The ICC Threaten England Yet Again Over Zimbabwe!!

[Ernest]

Carrying on from gregs thread: Zimbabwe tour 2009.

The ICC once again are meddling into the affairs of the UK state, and English cricket.

Originally Posted by BBC

England's plans to host the 2009 World Twenty20 could be under threat if the British government stops Zimbabwe cricketers from touring the country.

I think England have to draw the line here and place two fingers in the face of the ICC, who interviened in the UKs internal affairs not that many years ago, placing England cricket players in danger of their lives - and that not overstating what happened.

Originally Posted by Downing Street/according to the BBC

Downing Street has confirmed talks are planned over whether to ban Zimbabwe from England next year,[...] with a spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown saying:[...] "We'll need to discuss this nearer the time.

With an ECB with no backbone, and Gordon looking after the UK, a backdown from England is probably on the cards IMO.
This is if the rumour of a boycott is true, which it probably is - who needs to host the World 20/20 cup anyway?, it's not that big a deal considering what goes on in Zimbabwe - well that's my opinion.
LINK: BBC SPORT | Cricket | England | England warned over Zimbabwe tour

[Ninjaman]

Originally Posted by Ernest

The ICC once again are meddling into the affairs of the UK state, and English cricket.

Where is the evidence of meddling in internal affairs?

The ECB bid for the 2009 20/20 World Cup and has obligations to fulfill. They are just stating that if you ban Zimbabwe from visiting (British govenment's choice) then you're not abiding by those obligations so they'll probably move the competition somewhere else.

I think England have to draw the line here and place two fingers in the face of the ICC, who interviened in the UKs internal affairs not that many years ago, placing England cricket players in danger of their lives - and that not overstating what happened.

The Sons and Daughters of Zimbabwe sent a letter to the ECB threatening England.

They had never been heard of before or since. Probably because they don't exist and are a false flag operation.

South African intelligence has already declared they do not exist and the letters were "propaganda and not a direct threat".

Or were you worried by the other group "Organised Resistance" who were so clandestine that they managed to get into England's hotel on the tour of Australia and slip threatening letters under the players' doors. Yet no one could see who do it? Maybe these guys were in Kingston, Jamaica in March 2007?

The ICC have never and can never force anyone to go anywhere they don't want to or stop any government from barring anyobne they wish.

That is up to each team or nation and its government.

The penalties for not playing a WC game are forfeiture of points and there are penalties for not fulfilling tour obligations. The ECB agreed to them as an ICC member.

Bad bad ICC.

[Occasional Fan]

I'm with Ninj on this. And it's not new news either - the ICC had made this statement some time ago (I mentioned it in the original thread). The ICC is not attempting to fetter the UK's discretion to bar the Zimbabweans from touring, so it's not interfering in a sovereign decision as I see it. It has made it clear that ICC events have to be open to all and, if the ECB is legally prevented from opening the Twenty20 event to ZC, it is not qualified as a host according to ICC rules. Basically, ICC is saying that the UK can do what it wants to do according to its law and the ICC will do what it wants to do according to its rules. It's completely fair, and there is no penalty involved.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman

The penalties for not playing a WC game are forfeiture of points[..] and there are penalties for not fulfilling tour obligations][...] The ECB agreed to them as an ICC member.

And are you saying Ninjaman that events can't change obligations?, and forget whether the "Sons and daughters of Zimbabwe" exist or not, that was NOT known at the time - the ICC had no regard for the safety of the England cricket players.
I would argue that the thread (or the percieved threat of danger) should have been enough to give England a dispensation, rather that heaping on the pressure with financial threats.