BBC Home

Explore the BBC

Articles/ all comments

These 169 comments are related to an article called:

Is it right to ban Zimbabwe?

Page 1 of 4

comment by Silk (U1717598)

posted Jun 25, 2008

"ICC is run by the English."

I think you need to get out more...

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

The author of this article has deleted this comment.

posted Jun 25, 2008

"ICC is run by the English."

I think you need to get out more...

-------------------------------------------------
Ofcourse it is .. !! BCCI, AUS and Eng own it. BCCI only objects when there is a money issue or in the case of the offspiner. Aus, Eng dominate the poilitical part of it ... and Aus, Eng and prob NZ are the nations refusing to travel to Zim all the time. WI, India, Pak, Bangla, SA all go there without any trouble.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Silk, I agree with RedKrypt actually. The Anglo-Saxon block - Eng, Aus,NZ wield too much power, for my liking.

How the ICC reinstated an umpire who demanded to be paid half a million dollars on the sly, beats me. The welfare of cricket cannot be served by banning cricketers from places where democracy does not exist.

And the ICC would be well-advised to stick to cricketing matters.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Boycott this thread

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"Boycott this thread"

Why? Can't you think of anything sensible to say?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Are pakistan running hyper inflation?, their people starving and being beaten/killed/tortured whilst their leader lives in luxury hoarding all the peoples money?

Same question back to you?

Boycott this thread.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Nothing sensible has been said so far...

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"Are pakistan running hyper inflation?, their people starving and being beaten/killed/tortured whilst their leader lives in luxury hoarding all the peoples money?"

Even India is going through a period of record inflation in 8 yeras.... and many farmres are driven to suicides, unable to pay off debts.

My question is: Which of these problems will get solved by banning the cricketers? None whatsoever. So why do it? ICC is not the correct body to act on these things.... the UN should.

| complain about this comment

comment by mdw400 (U10763979)

posted Jun 25, 2008

I don't thinks the issue is the lack of democracy, more the terrible human rights abuses that are happening there at the moment.

SCA: to say its white British farmers on the receiving end is just not correct so please check your facts.

I'm in favour of a sporting boycott of Zimbabwe until the situation is resolved, just as I would have been in favour of the apartheid boycott.

| complain about this comment

comment by Silk (U1717598)

posted Jun 25, 2008

"BCCI, AUS and Eng own it."

So the fact that the SOUTH AFRICAN President forced out the AUSTRALIAN Chief Executive, over the issue of Zimbabwe, shows that the 'Anglo-Saxon' block is running things?

You need to get out more.

"WI, India, Pak, Bangla, SA all go there without any trouble. "

Do you actually understand what is happening in Zimbabwe? The issue isn't, and never was, security for players. England could play there without having to worry. That's not the issue.

When the hell did Pakistan or India last tour, in any case?

| complain about this comment

comment by mdw400 (U10763979)

posted Jun 25, 2008

SCA: Surely cricketers have just as much right to have take a pro-active, moral stance on the situation as much as anyone else?

| complain about this comment

comment by redones (U1707198)

posted Jun 25, 2008

the simple logic is:

Aparteid in South Africa was followed by a ban on touring teams.

Aparteid was, in essence, a restriction on the basic human rights of some parts of the population and outright violence and discrimination.

In Zimbabwe, current reports indicate that there is outright violence and a long history of restriction of rights, seizing of property and currently an apparent lack of transperancy in the democratic process.

I think the ICC has a precedent that should be followed.

The other question is:

If the ICC funds ZCA and that money cannot be accounted for - are they not potentially funding Mr Mugabe and his cronies? and should this be allowed?

ICC money is for cricket and there is little to no cricket being played or supported in Zimbabwe - so where is the money going and should the ICC throw good money after bad?

Lets not get into the legitimising unlawful rulers, etc... thats a different arguement - this is about the improper use of funding and the precedent set under a different regime in the same geographic area.

And for the record - those who want to use the race card can leave... Aparteid was white on black/coloured, Zimbabwe is Black on white and now black on other black...

any abuse of power or discrimination based on colour is wrong - regardless of which direction it comes from.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"My question is: Which of these problems will get solved by banning the cricketers? None whatsoever. So why do it? ICC is not the correct body to act on these things.... the UN should."

And in the absence of any action from the UN what should happen?

We seem to have had this discussion once before when you couldn't grasp the concept of Strauss and the other players actually managing to think for themselves and form an opinion.

Can't you go and play with the traffic?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"SCA: Surely cricketers have just as much right to have take a pro-active, moral stance on the situation as much as anyone else?"

I have nothing wrong with individual players having sentiments. If some particular player does not want to tour Australia or India becos he doesn't like those nations, so be it. All I'm saying is that, the ICC should not be forced to take stance on political issues.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"We seem to have had this discussion once before when you couldn't grasp the concept of Strauss and the other players actually managing to think for themselves and form an opinion."

Refer my reply aove. I have nothing against individual players acting on their sentiments, however misguided or otherwise.

"Can't you go and play with the traffic?"

I do not possess suicidal tendencies like you, when I lose an argument.

| complain about this comment

comment by mdw400 (U10763979)

posted Jun 25, 2008

SCA: I entirely agree with you, the situation in Iraq is deplorable, but thats for another discussion.

I think the ICC has every right to take a moral stance on the situation in Zimbabwe. There are no alleged abuses, its simply facts, and is a situation I believe every human being with any kind of humanity in them has an obligation to take a stance on. The ICC are in a position to take a pro-active stance by demonstrating their objection to the Mugabe regime, and as such should do exactly that.

| complain about this comment

comment by redones (U1707198)

posted Jun 25, 2008

SCA: sport is about fair contest.. this is a fairly simple idea. Its why competitors and sportspeople readily accept drug testing and why many on this board call for increased use of technology in cricket to improve the ability of umpires to make the correct decision.

If this is the basis of conduct - ie fair play, then surely abuse of rights and intimidation, violence and repression should be opposed by sporting bodies where possible. Dont you agree?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

How is the ICC competent to decide on matters concerning abuses of human rights?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"Refer my reply aove. I have nothing against individual players acting on their sentiments, however misguided or otherwise.

"Can't you go and play with the traffic?"

I do not possess suicidal tendencies like you, when I lose an argument."


Then why did you have such a problem with Strauss's comments last month?

Or have you forgotten that?


And if I ever lose an arguement to you then I think my subsequent suicide will be understandable.

Can't see it ever happening though.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Strauss was not speaking of his individual feelings. He said something like "Many England players could be boycotting the Zimbabwe game". That is what I find objectionable.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

comment by SwamyCricketAnanda (U5959555)
posted Just Now

How is the ICC competent to decide on matters concerning abuses of human rights?

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

If the decision in question is "should we support a place where human rights are being abused", then I think my hamster is qualified to make that decision.

You, I'm not too sure about.

| complain about this comment

comment by Silk (U1717598)

posted Jun 25, 2008

OK. Let's get this straight.

Right now, Zimbabwe has the lowest life expectancy of any country on earth.

And if you vote for the opposition you risk being beaten, tortured or killed.

Is this discussion worthwhile or meaningful in any sense?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

comment by SwamyCricketAnanda (U5959555)
posted Just Now

Strauss was not speaking of his individual feelings. He said something like "Many England players could be boycotting the Zimbabwe game". That is what I find objectionable.
-----------------

You could only find that objectionable if you knew, without doubt, that the other players did not agree with him.

How do you get your insight to such a degree that you have a better knowledge of what goes on in the England dressing room than actual members of that team?

Otherwise you have no sane reason to find it objectionable.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"You could only find that objectionable if you knew, without doubt, that the other players did not agree with him."

BTW, how would you know, Weasel?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

I don't Swamy.

But I don't find it objectionable.

I'm not the one with a case to answer here.

Strauss made a comment - you find it objectionable. Why?


Or are you saying that it's natural to find all comments to be objectionable, and anyone who doesn't has to explain why?

(can anyone tell me why I'm trying to reason & talk logic to this monkey?)

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Instead of avoiding the issue and deleting every post that doesn't agree with you try answering a few questions.

1. Do you think there is nothing wrong in Zimbabwe?

2. Do you support Mugabe and his party?

3. If this was any other government apart from the British one asking for Zimbabwe to be banned would you be objecting.

No obfuscation or changing the subject, just for once answer some simple questions.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

1. Do you think there is nothing wrong in Zimbabwe?

There's lots wrong in this world, and in Zimbabwe too. Nothing wrong that an ICC ban can achieve though.

2. Do you support Mugabe and his party?

No. I am ambivalent. Neither would I have knighted him in 1994. All of these are beside the point, from a cricketing perspective.

3. If this was any other government apart from the British one asking for Zimbabwe to be banned would you be objecting.

Yes I would. Not the govt.; but the ICC. The British govt. maybe right to cut off links with Zimbabwe... but apparently, it is doing so only with the cricket team; not closing the embassy; not stopping British Airways etc. A very narrow and unprincipled ban, is my verdict.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Why wouldn't you have knighted him in 1994?

Do you not think he was deserving?

Why?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Swarmy has a crystal ball, he can see 14 years into the future

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"Do you not think he was deserving?

Why?"

What did Mugabe do prior to 1994?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Shame he has no idea about what's going on now though.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Amanda... it appears your moral compass is so out of whack that you couldn't find your own backside if someone gave you a mirror and a stick.

This is not about politics, it's about basic human morality.

Not tha this will matter to an inane half-wit like you who is a constant and desperate search for sticks to beat England and English cricket with.

Now be quiet and go back to rediff.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

The british government is seeking to end all investment by British companies in Zimbabwe as well as attempting to bring up the matter of Zimbabwe in the UN which is being blocked incidently.

Also if the ICC cannot ban Zimbabwe over political problems, how about the total destruction of a once illustrious domestic cricket scene.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"This is not about politics, it's about basic human morality."

There's been much more immorality from political leaders of the US, UK, Italy etc. Should the ICC or FIFA get involved? That is the question I am asking.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Ambivalent????????????????????

What is wrong with you???????????

Are you so totally anti-colonialist that you are happy to write this crap to get your message across?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

The more he posts on this subject the more out of touch with reality he confirms he is, DL has the right idea about Swarmy, just don't post, if enough of us regular contributers didn't bite he may find another site.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"There's been much more immorality from political leaders of the US, UK, Italy etc. Should the ICC or FIFA get involved? That is the question I am asking."

Care to elaborate on this Amanda?
Any evidence of the US, UK and Italy murdering and starving their own people?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Swamy

Just checked the definition of ambivalent

" Willing to turn a blind eye to the cruel torture and suffering of thousands at the hands of a brutal despot desperately trying to cling to power in a nation where democracy has been destroyed "

Fair enough.....

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Not sure why you guys respond to SCAs posts. Each article provides more evidence of how ill informed, biased and downright stupid he is.

run

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"Any evidence of the US, UK and Italy murdering and starving their own people?"

Why? Does murdering or starving people of other nations, NOT count as human rights violations?

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

Ok Amanda, any evidence of the US, UK or Italy murdering or starving cutizens of other countries?. Why Italy by the way. Are anti pasta as well as anti white?

| complain about this comment

comment by ADSM (U9519094)

posted Jun 25, 2008

Hmm...
I don't usually stoop to replying to the ramblings of this fool whose inferiority complex drives him to seek hollow satisfaction through irritating and goading others.

However, in this case, he has attempted to use a serious political issue, involving the lives and livelihoods of thousands, in order to get his mean-spirited jollies.

Ananda, there is no other Test team representing the regime of a murderous despot, who for nearly 30 years has ruled with an iron fist, ordering the murder, rape and mutilation of political opponents, the decimation of entire tribes, and the perversion of democratic processes, all for his own selfish ends.

To allow his cricket team to play here would give legitimacy to this appalling regime, responsible for destroying what was once Africa's most promising developing nation.

Your attempts to wind people up on this sensitive subject betray a callous disregard for the sensitivities of others, as well as reaffirming your inadequacy for all to see.

| complain about this comment

posted Jun 25, 2008

"Is it right to ban Zimbabwae?"

It's a difficult question. I am trying to decide if banning a cricket team will serve any purpose. Especially when the govt of UK is not doing enough the company Anglo American from making huge investments in the platinum industry. It's a well known fact among most western nations that it is through economic isolation that we can best hope to oust this perpetrator of political violence from power. I am not sure whether banning their cricket team, which probably is suffering too at the hands of this dictator, will do any good towards helping the people of Zimbabwae.

It is clear to me from the history of Zimbabwae that the country was not colonised in the first place for bettering the life of the people there. So unfortunately UK has lost the moral right to even suggest what's good and bad for the future of Zimbabwae. Maybe a neutral country can suggest.

| complain about this comment

comment by 80mph (U9328463)

posted Jun 25, 2008

The ICC should have banned Zimbabwe or atleast removed their full member status some time ago.
Its clear that Zimbabwe's cricket funds haven't been properly managed in a long time due to massive corruption.
And who knows but the funds not accounted for might have partly helped finance the current human rights cricis.
That is something the ICC needs to rectify.
They could not act earlier because of RSA's strong support for Zimb but with RSA cutting off its ties, Zimb will now be banned IMO.

| complain about this comment

Page 1 of 4

HINTS & TIPS

Deleting comments

You are in charge of your own space - if you see an offensive comment, you can delete it

Reasonable debate is allowed - please don't delete a comment just because you don't agree with it

If you are not sure, or feel a comment warrants further attention, you can refer it to a moderator instead