Gavaskar apologizes
Sunil Gavaskar, who displayed very little maturity when he referred to David Hookes' death, has finally apologized for his remark.
On live television and radio, sometimes you respond on the spur of the moment with a remark that can cause hurt and pain to others.Fair enough, Sunny. At least you realized and owned up that you messed up. I don't disagree with your comments on the Australian team's behaviour, but if 'spur of the moment' is your excuse, the Aussies can also say that all their behavioural malfunctions are on the 'spur of the moment'.
I realise and I accept that what I said was uncalled for and inappropriate. Having said that, I hope they have the bigness of heart to forgive me for what I said about David Hookes.
Labels: australia, behaviour, gavaskar, hookes
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
|
Gavaskar apologizing is a good thing. And it shows his class.
But I'm shocked that not a single person has commented on Ricky Ponting's shocking outburst against Sunny which actually provoked Gavaskar into making that remark in the first place.
Ricky Ponting - as an active cricketer - should have known better than to have made a general debate into a highly personal and sensitive one.
Yes - Ponting made it personal by attacking Gavaskar's character and that was what made the debate ugly in the first place.
By 
Hari (20 Mar 2007, 10:22:00 pm)
Hari - I didn't see too much wrong with Ponting's outburst. He was factually correct in pointing out that Gavaskar's behaviour (in the instance he referred to) wasn't too great either. If anything, Ponting shouldn't even have bothered with a retort. Would you have preferred that Ponting label the Indian teams as being a bunch of 'over-appealers' instead of making it 'personal'?
By Jagadish (21 Mar 2007, 9:48:00 am)
Jagadish, I don't get it.
Ponting made the issue personal. Gavaskar hadn't talked anything about individual players before that.
Now I agree that Gavaskar probably over-reacted to Ponting's outburst, but think about what led to the issue becoming so ugly in the first place.
Gavaskar is definitely a bold individual who calls a spade a spade. Ponting responded with personal attacks instead of addressing the points made about Australia's bad behaviour on the field.
This kind of selective "journalism" is what really makes me annoyed. Nobody had a single reproach for Ponting's dragging in irrelevant issues.
By Hari (21 Mar 2007, 10:50:00 am)
hari - So you don't think Gavaskar was wrong in using a column to say this? Remember that as a head of the ICC's cricket committee he'd have had several opportunities to talk about this.
By Jagadish (21 Mar 2007, 7:10:00 pm)
Yeah, maybe he used the wrong medium, but I think the message was correct and decent. Gavaskar wasn't indecently targetting any particular player or incident in the first place. It was Ponting who dug up incidents in Gavaskar's career which are completely irrelevant to the point Gavaskar was making.
By Hari (22 Mar 2007, 2:45:00 pm)
To clarify I'm no big fan of Gavaskar myself (I think he's a big old bore) and I have no reason to defend him. But when I see imbalanced coverage of an event and obvious bias in the media, I think I needed to point it out.
By Hari (22 Mar 2007, 2:46:00 pm)
Interesting that you talk about imbalanced coverage. Aside from Chappell's comments to Cricinfo, I haven't seen any other Indian player comment on Bob Woolmer's death!
By Jagadish (22 Mar 2007, 3:41:00 pm)
We'd prefer if you posted comments with your real name to add more credibility to your opinions. However, the moderators reserve the right to delete comments, especially those containing offensive or unsuitable language. The opinions in the comments are your own views. You are welcome to provide a URL to your own cricket blog, but the moderators reserve the right to delete comments which only reference sites for viewing live streams.
Links within entries open in a new window. Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents. Some of the sites linked may require registration/subscription.
All opinions expressed are those of the authors alone. The authors' respective employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. We do not intend to infringe on any copyright. Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to our readers.
|
|
|
|
Post a Comment