The guy in the blue shirt in the photo here (it's appeared in a number of places) is certainly in the middle of imitating a monkey. The guy in the yellow shirt looks like he is about to do so too. And I look at this picture and I'm baffled.
You see, I couldn't really care less about whether what cricket fans have been shouting at Andrew Symonds constitutes racism. I also think all international sportsmen must and do eventually develop a thick skin; they learn to take abuse and answer it on their terms. And I'm uninterested in the argument that says Aussie crowds do the same (which they do, notably with one Muralitharan), so why the complaints now?
No, what gets me is this: why would we be so hypocritical as to deny that people have been shouting this stuff and taunting Symonds?
BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah has led the pack of such deniers; one quote from him making the rounds is "I don't understand where this anti-racism thing has come from as we have had no [official] complaint." Apart from him, message boards on all kinds of sites are filled with Indians saying this stuff didn't happen, racism is nonexistent in India, etc and all that.
One guy, I kid you not, actually puts it this way: "And well, monkeys are not black! So obviously, Indians would obviously not call a black guy a monkey. They never have discriminated against negros. ... Millions of blacks have been accepted by society as humans."
What's there to say in the face of such logic supreme?
Anyone who has attended an international match like this in India knows that players get taunted by some in the crowd. (Of course it's the same in any country.) Which is fine: we have our share of nuts, after all, like every other country. But why would we choose to close ranks behind the guys in the photograph? What do we get from defending creeps? Why the urge to paint ourselves as uniquely free of creeps? Whom do we think we fool?