this thread has morphed into a discussion of whether the Indian cricket team were harshly dealt with four years ago or, if you believe the recently-updated rhetoric, subjected to racially-motivated discrimination on the part of Bucknor
this type of escalation is exactly the sort of well-worn path that any earnest discussion about the behaviour or accountability of the Indian cricket team or the BCCI's role in modern cricket quickly takes and it has ruined India's credibility within world cricket
there are so many Indian players and officials ready to play the victim and, four years ago, the Australian media took the bait - hook, line and sinker!
after Australia's only coloured player was racially abused by Indian crowds, Harbajhan Singh was found guilty of doing the same on Australian soil...rather than accept that punishment (which followed due process) Indian players, officials and media launched an offensive against the Australian cricket team and against discriminatory umpiring from Bucknor
the near-hysterical lobbying, positioning and posturing succeeded in a) duping Australian media b) driving a wedge between Cricket Australia and some senior players and c) preventing a serial offender like Singh from doing his punishment
the problem for Indian cricket is that while they might have succeeded at the time, they also created a bit of a rod for their own back
Anil Kumble borrowed Bill Woodfull's famous quote: "only one team was playing in the spirit of the game" and by lecturing Australian cricketers and the rest of the cricketing world on ethics and morals, he painted a target on his own team's back
the cricketing public now look at incidents like this:
...and correctly see a cricket team (with notable exceptions like Rahul Dravid) which contains petulant, over-praised, overpaid, underperforming 'rock stars' and high-profile commentators on the payroll of the BCCI (note that neither Sunil G or Ravi Shastri dared showed their face in Australia this summer)
Kohli's gesture was a disgrace but it was not isolated
look at Ishant Sharma's behaviour when he gave Mike Hussey an absolute mouthful when Hussey was correctly given not out LBW (from square leg mind you!)...the way he carried on when correctly given out LBW in India's second dig this week was another example
Kumble himself is embroiled in a corruption/conflict of interest controversy after abusing his position in the cricket association for commercial gain
there are increasingly blatant examples of putting personal interests above those of the game
A more serious case of conflict of interest is currently being heard by the Supreme Court: it is former president AC Muthiah's petition that the current incumbent, N Srinivasan, cannot both be a BCCI official and the owner of an IPL franchise (his company owns Chennai Super Kings). The Supreme Court had allowed Srinivasan's elevation to the president's position to go ahead last month but said its decision was subject to the outcome of the larger petition.
In September 2008, shortly after the first IPL season, the BCCI had amended clause 6.2.4 of the regulations for players, team officials, umpires and administrators. Before the amendment the clause read: "No administrator shall have, directly or indirectly, any commercial interest in the matches and events conducted by the board."
After the change, it read: "No administrator shall have directly or indirectly any commercial interest in any of the events of the BCCI, excluding IPL, Champions League and Twenty20."
http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/news/item/179534-questions-raised-over-kumbles-player-agency
so this is the sort of hotbed of cycnical sentiment that India has created for itself and it is the context surrounding discussion of their refusal to use of DRS
most sense that Indian cricket rejects DRS for their own tactical advantage, not for any real or deep-seated concerns for the game so the irony remains that the very team who brought about the umpiring controversy which brought the DRS system into being are now the ones who now reject it
Indian cricket cannot be surprised that they have become a laughing stock due to the hypocritical gap between their rhetoric and their actual behaviour
it's not the bitterness of the Symonds-Singh incident that will be the longest lived from that foul Test in 2008 - India's pious and self-righteous stance in that controversy will be what endures
Kumble's posturing in 2008 might have suited their ends at the time, but it will leave a sad legacy - young cricketers like Sharma and Kohli will have to try to live up to the moral high ground that Anil tried to claim and they will be made to look foolish every time they fail
peace.