test2wa

Glenn Connley

There is no doubt Chelsea were robbed.

Whether it was, as John Terry claims, "six or seven" penalty appeals turned down ... or four, as most agree ... or even 148, it doesn't matter. Nothing will reverse the decisions or the result.

Let me make this perfectly clear. I feel what happened to Chelsea in the second leg of their UEFA Champions League semi-final, second leg was one of the greatest injustices I've seen on a football pitch. The boys in blue should be preparing for a trip to Rome on May 27.

I feel two of the penalty claims should have been awarded.

One, the Gerard Pique handball, was a certainty. The referee, Tom Henning Ovrebo, had a good view of it and should have paid it. It was an appalling mistake on his part.

The other I feel that should have been given was when Dani Alves shirt-fronted Florent Malouda. I don't care whether the first contact happened in row 18 of the Matthew Harding Stand, the major contact - the contact worthy of a spot kick - happened well inside the box.

Ovrebo lacked the courage to make a hard decision. Good referees have courage. He is not a good referee. Good referees are bold enough to trust their judgment (or listen to the linesmen) and do their job.

For what it's worth, I don't think Didier Drogba's stumble in the first half, nor the injury time handball claim, were penalties - but on another day they could have easily been given.

As a great admirer of Chelsea Football Club I thought the reaction of SOME players was digraceful. Drogba's post-match nonsense (and language) was unprofessional. We didn't see what went on in the tunnel afterwards but if, as reported, Drogba was slapping the wall right beside Ovrebo, he should be punished. His inability to lift his late shot on goal over Victor Valdes was every bit as costly as the poor refereeing.

Michael Ballack's behavior was almost as bad. His running beside Ovrebo with arms outstretched on both sides of the Norwegian's face was intimidating and threatening. He, too, should face sanction.

It was obvious that Ovrebo wasn't up to the job. I don't know much about his history but I can only imagine the big Rosenborg versus  Fredrikstad clash is a world away from a high-stakes, winner-takes-all clash between two of the biggest clubs in the world (with two of the most passionate sets of fans in the world). He should be punished in whatever way bad referees are punished. (Perhaps he should fly economy to his next three matches - or lose half his dinner money?)

But Drogba and Ballack cannot be allowed to get away with their carry-on.

As captain, John Terry is allowed to approach the referee after the match. He did so and was also animated. But he also realised the futility of the exercise and realised he also had a sporting duty to congratulate the Barcelona players, despite the unjustified nature of their victory.

Likewise, Frank Lampard, deserves credit. In is post-match interview he was typically dignified and respectful.

Guus Hiddink was restrained but I thought even speculating about conspiracy (which, to be fair, was in response to a direction question on the subject) was poor form. I have no doubt many in UEFA didn't want to see another Manchester United-Chelsea final but to resort to ordering a referee not to award penalties cannot be proven and should not be speculated on.

After the game I felt like screaming and slapping walls, too. And I don't get paid a hundred thousand quid a week.

This was bad refereeing. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, the stakes are high. Yes, the emotions are high and, yes, for people to whom the fortunes of the Chelsea Football Club are among the most important thing in life, there is a sense of heart-break.

But football, like life, really, requires that adults behave like adults. Dignified disappointment is far more meaningful than childish tantrum throwing.

For 93 minutes I was proud to be a Chelsea fan on Thursday morning. For the following, farcical half-hour, I was ashamed.

Pakistan is a nation of peace lovers and sports lovers.

Once again, a tiny minority of fundamentalists have sabotaged the lives and reputations of the innocent.

Despite the horror of the Lahore attacks on the Sri Lankan cricket team, the decent cricket-loving families of Pakistan should not be denied the chance to see their team play even if, in the short term, they must do so on television from Dubai, Abu Dhabi or elsewhere.

I am Australian. In my country millions of people love cricket. Many Aussies are fanatical about the fortunes of Ricky Ponting's men. But few follow the game with the same fervour, emotion and unbridled passion as their Pakistani counterparts. Few have the encycopedic knowledge of world cricket than the Pakistani cricket lovers I have met.

The last thing in the world I want to do here is to be condescending, but it's true that for many struggling Pakistanis cricket is a rare source of joy in a country where people's lives are so often damaged by the the actions of greedy, violent, corrupt individuals and groups.

That joy should continue and cricket should one day return to Pakistan..

Sadly, cowards in masks with guns have brought terrorism to cricket. But our sport be defeated by a faceless, gutless enemy like this.

Sport is the antithesis of terrorism. It brings together players and fans from different nations, religions, customs and beliefs. When play ends, they shake hands and talk. Fans sit side-by-side. They travel to each other's homelands and learn that they're not so different after all.

Now, more than ever cricket can help achieve healing and peace.

I can only imagine what was going through the mind of 23-year-old Ajantha Mendis when shrapnel struck him the neck and head. This extraordinary young man has already brought untold joy to fans well beyond his native Sri Lanka. Now, he's nursing the wounds of a bomb aimed at he and his teammates.

Sri Lanka's best cricketer, Kumar Sangakkara, did himself and his country proud with his measured reaction. And we should all take note:

"I don't regret coming to play cricket ... that's what we've done all our lives, that is our profession.

"All we want to do is go back home to our families and be safe."

Like many cricket fans, I hope the Sri Lankans are back on a cricket field soon. And winning soon.

But I wish the same for the Pakistan team.

It will probably be a long time before international cricket returns to Pakistan. Sadly, it may even lose it's role as co-host of the 2011 ICC World Cup.

But Pakistan should never lose their place in world cricket. Pakistan's cricketers and cricket officials are not to blame. Do not condemn them.

The perpetrators of these attacks should not be dismissed as Pakistani fundamentalists. In truth, they are nationless, Godless invertebrates who will, one day, face ultimate justice.

Cricket will be around long after they descend to hell.

I hope Andrew Symonds caught a tasty barramundi during his ill-fated fishing trip in Darwin ... because that little excursion could - indirectly - cost Australia the Border-Gavaskar trophy.

I don't care what's going on in Symonds' head (not much, I suspect) - but belongs under a baggy green cap covered in zinc cream, diving all over a dusty Indian cricket field, putting pressure on batsmen, piling on runs and bowling over after over of those annoying off breaks.

He's a fool to have put fishing ahead of cricket, knowing the likely consequences. But the Australian selectors are equally foolish not rushing him back into the squad for the upcoming four-Test tour of India.

To say Australia needs ‘Roy' on this tour is an understatement. Given the myriad recent departures from the Aussie squad - Warne, McGrath, Martyn and Gilchrist - experienced players are at a premium. Maybe five years ago, selectors could have afforded to take such a hard line. Not any more. The world is catching up. It's time to be a little more pragmatic.

The squad still boasts plenty of talent, particularly among the batsmen with Ponting, Clarke, Hayden, Jacques, Hussey and the rejuvenated Simon Katich back in the team. The bowling department is solid enough, too, with Lee, Clark and Mitchell Johnson set to lead the line.

But there's a serious shortage of all-rounders. Shane Watson can be a mesmerizing cricketer, particularly in the shorter form of the game, but he's unproven at Test level and continues to be dogged by injury.

The spin department is the biggest concern of all. Warne was irreplaceable, we know that. Stuart MacGill was as good as you could hope for in that role.

Part-timers aside (apologies to Michael Clarke who'll never do that again), the spin attack now lies with untested rookies, both young and old.

At the age of 36, Bryce McGain is a wonderful story. He was the leading wicket taker in the Sheffield Shield last year in just his second season as a professional, having made his first class debut only in 2001. But bowling to Martin Love, Mark Cosgrove and Adam Voges on home soil is a world away from five days against Sachin, Sehwag, Ganguly and Laxman.

Right arm off spinner Jason Krejza has played the same number of Tests and McGain - zero - and is eleven years younger.

Another debutante, New South Wales quick Doug Bollinger, will probably carry the drinks for much of the tour but he, too, could benefit from the influence of Symonds' experience.

Forget about punishing Symonds. He's already been embarrassed enough. Don't punish the Australian (and, for that matter, Indian) cricket fans. Roy is never going to change.

Get him on a plane to Delhi - fast.

I don’t have a problem with the theory behind Richard Scudamore’s plan to play a “39^th round” of the Barclay’s Premier League at various football hotspots around the globe.My beloved home-town, Melbourne, Australia, would be a perfect venue for such a fixture.It’s an affluent, sports-mad city. The 100,000 seat Melbourne Cricket Ground or the 55,000 seat indoor/outdoor Telstra Dome would almost certainly fill for even a couple of mid or lower table clubs playing for real premiership points.

The arguments about the potential impact on local sport don’t wash with me. It’s about supply and demand. There is certainly a demand for meaningful Premier League fixtures in dozens, maybe hundreds, of cities around the world.Moreover, it’s about money, which – again – is a question of supply and demand. We live in a free global economy. If someone wants to seek potential markets for their product, they’re entitled to do so.

My main problem with the plan is the fact that it would make the fixture unfair.The Australian Football League is a hugely successful national football competition for the unique local football code. Crowds are enormous, nearly all clubs make a profit each year and the television rights are worth more than AUD120,000,000 a season.Yet it’s most basic flaw, the flaw which affects the credibility of the entire competition, is its fixture.With 16 teams, for everyone to play each other twice you’d need a 30 week season.

Instead, the AFL plays a 22 week home-and-away season, a hangover from the 12 team competition which ended in the late 1980s. Considering there’s a four-week finals series at the end of the season, to play 34 weeks, plus pre-season, would make the season – simply – too long.One of the great strengths of the Premier League is the fairness of the fixture. Everyone plays everyone else twice, once at home and once away. By adding a match – even on neutral territory – that perfect balance is lost. And, for me, that’s too great a price.

Either play two matches a season (both against the same opponent) on foreign soil each season or don’t make it for Premiership points. How about scheduling the quarters or semis of the League or FA Cup at lucrative overseas venues?The bottom line is, the football calendar (particularly in England) is stretched too far already – largely by meaningless international friendlies. Scudamore’s plan is fine in theory but will never work fairly in practice.