probably denies it's serious at all. I mean he would have heard exponentially worse stuff whilst growing up where he did (as I, growing up in an even poorer area) so he probably just can't fathom how hurtful commenst like that certainly can be (and usually are).

The people who are well educated and worldy yet STILL hold onto that sort of angst are the ones to watch out for. And believe me, in Australian cricket, there are far worse discriminatory people than guys like Boof. I certainly won't name any names but Boof is in the category of angels when compared to a few others.
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Very VERY good answer mate. Well...if you can follow that up then be my guest...I can't...
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
yeah boof's no racist, the comment just slipped out and he didn't mean it, he would have said something on similar lines


i also think that the OCC should not have the power to come in and suspend him like that when the sri lankans dont even care
 

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Bazzaroodoo said:
Because they have not been accused of anything yet, and it's not a good idea to push this topic beyond it's boundaries...
 

Bazza

International 12th Man
But using racism as an example, how can we eradicate things like this if those in the know don't name names? Why should people be the subject of a cover up just because they don't go ranting and raving in public?
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
age_master said:
yeah boof's no racist, the comment just slipped out and he didn't mean it, he would have said something on similar lines


i also think that the OCC should not have the power to come in and suspend him like that when the sri lankans dont even care
Well the ICC got involved because it doesn't matter whether the SL care or not - he still breached the code of conduct.

In future does that mean that if someone kills someone, but the dead person's family don't care, then it's not murder?

Besides the Sri Lankan "not caring" was a political move to try and appear the martyrs.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Bazzaroodoo said:
Legal reasons I guess - if he posts that Loveland Bloggs is a racist then he could be in grave trouble if Loveland Bloggs finds out about this.

N.B. I chose Loveland as his christian name to avoid being chased by anyone called Joe Bloggs.
 

Top