it shows that they are still racist, if it has happened in white countries, they would not have withdrawn, if there is risk why Indian is staying there, Indian life is not so important?
2006-08-16 21:55:51 · 12 answers · asked by jamuna160180 3 in Sports ➔ Cricket
thanks for everyone, I understood my ignorance about South Africa , I withdraw the word racist
2006-08-17 01:25:18 · update #1
developed countries are more paranoid to safety measures and in our terms we keep on hearing terrorist attacks and bomb blasts within our country so often that we are exposed to such news and threats frequently and they have less impact on our fear impulses . but you don't hear reports of bomb blasts frequently in SA so they are more afraid of the situation.nothing else....but just think a while will Tamil terrorist risk killing their own players too if they attack and if they do public support for them in sri lanka will never be the same again and they are well aware of this.it was not right on cricket grounds for SA to quit but on practical terms they are right in what they are doing
2006-08-16 22:11:50 · answer #1 · answered by Explorer 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
By calling south Africa Racist you are being Racist and just remember that South Africa is a black country now and has been since 1994. So who you calling Racist? You are calling a Black Country Racist and than saying that they would not have left a White Country. First of all they would of caught the Terrorists in a White Country and secondly they would if one of your family member's was there and a bomb went off would you want them to stay there? The Rest of world hear South Africa and straight away the word Racist pops up. It is so unfair because nobody does the research to see tha Apartheid is being reversed slowly but surely yet it is the White People who are ALWAYS RACIST!
2006-08-17 07:29:08 · answer #2 · answered by wat_se 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. It´s wrong by saying that they are racist. They have withdrawn the series because of the security, and Indian team is staying there because they have their own security-officials from India. But the South African team is using the security officials from Sri Lanka. So that makes the difference. Look, the Lankan officials can even say that they are fully secure, even if they are not, but the Indian security-officials won´t say that. Indian felt that their team is fully secure, and that´s true, because they are already used to bomb-blasts, And if they don´t play, then who will visit them in the Champions-Trophy. Australian team has already sent their security officials after the Bombay bomb-blasts, and now they have confirmed that they will come for it(Champions-Trophy). One thing that some of the people probably doesn´t know. Even i wasn´t aware of it, i just came to know yesterday, and that´s: The bags. and the playing kits of the South African team were stolen from their hotel. So that shows how the media, and the other were hiding this from us.
Thanks!
2006-08-17 06:04:17 · answer #3 · answered by Tony 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No, it is a matter of perception of how much safety risk one thinks there is. Indian team management (and perhaps government too) does not think the level of threat too high to justify relinquishing the tours. South Africans on the other hand thought differently. Everyone has a right to perceive,think, analyse and decide! God fobid, if, say, something happens to the Indian team, everyone will start questioning the judgement of Indian officials in staying on against all odds. How safe is India anyway??If you stall day-to-day business for every explosion that takes place, its better to pull the quilts and turn on the ACs and never to venture out. How safe is England for that matter???
2006-08-17 05:04:24 · answer #4 · answered by slender 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They consulted with the International Cricket Board and it was felt the current security situation was too volatile to justify playing the remaining one-day matches. A bomb had exploded in the center of Colombo near their hotel apparantly.
Try to realise that people have choices and they may wish to make different choices to the one you might have made.
The Indian team have a choice too and they are staying, at present.
People in South Asia throw the term 'racist' around way too easily and it seems to reflect a deep-seated insecurity that rises up to the surface very quickly when folks can't think of anything logical to say.
Try to get out and meet more people.
2006-08-17 05:09:02 · answer #5 · answered by Bart S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
SA is not as racist as you would like other people to believe.under the circumstances any other team would have done the same,i think. do not leak your racist opinions into cricket. it's a wonderful game that does not need racism to spoil it.
2006-08-17 08:14:00 · answer #6 · answered by peaches 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
indians r used to blast bt they rn't.no player can play a match on the risk of his life
2006-08-18 13:47:56 · answer #7 · answered by sweetu 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
South Africa is extremly racxist, but it all goes against the whites. Do read something more than the propoganda.
2006-08-17 05:04:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
oh! thats a shame for a strong team like SA to loose against a poor team like SL.
2006-08-17 06:01:56 · answer #9 · answered by pinkcloud2015 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think south africans are very intelegent
already they were not having their main players with them
2006-08-17 05:21:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋