Why we appealed Harbhajan's ban?

The appeal has given the illusion that India is flexing its cricketing muscles and unwilling to accept that one of its own players is a racist. It is not so, there are genuine reasons.

Foremost among them, is the suspicion that the ICC is a racist organisation. There is a long held view, that the sub-continental teams have coped stiffer punishment than other cricketing nations.

ICC's refusal to address it and exhibit transparency in its process and procedures has induced a feeling of persecution and given rise to the impression that we, the sub-continental teams, have to resort to brinkmanship for justice.

The Harbhajan episode is an excellent pointer. Indian fans find it unbelievable that Procter has chosen to ignore the words of the only person who was at the scene of the crime and side with a complainant on the basis of hearsay as the other witnesses were mere passer-by's.

The ICC and their adjudicator Procter may argue it is not so, they have legitimate reasons to ban Harbhajan. If it was so why don't they assuage our anger by making the process transparent?

Why have they gagged Procter? Let him explain, why would we complain if the answers are honest?