International Cricket Council (ICC) match referee Chris Broad has done it again. Like always he has sided the whites. If it is a international match then all nations and race are supposed to be viewed equally, but Chris has never done that.
Chris Broad is the match referee for the the ongoing test series between Australia and West Indies in Australia. Australians who are known for their sledging and unruly behaviour have done it once again. This time Mitchell Johnson and Brad Haddin started to pick up on the West Indies Bowler Sulieman. Sulieman who responded to the harsh behaviour was banned for two match, while the other two were not banned. How does Chris Broad reason this judgement? On the other occasion Mitchel Johnson kept sledging at the West Indies batsmen and what happened when he took the wicket of the the West Indian Captain's wicket? he ran into him and yelled right on his face. Chris Broad defends him by saying that it is the passion for the game and not agression.
A thorough spoil sport is the international referee Chris Broad. Previously when the Pakistan's wicket keeper Rashid Latif appealed for a caught behind after the ball had pitched, he was banned for two matches by Chris Broad. The last encounter of India and Australia in Australia saw 16 wrong decisions and 13 were in the favor of the Australians and Chris Broad had nothing to say. Also Ponting had appealed for a catch and told the umpire it was a clean catch and asked the umpire to give the Indian batsmen out. Later the footages showed that the Catch was not taken by the Australian Captain and Chris Broad neither fined him nor warned him, let alone banning him. More than just appealing Ponting walked towards the umpire and confirmed that the catch was taken, even when he did know that the catch was not genuine.
These are just a few incidents.........
So, Why is Chris Broad's Judgements different to Indians, Pakistanis and West Indians when compared to his decisions against England and Australians
Chris Broad is the match referee for the the ongoing test series between Australia and West Indies in Australia. Australians who are known for their sledging and unruly behaviour have done it once again. This time Mitchell Johnson and Brad Haddin started to pick up on the West Indies Bowler Sulieman. Sulieman who responded to the harsh behaviour was banned for two match, while the other two were not banned. How does Chris Broad reason this judgement? On the other occasion Mitchel Johnson kept sledging at the West Indies batsmen and what happened when he took the wicket of the the West Indian Captain's wicket? he ran into him and yelled right on his face. Chris Broad defends him by saying that it is the passion for the game and not agression.
A thorough spoil sport is the international referee Chris Broad. Previously when the Pakistan's wicket keeper Rashid Latif appealed for a caught behind after the ball had pitched, he was banned for two matches by Chris Broad. The last encounter of India and Australia in Australia saw 16 wrong decisions and 13 were in the favor of the Australians and Chris Broad had nothing to say. Also Ponting had appealed for a catch and told the umpire it was a clean catch and asked the umpire to give the Indian batsmen out. Later the footages showed that the Catch was not taken by the Australian Captain and Chris Broad neither fined him nor warned him, let alone banning him. More than just appealing Ponting walked towards the umpire and confirmed that the catch was taken, even when he did know that the catch was not genuine.
These are just a few incidents.........
So, Why is Chris Broad's Judgements different to Indians, Pakistanis and West Indians when compared to his decisions against England and Australians
