Tendulkar rubbishes Gilchrist’s “loose statements”

In an interview with a TV Channel, Sachin Tendulkar put Adam Gilchrist’s comments comments in the pale and said he had made “loose statements”, thereby implying that this was nothing more than a ploy by Gilchrist to peddle his upcoming book!

To be perfectly honest, I personally would have expected better from Gilchrist!

Not surprisingly, while Adam Gilchrist’s comments surrounding his soon-to-be-released biography were immediately picked up by the Malcolm Conns of the world, as is to be expected by such objective journalists, Tendulkar’s response has not rated on their Richter scale yet! They will, in all probability, be ignored — after all, that is what objective and balanced journalists do!

Last night, the greatest cricketer in India spoke quietly about his reactions to the Gilchrist allegations.

He said, “I was surprised. I didn’t know how to react. (What he alleged) is something that I can’t even think of in my wildest dreams. I love the game so much and those remarks came from someone who doesn’t know me enough. I think he made loose statements”

Tendulkar said he reminded Gilchrist in no uncertain terms of the spirit and manner in which the Indians took even the hard defeat in Sydney. He said, “So many times he mentioned that you and Harbhajan (Singh) are not traceable to shake hands. I reminded him that I was the first person to shake hands after the Sydney defeat. It was a tough game that we lost and it was difficult for us. But we all in the team would shake hands. We have that sportsman spirit. We won’t shy away from challenges.”

When asked about Gilchrist’s opinion on his honesty during the Harbhajan Singh Monkeygate trial, Tendulkar said, “That’s his opinion but as far as I am concerned the chapter is closed.”

And finally, he said, “I am the kind of person who would leave things behind.”

Gosh! Everyone is into leaving things behind these days. This must be the new leave-behind that’s the rage! Gilchrist left it behind too, apparently!

And for those that didn’t see this yet, wind to about 2.31 mins into this video to see Sachin Tendulkar standing in a queue of Indians after the Sydney loss.

— Mohan

30 responses to “Tendulkar rubbishes Gilchrist’s “loose statements”

  1. Harbhajan Singh and Tendulkar have conveniently avoided the issue of –as to why Tendulkar’s version of the Monkey-vs-Maaki utterence–differed from Match referee inquiry to the one by the Judge from NZ. They have taken shelter under the umbrella of “it is closed” ” we don’t want to talk about it” “we want to focus on the next test”

    The need and urge to give different versions by Tendulkar to get his mate out of jail is what irked Gilchrist.

    Unless and until Tendulkar comes clean on this, any amount of soft talk by him or scraming from the roof tops by his supporters will not convince skeptics and cynics like me that Tendulkar ALWAYS tells the truth. Luckily, I gave up blind following many moons ago.

  2. chris hutchinson


    It is probably eay for me to say that this is the most sensible blog and statement on the matter because I agree. Tendulkar was not clean about what was said.

    The “two worlds” argument uttered by pro-Indian bloggers just highlights the giant hole the BCCI and India’s general juggernaut is digging for bloggers blind to what is going on.

    In fairness, they believe the shoe has previously been on the other foot and that is hard to deny. But it hasnt been the conspiracy that they suggest in my eyes.

    I adore Tendulkar for the way he has become the 2nd greatest ever and shouldered a nation for many years.

    But lets face it. Tendulkar speaks and truthfully of his love for the game.

    I am sure Gilchrist, book or no book, loves the game too.

    But Gilchrist never got done for ball tampering.

  3. @Sampath

    Very very simple Sampath. You can scream that you aren’t blind, but in my view, you haven’t opened your eyes 🙂

    The “maaki” thing was doing the rounds the very next day after Sydney. I have reliable inside info on this. Unfortunately, I am not in a position to share that particular series of exchanges. So, I admit that it is not admissible. However, what is a fact is that media reports on the “maaki” thing appeared 2 days after the Sydney episode. And that is admissible.

    But let us reject all of that too. No worries.

    M. V. Sridhar, the Indian media manager said that while Tendulkar did admit at the Proctor Kangaroo-court that “Harbhajan did abuse Symonds”, Tendulkar was never probed at that review on what the abuse was by the untrained and incompetent (in a legal sense) Mike Proctor.

    Mike Proctor rushed to a judgement without probing the “nature of the abuse” and pronounced that Harbhajan was guilty of racial vilification. Racial vilification is a serious charge and I am glad the Indian team and the BCCI stood up for justice to be delivered. If I were running the BCCI, I’d have even been happy with India stopping to play cricket totally if it meant that the “racial vilification” hearing wasn’t conducted by a man trained in the law. India, her fans, the team and the BCCI fought for justice. It was delivered.

    A trained judge explored the nature of the abuse in Adelaide and threw out the charge. Instead, he rapped Symonds on the knuckles for being a pillock.

    As I have always maintained, the Sydney hearing was conducted by an untrained man who ran a Kangaroo court in a thoroughly incompetent manner. He has, since, been put out to pasture — as he must. And anyone that says that that put-out-to-pasture was/is because of the might of the BCCI is either blind or insane or both!

    I have always maintained that the ICC needs to get its appeals act together. If not, we will see many more ugly Sydney-like incidents before we see justice. I point to the AFL tribunal. What the ICC conducts is a joke.

    Meanwhile, we have a whole lot of people in Australia — fans, media, players, fishing-players and ex-players — with their heels dug in and their heads in the sand; a feat that I, hitherto, thought was simultaneously impossible.


    While Gilchrist wasn’t done for ball-tampering by a person like Mike Denness (whose name one doesn’t hear anymore, by the way), he did not walk in Hobart when the chips were down. He then claimed to be a walker. It is what you do when the chips are down that counts most for me. You know my hypothesis about Aussie cricketers and backs-to-the-wall… Integrity is the loser.

  4. BTW, I will be the last person to claim that any sports-person is a saint. Sportspeople will do things to get ahead. Some of these will be legitimate. Just as Gilchrist is no Saint, Tendulkar is no Saint either.

    However, what I have seen time and time again is this rush to the moral high ground. That gets my goat. Every Australian sports-person wants to don a halo and rush to the high-pedestal. And then start to pontificate! It is always the Chinese that dope their swimmers! Any Australian sports-person that has doped is dealt with in a hush-hush manner.

    Remember Waugh-Warne and John, the match-fixer? How was that dealt? Need I say more? Nudge-nudge, wink-winK!

    Time for that to stop. There is no high-moral-ground here.

    And it is not surprising that people like Sampath read the media that peddles this fundamental hypothesis through the likes of Malcolm Conn and Jon Pierik in a blind manner without questioning “frame of reference”! Yes, he is not blind. But has he opened his eyes? 🙂

    It wasn’t Salim Malik or Mohammed Azharuddin that was first done for match-fixing, btw! And when Cronje was pinged by Delhi police, it was the Australians that first said, “This is a frame. It is impossible.” Steve Waugh worked hard to wipe the humble pie off his face.

    That “frame of reference” that says, “the bastards are all there” has to first go!

  5. Mohankaus,

    You can accuse me of anyhting but blindness. I listened to the Pope and stopped THAT practice long long time ago. I can not vouch for others!!

    I am glad you are able to have pillow talk with cricketers, officials and media liasion officers. Your non-disclosure leads to me think that there was a cover up, just to protect a player!! All along, I learnt from the Indian Press on the net that it was a Professor in Linguistics that managed to decipher what the player said or could have said or might have said. I am not sure if that learned Professor is still on the payroll of BCCI!!

    I am relieved that you accept that Tendulkar is not a saint, after all–just like a lot of other cricketers before him and the ones that he plays with or against.. Otherwiswe, you need to find a story to dispell the Fiat–Ferrari–Tax fiasco!!!!

    The fall from grace of Hanse Cronje–who was revered by every South African and in particular by Dr Ali bacher–must be an eye opener to anyone that simply supports BLINDLY a fellow countryman!!!

    I come from the flock of SWAYAM ACHARYAS !!!! Hence, will not be fooled and mislead by the Aussie journalists. I get balanced information from three Aussie dailies and three Indian dailies !!!

  6. @Sam

    The media officers’ comment was in the newspapers! I am happy to furnish a reference for you, should you need it.

    I never accused you of being blind. In my view, you are yet to open your eyes 🙂

  7. Mohan has his one eye completely open! 🙂

  8. Unfortunately, when JB “talks” his bottom eye opens automatically 🙂

  9. Ha ha ha… Mohan. That was just awesome! I cracked up at that riposte. Way to go! Ha ha ha ha! This is one of the best sledges I have heard in a long time! ha ha ha ha!

  10. Superb Mohan! I thinks JB uses that “bottom eye” to see the world and talk to the world! No wonder his comments raise such a stink!

  11. That’s right Mohan, and the same substance excrets as you produce in your blogs!

  12. @JB

    If you can’t be funny in a riposte mate, don’t bother!

  13. Mohankaus,

    Just like Tendulkar / Harbhajan Singh, you haven’t answered the simple question

    Why two verssions from Tendulkar?

    At the end of that day, he was quoted as saying’— (words to this effect)
    ” words were exchanged–these things happen all the time–OK as long the line is crossed–good for the spectators”

    In other word—there is nothing in it.

    Why then was the sudden change of heart–in fact twice. Again the same evasive answer, a couple of days ago.

    None of this justifies the balackmail–sorry–whitemail by the Indian officials concerned the change the umpires for the next game.

    Now that a committee of current and ex players–all whites, other than Kumble–want to reverse ICC’s decision to revoke the decision on England-Pakistan-D Hair test–what will be the next step? All sub continent committee!!! refuse to play England next month?

    You simply say–

    ” Trust Me”

    Next it will be–
    ‘” the cheque is in the mail!!!”

  14. that should be

    as long as the line is NOT crossed


  15. Raghuram,

    You bother? So what does that say? But I know that the rules are differne’t for you guys cause you are so awsome and wise.


  16. @Sam

    You ask: “Why two verssions from Tendulkar?”

    Scroll up for the answer. And if you still have problems, search for M. V. Sridhar on the net. My advice to you is that you read what is posted before you thump the table. The answers are there above.

    Yes Sachin did say that there was niggle. Mike Proctor wasn’t competent enough to explore it. He was not trained. Simple man.

    There wasn’t any sudden change of heart from Sachin. He has been consistent.

    You are welcome to your jaundiced views. Your loss and your problems.

    End of story.

    Time to move on. The only people who have been clean and above board in all of this have been the Indians and Cricket Australia. They have handled this with maturity. A few people like you and the Aussie players have their heads stuck in their backsides.

    End of story. Move on.


  17. chris hutchinson


    One word for you. Blinkers!

    Interestingly you avoided speaking negatively of Sachin re the ball tampering episode othen than to sight another example of Indian muscle-flexing.

    Your’s and India’s attitude are untenable and can only begin to end as quickly as the dollars have started them.

    Balance yourself Mohan.

    If you must continue writing the way you do, then get a job with your much quoted friend Malcolm Conn!

  18. @chris

    Thanks for the advice. I won’t take it, if that is alright with you. Mainly because I am happy with the way I am. Thanks. I base everything I write on views that I have formed over a long long period of time. And much of what I write is based on fact. I am happy to meet with you to discuss much of this if you are ever in Melbourne — PROVIDED, you remove your halo. I like the Australian way of playing. I am a fan of that way of playing till of course, they sport a halo. The moment the halo is donned, I will wear my gloves. In that sense, I am not a Gandhian and I hate people with brown noses. If you are game, let’s talk more. But as I said, I am happy with the way I am.

  19. Mohankaus,

    Rediff news January 24 2008

    Procter’s statement on Harbhajan Singh Ruling

    It partly reads—

    ” I note that S Tendulkar only became involved when he realized that something was happening and was gestured over. He tried to calm things down because something had happened “THAT HE DID NOT HEAR”

    For Procter to make this statement, Tendulkar would have told Procter that he did not recollect the EXACT WORDS BY EITHER SYMONDS OR HARBHAJAN.

    Procter as an ex-player would always think like a player and try to be lenient towards players–unlike if ex-umpires were on the tribunal

    Procter–DID NOT GAG Tendulkar nor is there evidence that he refused to take evidence from Tendulkar.

  20. Mohankaus,

    I do not accept or believe that H Singh said , ” Tere Mxxxxxx for the following reasons

    H has played international matches for a few years

    H has played county cricket

    H conducted a tour of his house for Foxtel viewers in ENGLISH

    If H wanted to abuse an opponent and hurt the opponent’s feelings, he would do so in a language that the opponent can UNDERSTAND

    We ALL know that A Symonds does not understand HINDI

    Whether the word MONKEY was said—we might have to wait for the bowler”s retirement and a book from him after that!!!

    Unfortunately, the word WAS USED on an earlier occasion.

  21. Sampath

    With respect to your last post I would like add my 2 pence. I live in the UK where as you can imagine, I speak in English with everyone though my native language is Hindi. It does happen on rare occasions that I break into Hindi unconsciously while talking to people, if say for example, I am in a heated debate. So, I think it can be assumed that in a situation that evoked high passion, it is conceivable that Harbhajan could have used the Hindi swear word.

    That said, this is certainly not proof that he did not use the word monkey. If it can be proved without reasonable doubt that he did use the word, I say hang him. There is no place for racists in such a beautful game. But on the other hand it is harsh to pass judgement on the premise that “he did it before”. In the civilised world you are always innocent until proven guilty without doubt.

  22. Megha S,

    I totally agree with you that a person’s past is irrelevent to the present charge
    Procter acknowledges this in his report.

    Use of a language that an opponent doesn’t understand defeats the purpose making one understand your views or feelings!!! I suppose, body language helps!!!

    Re your biased accusation that Procter conducted a Kangaroo court—just as you accuse me of being educated by Australian journalists, I can comment that you blindly follow S Gavaskar and Indian media on this

    Procter took evidence from H Singh, S Tendulkar, A Symonds, A Gilchrist, M Clarke, M Hayden, two umpire, M V Sridhar, Chetan Chauhan, Steve Barnard etc


    There you go!!!

  23. chris hutchinson

    @ Mohan,

    I live in Melbourne and I suspect Mr Kumar does also! Howzat?

    One day we will have a chance to discuss these matters. I’m game.

    However, my halo is permanent. Tongue in cheek of course.

  24. @chris

    As long as you are happy with my gloves, your halo won’t worry me. Don’t expect me to bow down to you though, although I believe Sampath Kumar has demonstrated that he would be willing to do that … repeatedly! 🙂

  25. @Sampath

    In response to your last three comments… with due respect, you are mixing flour that has already been mixed (the saying in Tamil which you will have heard is, “aracha maava araikkade”). I requested you to Google M. V. Sridhar’s recent comments and you produce an old Rediff post that has been read and re-read by most eyeballs over 1000 times! You must be Indian 🙂

    Your recent arguments and weird conclusion — countered by Megha — have no bearing on the thrust of this thread, in my view, which is around whether or not Sachin Tendulkar lied in the first hearing.

    I consider Proctor’s court a Kangaroo court because he is not trained in matters law. He apparently said to the ICC that he was not capable of conducting an important hearing that involved a racism charge. The ICC forced him to do so.

    Read this:

    And in particular, this line: “Realising that he was not properly qualified, Mike Procter implored the ICC to appoint someone else to sit at the hearing, but his plea fell on deaf ears.”

    Don’t just thump tables Sam. Do the hard yakka before you form opinions!

    Scroll back to read my initial submission on this around M. V. Sridhar and let’s take it from there. Thanks.

    Finally, I do not read Gavaskar. Indeed, this blog routinely mocks him. If you have visited this blog regularly (which you have) and if you are able to retain what’s been said here (which I doubt) you will have known that this blog refers to the Indian media collectively as “The Braying Mediocrity of Indian Cricket”. Case closed.

    Sam you don’t prove things by thumping tables and shouting with Caps-Lock on. You prove things by living it.

    — Mohan

  26. In the context of this thread, here is what Peter Roebuck says in today’s Age on matters SCG: “Australia’s pursuit of a charge it could not prove from an exchange it had initiated served only to unleash nationalistic forces in both countries and to turn Harbhajan into a populist champion. Ignoring their man’s churlishness, Indians circled the wagons around him. To them, too, it seemed that the Australians had tried to remove a thorn from their sides. Harbhajan had for several hours been thwarting the Australians. He is not much of a batsmen but has a way of scoring runs when it matters, did so again in Bangalore. Indeed, he survived for quite some time as India tried to stave off defeat in the second innings in Sydney. He does not back down. India liked him for that, forgave him a lot.”

    I know I certainly did. To use Peter Roebuck’s words, I ignored Harbhajan’s churlishness and circled my wagons around him! In Harbhajan Singh, India has a player who stood up to the Aussies on and off the field. India had a player who insisted on and thrived on dismantling the halo that Australia has insisted on wearing for many many years. I would back Harbhajan Singh not for his abilities — there are better off spinners in India, in my view. But I’d certainly back him for his attitude and his stomach for a fight — especially against halo-wearing Australia and England!

  27. chris hutchinson

    @ Mohan,

    Alas Mohan your circling of the wagons exposes you to your last stand on the matter.

    The BCCI and yourself, as duly stated by Peter Roebuck and admitted by yourself, highlights India’s desperation to attack Australia without due cause, for the sake of claiming the moral high ground.

    There was no moral high ground to be gained in that matter. Ricky Ponting should have known this and addressed the matter differently.

    This is where the BCCI has exposed itself to the world.

    It was far better to save face and create a storm on the injustices of the test match in question, injustices that are part and parcel of test cricket, of which the Australians played no part in (please dont bring up the Clarke catch – he caught it) than face the obviousness of the predicament that Baji created.

    We can all sit in our glass houses Mohan.

    But circling the wagons wont fend of the arrows.

    PS. I really wish that India had the luck to deliver a victory in Australia. Because then you could just gloat and Peter could look for a sensible way to describe the joy of such a triumph rather than drivel on with senseless attacks n Ponting and co.

  28. @chris

    “without due cause”? You think that spitting on the opposition and then donning a halo when the shoe is on the other foot is “without due cause”? Get real buddy. There is no higher-moral-ground in sport. It is Australia that wishes to rush there all the time with a halo on its head! Yes, if Ricky Ponting did not see SCG as another opportunity to rush to the high-moral-ground he would have dealt with the mess in a more mature manner!

    India had been doing the diplomacy route for ages through the Dravids and Bhindras — and the throng of gentlemen before them. But with the onset of the new Turks in the ranks — the Harbhajans and the Lalit Modis — old-India had to yield to the new-India!

    Harbhajan did not create any predicament. He tapped someones bum. An Aussie sledged him. He sledged back. The Australian captain lost his mind in a bid to claim the high-moral ground. The rest was a messy history, compounded by the fact that we had an incompetent judge that heard the case the first time round.

    The injustices and the cheating in the game itself is part and parcel of the game — another day, another debate.

    I am not interested in gloating. I leave that to you and other lesser mortals. 🙂

    I have always believed that Australia is a better team. It is because of the attitude here to sport, the wonderful grass-roots system and the quality of her players. Australia will win more than they lose.

    It is this rush for a halo that I find morally disgusting and vile.

  29. Pingback: India Vs Australia :: Test 3 :: Delhi :: Day-1 « i3j3Cricket :: A blog for fans of Indian cricket…

  30. Slipstream_RacerX

    “That’s right Mohan, and the same substance excrets as you produce in your blogs!”


    Despite the fact that you find his blogs comparable to excreted waste, your constant presence here seems to indicate you love lapping it up. Need a spoon, boyo? How about a bib, so you don’t dribble it all over yourself?

Leave a Reply to mohankaus Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s