Journalist Hussain takes a swipe at ICC

[Occasional Fan]

No longer constrained by his ECB contract or the ICC's Code of Conduct, novice journalist Nasser Hussain takes a swipe at the ICC over the Zimbabwe issue.

Click here for The Guardian's report, or here for Derek Pringle's comment from the Daily Telegraph Read A Best Seller Every Day (formerly just the Daily Telegraph, I think).

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

No longer constrained by his ECB contract or the ICC's Code of Conduct, novice journalist Nasser Hussain takes a swipe at the ICC over the Zimbabwe issue.

Click here for The Guardian's report, or here for Derek Pringle's comment from the Daily Telegraph Read A Best Seller Every Day (formerly just the Daily Telegraph, I think).

Your thread though interesting,in your introduction,you mention' Hussain takes a swipe at the ICC over the Zimbabwe issue,makes it sound like it is only the ICC to blame(I used to think that)not the whole story though is it OC.

The Guardians report is the better of the two,I think.

Why should all the blame be percieved as being laid at the ICC's door,The ECB has come out of this affair with very little credit,and the British government led by Mr Blair,has no small part to play in this fiasco.

Hussain says it all in one little paragraph"We have been hung out to dry by the British government,and the cricketing establishment offered no support other than watered down sentiments.(Tell us something new)

We have gone over this time and time again,but little things tag on.

What I think.

1)Mr Blair and Mr Straw,most to blame,encouraged England not to play in the world cup,and did not want us to tour Zimbabwe,could not help though,commercial interests maybe.?They would not even help with the small amount it would have took to pay any fines.
2)The ECB did not have the balls to stand up to anyone,the stand still approach of the ICC,or the blatent inaction of our Government
3)The ICC made it clear it would act in Englands favour,if it was told by Mr Blair,that England could not tour Zimbabwe,(India and Pakistan get dispensations),this was reported on TV (Text),and will be archived,so I will name that as my soarce.
4)Hussain himself,why did he not speak out?if not as England captain,or an England player,then if he was so concerned ,as he feels he has to make so much fuss now,he could have spoke as a human being.
5)Outsiders,Ricky Ponting,is now saying it was the right thing to do,to tour Zimbabwe,I question his motives for saying that,after seeing what has gone on,and even some Shri Lankens saying it was not a fit place to tour,and the facilities were terrible.
No I think he was having a dig,

The ECB must now make the decsission now,and fingers to the world,no one is going to help.
Ernest

[R W S]

I thought your take on the situation was much more representative that that of the BBCs.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by R W S

I thought your take on the situation was much more representative that that of the BBCs.

Real thorough stuff that,cant accuse it of getting bogged down in detail

One thing of interest

The outgoing chief executive of the ECB ,Tim Lamb,has been quoted as sayig "I fully wxpect the england tour of Zimbabwe in November to go ahead"

So what is new?what has changed? jack all!!!!!!!

[Whips_off_the_bails]

Originally Posted by Ernest

4)Hussain himself,why did he not speak out?

He was under a contract with the ECB and bound by the ICC code of conduct.

Even so, he gave ICC chief executive Mal Speed such a roasting that the ECB felt obliged to apologise on Hussain's behalf. Hussain said he had nothing to apologise for.

He also made it clear that the majority of his team were opposed to playing the fixture in Zimbabwe on moral grounds. It was Lamb & co. who preferred to stick to the security issue, and they were helped in this by the threats issued by the Sons and Daughters of Zimbabwe.

Hussain's views were well-known and widely reported, so it cannot be said that he didn't speak out.

Short of resigning on the eve of the World Cup and leaving his team in the lurch, there was nothing more Hussain could have done.

[Occasional Fan]

Ernest - you're right, of course, that headlines seldom tell the full story, and my "headline" is selective in the context of the full report. It's clear that Hussain is also critical of the ECB, and if I were a sub-editor of a respectable paper I would expect someone above me to have a swipe at my headline. Maybe the editor at The Grauniad will have a go at the sub who wrote the headline for that paper!

I didn't attach a link to the BBC's report in my original post as I could not find a report on their site at the time. Thanks, RWS, for filling that gap with a report which is somewhat lightweight.

My personal view - and it is one which I find myself holding with some surprise - is that the only body to emerge with any kind of credit is the British Government. They have no power in this matter, have consistently said so and, much to my surprise, seem to be holding their peace for the moment, which is as it should be. The ball is in the ECB's court now, and I hope they will pick it up and chuck it through the ICC's window in the fairly near future, with a suitable note attached.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Whips_off_the_bails

and they were helped in this by the threats issued by the Sons and Daughters of Zimbabwe.

Hussain's views were well-known and widely reported, so it cannot be said that he didn't speak out.

Short of resigning on the eve of the World Cup and leaving his team in the lurch, there was nothing more Hussain could have done.

WOTB

Sos I dont see it the same as you,to the strict letter of the law you are right.But being the players were taking a moral stance,they could have refused to play,Hussain new his days were numbered,did it matter if he had spoke out earlier,no!what could they have done to him?

Are the team and fans not still under threat from the Sons and Daughters of Zimbabwe?

If he felt that strong about it,he could have spoken out ICC or not,the team would have backed him.

Yes his views were known.but that is different than standing up and saying so,and he has picked on the softest party the ICC,No one has formally aproached them,and asked them to let them not tour,Neither the ECB,or Mr Blair or Jack Straw.

I am not blaming Nasa,but ICC or not,he could have spoke out earlier.

Ernest

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

Ernest - you're right, of course, that headlines seldom tell the full story, and my "headline" is selective in the context of the full report. It's clear that Hussain is also critical of the ECB.

My personal view - and it is one which I find myself holding with some surprise - is that the only body to emerge with any kind of credit is the British Government. They have no power in this matter, have consistently said so and, much to my surprise, seem to be holding their peace for the moment, which is as it should be. The ball is in the ECB's court now, and I hope they will pick it up and chuck it through the ICC's window in the fairly near future, with a suitable note attached.

Hi OC

It,s a big issue this,and it wont go away,in fact it is only simmering at the moment,your link to the Guardian was good,it told a story,a story of craven cowerdice by the ECB Tim Lamb,has said it all!!!We are going come November,and what have the ECB done about it?as far as I know nothing.

The ICC says they have not been approached by anyone,asking for a dispensation,for England to stop the tour,so if this is true,what has the ICC done wrong in this matter,I know they have been inactive,as per usual,but it is up to the Goverment,or the ECB backed by the government,to approach the ICC.

Sos to disagree,but Mr Blair and his whole government come out the worse in all of this,Mr Blair more than anyone was imploring the England team not to play Zimbabwe in the World Cup.

They are detaching themselves from the issue now it would appear,Why?its not the piddling little amount the ECB would need to compensate Zimbabwe.Thinking has changed,commercial contracts could be damaged,who am I to say.

But Mr Blair or no one from the government have been in touch with the ICC,I heard Jack straw say,it looks like England will have to tour,it could bankrupt them if they dont,what do we take from that,were has all the hysyeria gone from the governments stance.

I think every one from Mr Blair downwards should take head from the threats of The Sons And Daughters os Zimbabwe,they are still there.

[Whips_off_the_bails]

Ernest,

I am not talking about the current crisis over the England tour of Zimbabwe in September.

I am referring to the World Cup.

Hussain and the majority of players let it be known that they had moral objections to playing in Zimbabwe. However, they were told that they were going to go there whether they liked it or not. Until the Sons and Daughters of Zimbabwe issued their threat and allowed the ECB to claim that there was a security risk involved. The ICC then allowed England to cancel that fixture (but England lost three points). There was no need for players to refuse to play as the fixture had already been cancelled. Nevertheless, Hussain let it be known that the majority of his players were angry with the ICC and the ECB and had moral objections to touring. They must have hoped that those organizations would take a much tougher line with Zimbabwe after that.

But what happened after that in fact contributed to the current crisis: ECB Chairman David Morgan flew to Zimbabwe entirely on his own inititative and promised the ZCU that England would tour this year. Meanwhile, Des Wilson's report arguing a moral case for not touring Zimbabwe was issued without prior consultation. It was this kind of dithering and two-faced behaviour that crucially lost England the support of Australia, which then backed the sort of sanctions with which England is being threatened right now.

However, I believe Morgan and Lamb are culpable for not testing the legality of these sanctions in the courts. More than one lawyer has argued that they may be illegal.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Whips_off_the_bails

Ernest,

I am not talking about the current crisis over the England tour of Zimbabwe in September.

I am referring to the World Cup.

Hussain and the majority of players let it be known that they had moral objections to playing in Zimbabwe. However, they were told that they were going to go there whether they liked it or not. Until the Sons and Daughters of Zimbabwe issued their threat and allowed the ECB to claim that there was a security risk involved. The ICC then allowed England to cancel that fixture (but England lost three points).

But what happened after that in fact contributed to the current crisis: ECB Chairman David Morgan flew to Zimbabwe entirely on his own inititative and promised the ZCU that England would tour this year.

However, I believe Morgan and Lamb are culpable for not testing the legality of these sanctions in the courts. More than one lawyer has argued that they may be illegal.

WOTB

I stand corrected for putting the 2 issues together,yes N Hussain did act correctly and proper,during the World cup,and I am sure they would not have played Zimbabwe anyway.
The two issues are connected,you say so yourself,saying the fact that David Morgan,flew to Zimbabwe,be it on his own initutive contributed to the current crisis,it is so easy to widen this issue,litigation as you sugested may have worked on that issue,but litigation takes a lot of time ,appeals,counter appeals and so on.
I agree that if the situation was so bad that it was to dangerous for us to travel to Zimbabwe,we should not have had three points docked,The ICC should have nominated a neuteral venue,then the fixture could have been played,or the one refusing to play docked 3 points.

I stand corrected,but the fact remains,the situation is still ongoing,and everyone seems to be fudging the issue