Politics and Cricket: Separate or not?

[Zainub]

In an attempt to bring this back to topic, I'd like to share this:

Originally Posted by Steve Price in Harare, Roving Reporter for Cricket Info

It does not do to take the comparison with apartheid South Africa too far. Sport played its part in toppling apartheid, even though it took more than 20 years of boycotts to achieve its objective. No amount of sporting boycotts would have any significant effect on the Mugabe regime. A refusal by England to tour would have been a totally futile gesture politically.

Obviously won't comment my self, since I have pleged not to say anything controversial agains on this subject on this forum, just trying to bring this back to topic and innitiate a discussion. Hope this satisfies you Beny.

[Beny]

Yay! I was starting to wonder if I was reading the thread title wrong.

[Maranello]

I appreciate that we non-English people have a gagging order placed on us on the Zimbabwe issue, so I will not comment on that.

In general, politics and sports do mix, have mixed since time immemorial and will continue to do so. And it is not necessarily a bad thing either. If politics and sports did not mix, the US and other Western nations would happily have participated in the Moscow Olympics of 1980 when the Soviets were massacring tens of thousands of Afghans. If politics and sports did not mix, England, Australia and New Zealand would happily toured SA whilst Mandela was in jail and the worst oppressions of the apartheid regime were in progress, eg the Soweto killings. Hence politics and sport definitely mix, and a jolly good thing too. Politics impacts every sphere of human endeavour, and its naive and even unrealistic to believe otherwise.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Sport and politics- they dont mix, except in some occaisions when they do and others when they dont and they should. Sometimes they mix and its good they do mix but otherwise they shouldnt. I think.

Watched Peter Hain on ITV sunday lunchtime and we both showed remarkable degrees of restraint. He barely manged to say anything accurate and I barely managed not to throw my telly out the window.

[Maranello]

LOL. Was he talking about Zimbabwe? I did not see Dimbleby on Sunday, felt Hain was a bit too much over one's Sunday lunch.

With his background in SA political issues, one would expect him to show some empathy and sense.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Yes he was. Apparantly, and this made my laugh out loud, if the government had instructed the ECB, the ICC/ZCU would have sued the britsih government. Utter bollocks. He convientently missed the fact that both india and pakistan refused to play each other and werent fined.

He also thought it was down to the individual players to back down. No pressure then.

[Oliver]

Aaaaagh!

Obviously I can't say what I'd like to about Peter Hain.

Suffice to say I ran him out once... he attempted a suicidal single to a poor fielder (at mid wicket) who barely had a throwing arm and I still managed to return the ball before he got home.

It was a twenty over midweek thrash about sixteen years ago.

In the pub it was discussed at length... we lost by eight wickets I think. The perceived wisdom was that I shouldn't've run him out because he was scoring so slowly.

Anyway, as Richie says, sometimes there is politics in sport and sometimes there isn't.

There is extremely little politics in Association Football because Sepp Blatter is VERY interested in money.
If he was to allow FIFA matches to halt anywhere there would be slightly less money flooding into his coffers.

I have found it interesting, of late, that Israel is now in Europe and not in Asia. But big deal, sometime in the last twenty years Australia was in Europe... it must have been because they had an entry in the Eurovision Song Contest!

There is lots of politics in cricket because it is run within the confines of Britain's old imperial boundaries... as with most World games, this one was allegedly invented by the British and once we were quite good at it, and if ever there was a greater bargaining chip for goading the British - threatening to ban them from one of the games they created... well it's not quite like banning the Americans from playing baseball, but nearly.

Let's face it, you wouldn't bother bringing politics to bear on the World Pelota Association (if there is one) or the World Petanque Association or the World Polo Association (water or field) or croquet or swimming or gridiron or ice-skating etc, etc, etc.,

Basically because the games aren't A) big enough B) not remunerative enough or C) not widespread enough & D) not popular enough.

It is possible that A & B and C & D are the same thing... but the difficulty with A & B is Association Football, which IS the world game. You can't use it as a bargaining chip, though it is noticeable that warring countries do not take part in qualifying tournaments. And the apartheid blockade still applied. Still Blatter gave South Africa the World Cup finals as a consolation.

Cricket and Rugby Union are the two sports that lie exactly in the right category. Games for gentlemen.
(Though it has to be said that Rugby Union was once described as "a game for hooligans, played by gentlemen."
Apparently Association Football is "a game for gentlemen, played by hooligans.")

Cricket and Rugby Union have spread similarly partially across parts of the world - interestingly not the same parts - and they are similarly funded, and similarly run by bunches "of old farts."

Perhaps it is because England aren't too far from the top of the tree in these "World" sports that both have been used for political point scoring.

Cricket seems to be prevalent in places where politics are "difficult" - for want of a better word. Rugby, not so these days. It is interesting (to me) that the Taliban, during and after Bush's biggest attempt to wipe out Bin Laden, were quoted as saying: "We like cricket."

So even when total democracy returns to the cricket playing states of all of Africa, the chances are that by then Afghanistan will be an ICC or Test match second division country.

English captains will be trying to avoid shaking hands with President Bin Laden IIIrd of Afghanistan in the one day series that immediately precedes the Pakistan tour and cricket will be the political tool again.

[Maranello]

Interesting comments Oliver. My rejoinder:

1. The US and other Western nations did not participate in the Moscow Olympics of 1980 when the Soviets were massacring tens of thousands of Afghans - so sport does impact more than just cricket or rugby, and its not just an Anglo-centric thing.

2. The whole process of awarding Olympics is driven by politics (though money plays its parts), and politics meant that China did not stage the 2000 games, and politics dictates that China does host the 2008 Olympiad.

2. Not only Israel but Azerbaijan also participates in European football competitions. Me thinks UEFA needs a map.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

You would have gladed my heart Oliver if you said you tried to run him out, got it wrong and the ball smashed into the side of his head. Mind you, 16 years ago he was no doubt a respected campaigner against Sa so an all round good egg. Amzing what 7 years of governemnt can do to a chap.

I suppose the Zim farce is proof that we still carry weight in the world becasue with the exception of stuart mcgill nobody gave two tosses when austrailia went there or when SL went there. In fact when ANYBODY else goes there (with the possible exception of NZ) nobody else will give a toss. Will the ECB or our government be having a go at other countries if they go? Of course not. Will the Zim opposition ? Pretty unlikley.

Sport and very specific politics can mix when it suits people.

[Maranello]

With respect RBLC, the only people who give a toss about England going are the Zimbabweans themselves, due to their historic links with the UK. The rest of the cricketing world, inlcuding Australia, NZL, India and Pakistan, does not really care at all that England are going, and is only irritated that EWCB have made such a meal of it. Sure, everyone here disagrees strongly with that sentiment, but I am only relaying how the world views us, so don't shoot the messensger... please