Indian players racially abused at SCG

[honestbharani]

Have been going through a lot of interviews, the links to which I posted in the 4th test thread but some more info around the racial abuse - Seems the umpires told Rahane that he can take his team off and they can call off the game, basically but Rahane said that is not what he wants to do, as they are here to play cricket. And just wanted to ensure the trouble makers were thrown out and then they can get on with the game.

His maturity is just such a nice change of pace to the usual teenage antics we see in India-Australia games, including this series.

 

[honestbharani]

But people also have a right to be able to, you know, watch the cricket. Treating "take the flag down" as the same as racial abuse just doesn't make sense, bigger picture or not.

You keep assuming they said it because it obstructed their view. What if it did not and he was on the other side and the only reason they said that was because he is Indian and that was an Indian flag?

 

[honestbharani]

 

[Spark]

YOu keep assuming they said it because it obstructed their view. What if it did not and he was on the other side and the only reason they said that was because he is Indian and that was an Indian flag?

Because, like I said, people being told to take down flags and signs because of obstructed view is a pretty common thing in Australian grounds? Like I said, flying flags is not really something most local fans do in general for that reason, at least in my experience.

I can absolutely say that if someone was flying a flag in front of me, I'd definitely want them to take it down.

 

[honestbharani]

Because, like I said, people being told to take down flags and signs because of obstructed view is a pretty common thing in Australian grounds? Like I said, flying flags is not really something most local fans do in general for that reason, at least in my experience.

I can absolutely say that if someone was flying a flag in front of me, I'd definitely want them to take it down.

Sure, but it is also a place where the guy says he was very obviously racially profiled and abused. So your own experience may not matter as much as what the guy says he actually went through.

 

[Spark]

Sure, but it is also a place where the guy says he was very obviously racially profiled and abused. So your own experience may not matter as much as what the guy says he actually went through.

But then... focus on the actual racial abuse? Not the other stuff which is entirely legitimate and commonplace? I don't see where you're going with this.

 

[honestbharani]

But then... focus on the actual racial abuse? Not the other stuff which is entirely legitimate and commonplace? I don't see where you're going with this.

I fail to see where you and PEWS are going with this, tbh. The obvious reason the guy said it was because he was basically recounting his experiences at the ground. The flag stuff may or may not have been racial but when in taken as a whole with everything else that happened, it is something that deserves to be looked at from the prism of racial abuse. Other isolated incidents where people do not like to have flags being waved has nothing to do with anything here.

Also, wasn't SCG a lot more spacious this time due to covid restrictions?

 

[Spark]

I fail to see where you and PEWS are going with this, tbh. The obvious reason the guy said it was because he was basically recounting his experiences at the ground. The flag stuff may or may not have been racial but when in taken as a whole with everything else that happened, it is something that deserves to be looked at from the prism of racial abuse. Other isolated incidents where people do not like to have flags being waved has nothing to do with anything here.

Also, wasn't SCG a lot more spacious this time due to covid restrictions?

Yes, but you aren't allowed to change your assigned seat. So, at least in theory, if someone is waving a flag all day in front of you and blocking your view, you can't just change seats like you usually would to get a better view because, at least from what I've heard, they're a lot stricter about enforcing seating assignments than usual.

I just don't see why this shouldn't be considered an example of the latter tbh. It fits the exact same pattern and is the most obvious explanation of why that, in particular, was said. Leaving the obviously racial abuse as... obvious racial abuse. Like, your theory is basically that he was singled out, but in the narrow case of why he was told to sit down and stop waving his flag around, that doesn't really make sense to me IMO.

 

[honestbharani]

Like, your theory is basically that he was singled out, but in the narrow case of why he was told to sit down and stop waving his flag around, that doesn't really make sense to me IMO.

FWIW, I am not saying it WAS racial. My point is it has to be enquired thinking it could well be racial, if you are just to assume the most innocent cause, it will turn out to be counterproductive in this instance, is my point, really.

 

[Spark]

FWIW, I am not saying it WAS racial. My point is it has to be enquired thinking it could well be racial, if you are just to assume the most innocent cause, it will turn out to be counterproductive in this instance, is my point, really.

Whether it's the most innocent cause or not is really irrelevant. The point is that it's the most obvious cause and the simplest plausible explanation with the fewest assumptions or conditionals required. In the vast majority of cases, that will be the correct one.

 

[honestbharani]

Whether it's the most innocent cause or not is really irrelevant. The point is that it's the most obvious cause and the simplest plausible explanation with the fewest assumptions or conditionals required. In the vast majority of cases, that will be the correct one.

Generally, that is true. But over here, I feel the enquiry by the authorities should look into this aspect as well. Guess we just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Spark]

Generally, that is true. But over here, I feel the enquiry by the authorities should look into this aspect as well. Guess we just have to agree to disagree.

Oh they should look into it. But like I said, the vast majority of their time should be spent prosecuting the really obvious and incontrovertible examples of racial abuse he pointed out.

 

[honestbharani]

Oh they should look into it. But like I said, the vast majority of their time should be spent prosecuting the really obvious and incontrovertible examples of racial abuse he pointed out.

Fair enough. I dont fully agree that they should take that as the default view but as long as the incident is enquired fully, that is what is needed. And I have to say the SCG authorities have acted well here from the time it was brought to their notice. Hopefully they keep up the good work and nip it out fully.

 

[Arachnodouche]

If someone was obstructing my view with a flag, a dishrag, or a bathtowel, I'd tell him to sit the **** down. Doesn't matter if it's an Indian fan. In any case, flying flags on foreign grounds always makes me a little uncomfortable. It has far too many militaristic connotations for my liking (not that I agree with many of the patriotic bugbears of modern discourse either, just that it feels like a breach of common courtesy when you're abroad).

 

[Window]

In an article about racism, with some clearly racist language being used, why is the discussion focussed around how one of the insults is not racist? Is that the important takeaway here? When Siraj complained of racist remarks being hurled at him, some on here assumed nothing racist was said or it was probably a misunderstanding, based on a random spectator’s statement. Some others even thought it was a deliberate attempt by the Indian team to cancel the tour on the pretence of racism. Even if it were a joke (which I doubt), it’s not funny.

I’ve only recently joined this forum but have been a on/off lurker for 10+ years and I’ve always been disappointed by how racism is discussed and handled. I think this forum has the best cricket knowledge on the internet but it’s sad to see conversations around racism devolve like this. It’s better than the likes of reddit and many other forums with insightful, level headed and fair takes by many posters but it can be even better.

 

[OverratedSanity]

In an article about racism, with some clearly racist language being used, why is the discussion focussed around how one of the insults is not racist? Is that the important takeaway here?

Because pews

 

[stephen]

The problem with discussing racism is that it's a heavily overloaded term, is something you want to be avoided being labeled and is often thrown around for reasons that one side does not even see is a problem.

Is saying that "Muslims are violent" racist? Yes it is, despite Muslims not being a race. It's a negative and incorrect stereotype about a huge and disparate group of people. Is calling an Indian person a "curry muncher" racist? Yes it is, even if the act of eating curries is not in itself a degrading act.

Because racism is usually about the double meaning and hostile intent behind what is actually said it's very hard to convince the victims that they aren't victims and it's usually equally hard to convince the villains that they've been villainous.

It's why the racist says "but I have *minority group* friends and they think it's ok". The friends (if they exist) might be ok with it, or at least put up with it because the rest of the friendship is worth it. But what's ok between friends is not necessarily ok between strangers.

The saddest thing about all of this is that you'd imagine cricket fans to be the least prejudiced against other cricketing nations because, well, the reason you're there specifically to see Australia play against that other country. It's supposed to be fun, not abusive.

 

[Window]

Yeah I have no doubts that racists don’t want to be labeled as racist. If the history of racism is anything to go by, I would say there’s only rare instances of victims not actually being victims and the villains not actually being villains. Not exactly an even 50-50 scenario. Each incident should be investigated on its merit but reading the first few pages of this thread is painful with how easily people were ready to dismiss Siraj’s claim.

 

[Burgey]

"shut up and sit the **** down/take the flags down"

Hmmm. Makes you think.

 

[Burgey]

You keep assuming they said it because it obstructed their view. What if it did not and he was on the other side and the only reason they said that was because he is Indian and that was an Indian flag?

I think Spark is relying on his own experiences wrt to flags and banners, and how people react to them here. It's long been a thing for people to be told to take them down here because others get the ****s having their view obstructed. As has been said already, it's really about the context of the comment.