The Jadeja Anderson Spat

[Dilbert]

I thought it best not to spoil the 3rd test thread, so started a new one.
So Anderson and Jadeja had a spat on field in the 1st test, which continued when they were walking towards the dressing room. Apparently Anderson was abusing him and then pushed him near to the dressing room. Which was what was originally complained by the Indian camp

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/j ... ia-england

The complaint was not brought by the umpires but by the India team manager, Sunil Dev, who told ESPNcricinfo he lodged the complaint only after confirming the incident with India captain MS Dhoni, other players and coach Duncan Fletcher. Players from both sides could be called to give evidence at the hearing.

"Mahi [Dhoni] and everyone complained that he [Anderson] physically touched him [Jadeja] and pushed him. It was all over the dressing room," Dev said. "It is serious matter only because you can't push anybody. So I put in a complaint with the match referee."

The ECB were "surprised" by this decision

The ECB reacted with surprise and anger that India had reported Anderson for what they described as a "minor incident" in a press release. In retaliation, the ECB notified its intention of lodging a complaint against Jadeja as well.

So, apparently it was minor for the ECB but they still decided to lodge a complaint as an afterthought, or more like a quid pro quo

Well, considering that Eng didn't bother lodging any complaints in the first place, then Cook publicly describing it as a "nothing" or "minor" incident it was double standards of Eng to lodge a complaint in the first place. Then after lodging a complaint, it was ridiculous of ICC to handle this one BEFORE the original complaint.
And then Eng's complaint is actioned with Jadeja fined, whereas the original one is pending even though its going to be addressed by a VCON.

This is what was testified by Stokes and Prior

ESPNcricinfo has learned that Prior contended Jadeja's bat was raised dangerously when he turned towards Anderson, and Stokes suggested Jadeja had pushed Anderson first. India claim Jadeja neither touched nor swore at anyone.

Clearly "turning towards Andersen with his bat raised" and "pushing Andersen" isn't minor. Looks like Prior and Stokes lied blatantly.

Also, Stokes gave away 1 important fact - That Andersen pushed Jadeja when he said "Jadeja had pushed Anderson first"
Pathetic really

I didn't expect England to stoop so low. Harbhajan and Tendulkar were vilified during Monkeygate, but at least then, no one knew the real facts, and Symonds was clearly the aggressor. Also you *can* give the benefit of doubt to Bhajji - he could have very well said "Teri Maa Ki" which is very common abuse and sounds like Monkey.

Here, Eng team are caught lying openly. How it turned from "minor" to "threatening with bat raised" and "pushed Anderson first" only they can justify. And to be so stupid, and say - "Anderson was pushed first" really gives away the fact that Anderson did push Jadeja.

Ah, and that video camera not working/not turned on seems just too convenient now.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Have you seen the film Rashomon?

Maybe everyone believes they are telling the truth?

[D/L]

...Here, Eng team are caught lying openly...

Strange conclusion based only upon hearsay, but not entirely unexpected. No chance at all then that Dhoni also has been a little economical with the truth?

[Dilbert]

...Here, Eng team are caught lying openly...

Strange conclusion based only upon hearsay, but not entirely unexpected. No chance at all then that Dhoni also has been a little economical with the truth?

Englands testimony isn't hearsay, is it? They publicly said its a minor incident, then lodged a level 2 complaint, and in the testimony described the incident as a level 3 offence. Dhoni is at least consistent with his story throughout. Is it that difficult to see how Prior and Stokes lied blatantly? Even with Prior? Thats surprising...

[D/L]

...Here, Eng team are caught lying openly...

Strange conclusion based only upon hearsay, but not entirely unexpected. No chance at all then that Dhoni also has been a little economical with the truth?

Englands testimony isn't hearsay, is it? They publicly said its a minor incident, then lodged a level 2 complaint, and in the testimony described the incident as a level 3 offence. Dhoni is at least consistent with his story throughout. Is it that difficult to see how Prior and Stokes lied blatantly? Even with Prior? Thats surprising...

Even more surprising is saying anything we have heard said is anything other than "hearsay" until the two parties in dispute and any witnesses present their accounts to those who sit in judgment.

However, why let such a consideration get in the way of presenting a partisan view of events?

[Making_Splinters]

Some seem to be getting hung up and drawing conclusions based on the language the ECB used. Is it not credible that what the ECB and Dhonu regard as minor is different particularly since the ECB and the BCCI wanted to down play the entire thing.

As for claims of people lying, seeing as there has been no independent footage of the incident released, it is impossible to say what the "truth" of the matter is. Reminds me a little of "Monkeygate" with the boot on the other foot.

Any road up, I would like to see Anderson banned, as a senior player in the side he should be setting the example, not getting involved in such nonsense.

[Dilbert]

...Here, Eng team are caught lying openly...

Strange conclusion based only upon hearsay, but not entirely unexpected. No chance at all then that Dhoni also has been a little economical with the truth?

Englands testimony isn't hearsay, is it? They publicly said its a minor incident, then lodged a level 2 complaint, and in the testimony described the incident as a level 3 offence. Dhoni is at least consistent with his story throughout. Is it that difficult to see how Prior and Stokes lied blatantly? Even with Prior? Thats surprising...

Even more surprising is saying anything we have heard said is anything other than "hearsay" until the two parties in dispute and any witnesses present their accounts to those who sit in judgment.

However, why let such a consideration get in the way of presenting a partisan view of events?

Well, its published as a report on cricinfo, so its probably come from an authentic source. Its not the Sun or NOTW after all.
Also, the report clearly says India being angry at the testimony of Prior and Stokes, with the report clearly stating what the testimony was. Do you expect to be present in the trial to believe what exactly happened?
Surprising from you, especially considering the way you go on about KP…

[Dilbert]

Some seem to be getting hung up and drawing conclusions based on the language the ECB used. Is it not credible that what the ECB and Dhonu regard as minor is different particularly since the ECB and the BCCI wanted to down play the entire thing.

As for claims of people lying, seeing as there has been no independent footage of the incident released, it is impossible to say what the "truth" of the matter is. Reminds me a little of "Monkeygate" with the boot on the other foot.

Any road up, I would like to see Anderson banned, as a senior player in the side he should be setting the example, not getting involved in such nonsense.

Well, to be fair, i wasn't really bothered when this was initially reported. What really irked me was ECB saying its minor - equivalent to a Level 1 offence, then lodging a complaint equivalent to a Level 2 offence, and the testimony actually accusing a Level 3 offence.
Surely, if Jadeja had raised his bat dangerously at Anderson and pushed him, they would have made a big deal out of it? Don't think thats minor in any event, is it? Irrespective of whatever Anderson did, said etc…

If i was Boon, i would have applied basic logic, and asked them, why they lodged a Level 2 offence complaint and then testified as a Level 3 offence. As its the word of Stokes against Jadeja, that point would have been enough to throw their case out.

I am pretty sure Jadeja is not entirely innocent in all this. Would have been good if they had banned him for a match too. It just irks me how Eng could blatantly lie and get away with it.

[SaintPowelly]

Its all hearsay until we hear an official judgement.

[alfie]

Have you seen the film Rashomon?

Maybe everyone believes they are telling the truth?

A brilliant analogy , Arthur

Had been thinking along similar lines myself , but your Rashomon reference saves a lot of typing.

Provided everyone has seen the film , of course ...

[DeltaAlpha]

Its all hearsay until we hear an official judgement.

Pointless discussion.

[D/L]

...Here, Eng team are caught lying openly...

Strange conclusion based only upon hearsay, but not entirely unexpected. No chance at all then that Dhoni also has been a little economical with the truth?

Englands testimony isn't hearsay, is it? They publicly said its a minor incident, then lodged a level 2 complaint, and in the testimony described the incident as a level 3 offence. Dhoni is at least consistent with his story throughout. Is it that difficult to see how Prior and Stokes lied blatantly? Even with Prior? Thats surprising...

Even more surprising is saying anything we have heard said is anything other than "hearsay" until the two parties in dispute and any witnesses present their accounts to those who sit in judgment.

However, why let such a consideration get in the way of presenting a partisan view of events?

Well, its published as a report on cricinfo, so its probably come from an authentic source. Its not the Sun or NOTW after all.
Also, the report clearly says India being angry at the testimony of Prior and Stokes, with the report clearly stating what the testimony was. Do you expect to be present in the trial to believe what exactly happened?
Surprising from you, especially considering the way you go on about KP…

Ah, "cricinfo", the font of all knowledge and truth as far as the great game is concerned and not all interested in whipping up sensation like the rest of the media.

What on earth has Pietersen got to do with this matter?

Someone seems to have rather lost the plot.

[D/L]

...It just irks me how Eng could blatantly lie and get away with it.

It's entirely possible that India have too.

[bigfluffylemon]

I doubt we will truly know what happened. Hopefully the ICC's process will produce a just result, but there is no way to know. An official statement may be released, but it will still only contain players' accounts of events, as it appears that there is no hard evidence such as video footage to support either side.

What players on both sides should do is accept the ruling with grace, rather than complain about the verdict, as some have. If Anderson is found guilty (and I expect he will be, on some level, maybe not level 3), I hope England accept it with better grace than India have. Even putting aside this incident, England have been overly aggressive and try to get under other sides' skins without backing it up with deeds on the pitch. In my view it makes them look rather pathetic, and I hope they grow up. Anderson in particular needs to remember to let the ball do the talking by taking wickets (by pitching it up) rather than trying to be aggressive with the short stuff because he's angry.

[Dilbert]

Have you seen the film Rashomon?

Maybe everyone believes they are telling the truth?

great analogy

My point was different though. Yes, when India raised this issue, they may not (and I am pretty sure) be entirely innocent. My only issue is with the way its unfolded – Prior and Stokes testimony. Again, its reported in the press, you can always keep saying its hearsay, but there’s a difference between a report like this and speculation and unsubstantiated reports. Else there is no point in reading any news at all.

Guess some people wont get it though....