posted Jul 4, 2008

The notion of any of the members of the ICC being lilly-white defenders of human rights is rather a laughable one in itself. Which country doesn't have any history of invasion and murder and maiming? Holding up the recent Iraq war smacks of "well we haven't done anything bad RECENTLY you see..."

Nevertheless, contributing money to Mugabe's Zimbabwe in aid of this seems foolish in the extreme. I'm glad a compromise has been reached.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2008

I personally feel sorry for the zimbabwe cricket team. They have shown they are reasonable by voluntarily pulling out of the Twenty20 World cup. They are just ordinary people wishing to take part in a sport against other countries. They, in my opinion, should not be punished because of their government. Just think, what if the leader of china decided he didnt like our government or gordon brown, should he deny our olympics team access to china? The rift with the zimbabwe government should be solved dipomatically not by punishing the ordinary zimbaweans who just want to do what they love doing.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2008

comment by ruka_logic

Do British Sportsman feel morally responsible for the deaths by the thousands of innocent Iraqis?

Why should Zimbabwe cricketers?

------
These being the Iraquis who are being blown up by, erm...other iraquis?

Explain to me, exactly, what Iraq has got to do with cricket.

Other than some odd parallel that you seem to think exists to justify Mugabe.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2008

Sopwith_Camel...

Actually I don't think that it is the sportsmen who have so much of a moral conscience, moreover a fear of being victimised by the fickle British press.

That is not to say that some don't have a conscience however. I just think that the easier option is being taken. I can't see exclusion working here just as it never worked for the fight against appartheid. However, a stand has to made somewhere against this odious dictator and there has to solidarity across the board from politics to leisure pursuits. The message has to get home to him that his regime will not be tolerated.

Shame the ICC have to resort to persuasion rather than making a decision on their own backs, but nothing new there hey?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2008

Its pure polictics and not sports...Just to prove Mugabe that if "Europ etc" want they can cut all sort of links with Zimbabawe and to put more pressure on Mugabe.

Common we are an equal opportunities country and shud have welcomed them besides the games are in England and not in Zimbabwe.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2008

Just a few thoughts on the sport - politics angle of this reference Zim. It was Mugabe who declared himself "protector and sponsor" of the Zim. cricket team ensuring his personal influence in all things cricket.It is his regime that have so influenced the running of Zim cricket that includes selecting the team that players have protested and resigned. Henry Olonga made his thoughts clear enough. Try telling Zim cricketers that sport and politics don't mix . Perhaps BCCI should talk to some of these people before taking the line they did.It is widely reported that ICC funds meant to go to the promotion of cricket's interest end up in the hands of a certain political party. Not sport and politics ?The efforts of Mugabe and his mob have deeply involved politics in the sport of cricket.
I have not even started on the morality of the current Zim dictatorship nor confused it with Iraq. That debate might take pages.
The current ICC stand might be seen as a cop out by some but it does leave the door open for a post - Mugabe Zim cricket side to resume relations with everyone else.It allows a major competition to go ahead and not allow Mugabe the oppportunity to feel he has normal relations with the rest of the world in one sphere at least. I do feel sorry for the current crop of Zim players who are sacrificing a big stage appearance for wider interests. Compromise it may be but was there a better option available ?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2008

comment by nm2878 (U10783832)

"I dont think UK govt has right to talk about morals, fake WMDs for oil "

You will note that I'm not the UK govt. (I tend to be vaguely competent).

As to Iraq - removing Saddam was morally justifiable.
The way it was done, the "dodgy dossier" (WMD), the lack of thought about what happened next, the following Bush's oil crusade etc wasn't [although Bush Snr leaving the Shia's high and dry in the early 90s may actually have been worse].

..but that's another issue

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2008

comment by Dev (U8304136)

posted 16 Hours Ago

"I am proud of the SL Cricket board, they have to stand united with India and Pak. I only hope that ECB and the other rich cricket board members don't force them to change their stand"

Errmm the richest cricket board is BCCI - its part of why it has such a massive influence.

Simple fact is - Mugabe's regime made politics part of cricket by:
1) appointing the Zimbabwean cricket authorities
2) Imposing racist selection criteria [also a potential issue with quotas in SA]

..plus the issue of financial irregularities when the administrators are so closely linked to the regime

Zimbabwe historically tend to back BCCI in ICC votes... as such BCCI's stance is far from surprising.

I do wish people would stick to the issues re Zimbabwe rather than trying to justify the shocking stances taken by pointing at other injustices..

Ever heard the term "2 wrongs don't make a right"?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 5, 2008

comment by ruka_logic (U10382437)

posted 23 Hours Ago

Sopwith_Camel (U11240053)

. . . . No matter what we think, we can't ignore those people who are so proud to wear their country's shirt, but are now torn between their pride and their conscience.
====================================================
Do British Sportsman feel morally responsible for the deaths by the thousands of innocent Iraqis?

Why should Zimbabwe cricketers?

--------------

Maybe, but that's not really here nor there, you know? The fact is, the sportsmen in question DO feel that way about Zimbabwe. Whether because of moral conscience or perhaps media pressure or whatever else may be involved in their reasoning - they honestly and truthfully do not feel comfortable playing against Zimbabwe. A sizeable number feel that way, as it has been reported that the entire ENG, NZ, AUS teams would refuse to play. Iraq has nothing to do with this because it's not for us to judge why they make their decisions. The cricketers have made their feelings clear, their board and the ICC should seriously make an effort to accommodate those feelings.

add comment | complain about this comment