I’m a little bit tired but my mind is going back to three reoccurring thoughts. Rosario Dawson, Ishant Sharma’s Apple and why Channel 9 went to a hasty ad when Harbhajan Singh came out to bat in the 2020 game.
The first two are easy to explain, Rosario Dawson is the sort of woman who could start, finish, win or lose a War.
And Sharma’s Apple is hypnotic.
The third one has had me scratching my head.
On the surface it seems like a very PC decision by an over anxious coke addled TV executive who was eager to please all the cricket administracrats and so forth.
But why does Channel 9 and Cricket Australia have the right to tell us what is too controversial for us to watch?
I understand the urge not to show streakers ( I obviously don’t agree with it), but short of that, nearly all other controversial moments are shown on their coverage.
Mistakes by umpires, that can force some cricket extremists to actually go to the trouble of making an effigy, just to burn it.
On field altercations that get so heated one team wants to go home, are shown until we all want to go home.
Unsportsmanlike behaviour that is viewed so many times from so many angles, while over the hill commentators suggest self flagellation whilst practising self gratification.
It was only some boos, was it really worth cutting Bill Lawry off mid sentence?
They weren’t racially vilifying him, they weren’t carpeting bombing his house, and most of them weren’t even questioning his sexuality.
So who made the decision to 86 Harbhajan’s largely booed walk to the wicket.
If it was Channel 9, it was probably just an over reaction to the situation, or perhaps they thought the Melbourne crowd might just do something really wrong.
But if it was Cricket Australia and their team of trained monkey administracrats you almost sense they are trying to make this game even more diluted and softer than it currently is.
Pulling the plug on something this trivial is a low act even for a Cricket body.
Cricket is a game played by hairy overweight men, men with large derries and terrible nick names. It’s played hard, but mostly fair and cricketers engage in healthy discussion on all matters from sexuality to race.
In the words of Australia’s head administracrat,
“cricket is what is being played, it is not tiddlywinks.”
Then fu©ken show it to us, genital warts and all.
May be they thought Harbhajan was cat walking onto the pitch!Seriously, in India most channels except ESPN routinely blank key moments in between the overs and also those upon the fall of a wicket, under the guise of advertisements. We are kinda used to it.But Channel 9 doing it came as a huge surprise. Money talks!
It didn’t surprise me Nine cut the booing.Friday night was less a cricket match and more a three hour advertisement.Can’t damage the brand with nasty booing.
Tony, i expected it, but it still disappointed me.
They keep the pulling the plugs of their various telecast contents so often that next time I see or hear something I ain’t going to believe them.Boo’s must be shown on TV… tomaytoes, eggs, rotten cucumbers (don’t ask me why cucumbers, but I once saw a rotten cucumber which looked all nice otherwise and I tell you it can stink as bad as run-over meat) and all that kind of stuff. Sets up the mood right.
The C9 censorship around not showing a replay of Clarke’s cheating in claiming a catch of Hopkins during the final rites of an ODI remains the nadir of the summer