That gave me a laugh 
Guys, i haven’t seen the video yet (at work) but if he did infact say what people are saying he said he needs to be disciplined immediately. There is no other way around it. If true, this calls for a public apology.
So we have the following:
- He probably meant to say Indians, Hindu is widely understood shorthand for Indians. While it is broad brush, and is very unfair to the Good people of Pakistan who may be Hindu, it is relatively representative of India as a country. Sort of like saying 'gora' instead of English.
- He may have meant to indicate the Hindu fundi orgs that have been threatening pakistani players
- He may believe that all Hindus mentality is to blame for his exclusion from IPL including Danish Kaneria
Number 3 seems unlikely, and we should not react as if his intended meaning was number 3. A 'we'll look into it, and see what he was talking about' approach is much better.
1. lol...if the terms are interchangeable because it is representative of india then that's the same thing, isn't it? think, bhai jaan, think.
why waste energy typing stupidities?
remove the word "all" (which you unnecessarily added to make the comment extreme and therefore less likely) from your statement and it suddenly becomes the perfect answer choice. ding ding ding.
with that said, i don't think it's shocking or even that bad. i think it's reflective of what a common pakistani would say and, if in reverse, what a common indian would say. however, the contrast is that you would never in a million years hear an indian cricketer saying something equivalent and that too on national television.
Re: Sohail Tanvir comments on Hindus
- i didnt say they were interchangeable, because that would imply i agree with it. i dont, its not politically correct to say Hindus in place of Indians, and it alienates the Hindus in our country. And it isnt entirely accurate, just as saying Goras inplace of "Australian/English" would exclude the small, underrepresented, often discriminated against, wholly out of the ruling class, segment of minorities.
- Why is that stupid, given the confirmation of this by the IPL franchise owners. The (violent) opposition to Pakistani cricketers is clearly from the extreme Hindu section of the country, and so it makes sense to criticize backward retrogressive mentality in that segment of the country instead of all Indians.
- My comment is with reference to the OP, who commented that this indicated his attitude towards people like Kaneria.
[quote]
with that said, i don't think it's shocking or even that bad. i think it's reflective of what a common pakistani would say and, if in reverse, what a common indian would say. however, the contrast is that you would never in a million years hear an indian cricketer saying something equivalent and that too on national television.
[/quote]
If thats true, thats sad. baghal mai churi, munh mai ram
- i didnt say they were interchangeable, because that would imply i agree with it. i dont, its not politically correct to say Hindus in place of Indians, and it alienates the Hindus in our country. And it isnt entirely accurate, just as saying Goras inplace of "Australian/English" would exclude the small, underrepresented, often discriminated against, wholly out of the ruling class, segment of minorities.
- Why is that stupid, given the confirmation of this by the IPL franchise owners. The (violent) opposition to Pakistani cricketers is clearly from the extreme Hindu section of the country, and so it makes sense to criticize backward retrogressive mentality in that segment of the country instead of all Indians.
- My comment is with reference to the OP, who commented that this indicated his attitude towards people like Kaneria. let us discontinue this charade. we all know exactly what he said and what he meant by it. it's not a huge deal.
[quote]
If thats true, thats sad. baghal mai churi, munh mai ram
[/QUOTE]
what is sad? the common man's views?
let us discontinue this charade. we all know exactly what he said and what he meant by it. it's not a huge deal.
haha. charade indeed. i think we know that this is unlikely to be on the top of the agenda for PCB, and these condemnations/justifications are likely to be limited in scope to this thread.
im glad you feel its not a huge deal, I agree with you. my explanatory remarks are targeted towards those who do feel its a huge deal.
[quote]
what is sad? the common man's views?
[/QUOTE]
the preference for a hypocritical attitude belying deep prejudices. atleast people here are condemning the prejudice and not just the voicing of it.
haha. charade indeed. i think we know that this is unlikely to be on the top of the agenda for PCB, and these condemnations/justifications are likely to be limited in scope to this thread.
im glad you feel its not a huge deal, I agree with you. my explanatory remarks are targeted towards those who do feel its a huge deal.
i don't mean to be offensive but the reality is that pakistani cricketers tend to come off as jahils to begin with so to find this kind of commentary shocking is just not realistic.
[quote]
the preference for a hypocritical attitude belying deep prejudices. atleast people here are condemning the prejudice and not just the voicing of it.
[/QUOTE]
who is condemning only the voicing of prejudice?
haha.. as opposed to the grown up, civilized indian cricketers.
anyway your agenda is pretty clear here, the issue seems besides the point.
If you feel that it is in any way better that in India people are prejudiced but they wouldnt dream of owning up to it before a camera
No, but can you deny that majority of Pakistanis have animosity for India/Indians/Hindus ?
The way I have seen it, it is actually the other way around.
Show me a major online Indian cricket forum where Pakistanis can post just like any other poster and can expect discussion from Indian posters in a civilized manner and where they are not bombarded with ma bhen kee galian from all the members including moderators as soon as they post anything "undesirable"????
Compare the reactions of crowds whenever an India/Pakistan is played in their home countries and you will see how much animosity Pakistani's have towards Indians.
i don't mean to be offensive but the reality is that pakistani cricketers tend to come off as jahils to begin with so to find this kind of commentary shocking is just not realistic.
Bhajji slapping the dancer Sreesanth... remember?
Re: Sohail Tanvir comments on Hindus
^^
How can you compare this with the Sreesanth incident. It was a fight between two individuals nothing big about it. Here we have a national cricketer spewing venom against an entire community. Please do not compare apples and oranges....
We know what you are taught about Pakistanis in your textbooks and what you sometimes when frustrated say or think things on racial and religious lines.
What is this that you know? I don't recall anything negative being taught about pakistan or muslims in Indian history textbooks. And most Indian posters do not take a religious line while posting here.
^^
How can you compare this with the Sreesanth incident. It was a fight between two individuals nothing big about it. Here we have a national cricketer spewing venom against an entire community. Please do not compare apples and oranges....
Don't be an idiot and read my views on the first page of this thread.
This comment was jokingly to his comment about Pak cricketers in general.
i wasn’t making the comparison. but since you have…not all indian cricketers are civilized. but objectively, it’s pretty clear that as a group they’re a lot more civilized than their pakistani counterparts. this is also a function of differences in socioeconomic class and education level. nothing to get sensitive about.
if you want to cite my comment just copy/paste, don’t manipulatively paraphrase it to arrive at an alternate meaning.
i said the common indian can be expected to have such a view and that one would never see an indian cricketer making such comments. i never indian cricketers are common indians and i never said common indians wouldn’t make such comments on tv.
if we remove the manipulations, we arrive at the conclusion that indian cricketers would generally not hold such cheap views and that a common indian holding such views would not shy away from vocalizing them in a televised interview.
i wasn't making the comparison. but since you have...not all indian cricketers are civilized. but objectively, it's pretty clear that as a group they're a lot more civilized than their pakistani counterparts. this is also a function of differences in socioeconomic class and education level. nothing to get sensitive about.
if you want to cite my comment just copy/paste, don't manipulatively paraphrase it to arrive at an alternate meaning.
i said the common indian can be expected to have such a view and that one would never see an indian cricketer making such comments. i never indian cricketers are common indians and i never said common indians wouldn't make such comments on tv.
if we remove the manipulations, we arrive at the conclusion that indian cricketers would generally not hold such cheap views and that a common indian holding such views would not shy away from vocalizing them in a televised interview.
Please cite the objective basis here. I see no reason to grant the idea that indian cricketers are for some reason more 'civilized' even though 'common indian' and 'common pakistani' hold the same views. Whatever class distinction you are groping for, it is ridiculously hand-wavey, especially in light of you using words like 'objective'.
Dont blame me for not parsing your comments in a marxist light, and it is natural to assume that cricketers hail from whatever 'common' indian/pakistani means. Can you substantiate your claim that indian cricketers as a group hail from a different class than 'common indians'?
Don't be an idiot and read my views on the first page of this thread.
This comment was jokingly to his comment about Pak cricketers in general.
It was just plain stupid to make this comparison.
Please cite the objective basis here. I see no reason to grant the idea that indian cricketers are for some reason more 'civilized' even though 'common indian' and 'common pakistani' hold the same views. Whatever class distinction you are groping for, it is ridiculously hand-wavey, especially in light of you using words like 'objective'.
Dont blame me for not parsing your comments in a marxist light, and it is natural to assume that cricketers hail from whatever 'common' indian/pakistani means. Can you substantiate your claim that indian cricketers as a group hail from a different class than 'common indians'?
you are seriously asking me for empirical evidence to substantiate claims of relative indian superiority in civility of cricketers? lol.
if a truly objective answer did exist, say the result of a well-designed poll of unbiased parties and peer-reviewed academic research on cricketer civility, and you had to bet all your material possessions on the outcome...would you bet on the answer being "indian cricketers" or "pakistani cricketers". please reply honestly.
i'm sure somebody could actually research player backgrounds and produce the evidence, but given that i don't have enough interest in this argument to actually do that....let's just use english language proficiency as a barometer of socioeconomic background. which team do you think would rank higher using this metric?
Re: Sohail Tanvir comments on Hindus
haha.. so english language proficiency is a measure for how civilized people are? i see some havent gotten out of the Empire's boot.
dont beat about the bush, you are the one who said 'objectively indian players are more civilized'. you should understand that 'objectively' is not just a word to use to make your point seem stronger, it has a particular meaning. doesnt necessarily have to be emperical evidence, but has to be something tangible, and Im sorry hypothetical bets on material possessions arent that.
haha.. so english language proficiency is a measure for how civilized people are? i see some havent gotten out of the Empire's boot.
Not just English speaking skills. Indian cricketers have generally been more educated. The average person is a graduate, while a few (Srinath, Venkatersh Prasad etc.) have been professionally qualified engineers. Compare that to the "paindoos" in the Pak team.
haha.. so english language proficiency is a measure for how civilized people are? i see some havent gotten out of the Empire's boot.
please try to read properly. let's not be dramatic.
english language proficiency is a reliable barometer of both education level and socioeconomic background in south asia. the common man, who is more likely to hold the views of sohail tanveer, is also more likely to be minimally educated and be of a correspondingly lower socioeconomic bracket. in fact, it is a causal relationship.
[quote]
dont beat about the bush, you are the one who said 'objectively indian players are more civilized'. you should understand that 'objectively' is not just a word to use to make your point seem stronger, it has a particular meaning. doesnt necessarily have to be emperical evidence, but has to be something tangible, and Im sorry hypothetical bets on material possessions arent that.
[/QUOTE]
it's not a very complicated word. it simply means unbiased. i may be biased but that doesn't prevent me from making an unbiased statement. why is it so difficult to answer my question about the hypothetical bet? just answer it.
Not just English speaking skills. Indian cricketers have generally been more educated. The average person is a graduate, while a few (Srinath, Venkatersh Prasad etc.) have been professionally qualified engineers. Compare that to the "paindoos" in the Pak team.
Theres been plenty of Pakistani graduates. Saeed Anwar and Aamer Sohail were both engineers, Ramiz Raja an MBA, Imran Khan went to Oxford and in the current team I believe Salman Ahmad and Misbah have engineering backgrounds.
So no, not paindoos.
please try to read properly. let's not be dramatic.
english language proficiency is a reliable barometer of both education level and socioeconomic background in south asia.
Not such a reliable barometer of education level, given that many govt schools were converted to urdu medium back in the 80s esp outside cities.
[quote]
the common man, who is more likely to hold the views of sohail tanveer, is also more likely to be minimally educated and be of a correspondingly lower socioeconomic bracket. in fact, it is a causal relationship.
[/quote]
Not really. I've seen plenty of Indians on this website who can apparently type in english but hold views similar to, if not the same as, what you said the 'common indian' feels.
[quote]
it's not a very complicated word. it simply means unbiased. i may be biased but that doesn't prevent me from making an unbiased statement.
[/quote]
Objectivity requires evidence that isnt subjective. The bet you offer is completely subjective.
[quote]
why is it so difficult to answer my question about the hypothetical bet? just answer it.
[/QUOTE]
I'd place my money on the Pakistanies to be more civilized. Better at english, maybe not.