ICC bias against non-whites?

[R W S]

There's a problem here. The 'chip on the shoulder' mentality has been used to exagerate any real or perceived hardship suffered for too long and is an unconstructive stance. For every 'poor' decsion you can find a counterposing one (e.g. Ganguly overturns ban). To look for a racial or geographical bias when wise eyes will look at the processes and systems in place.

Time for Everyone to put Cricket's interests first and personal agends a distant second.

[Shaka]

I don't think it's a chip on the shoulder to ask why Hall and Shoaib are getting different punishments for identical offences. Maybe Asif Iqbal's tone is a bit strong but he does have a point. The processes and systems are in place, now we just need consistency in applying them across the board.

[R W S]

Originally Posted by Shaka

I don't think it's a chip on the shoulder to ask why Hall and Shoaib are getting different punishments for identical offences. Maybe Asif Iqbal's tone is a bit strong but he does have a point. The processes and systems are in place, now we just need consistency in applying them across the board.

You are quite right to query why one individual has a different punishment from another for the same offence. Perhaps more details are required to ascertain why Clive Lloyd took a different course on A Hall than was taken with S Akhtar.

What I do question is coming to the conclusion that there is a racial or geographical bias in the decision making process. No such conclusion can be drawn and to look for one promotes the question why? What point is Mr Iqbal trying to make? And if you agree that he has one . . . .

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by R W S

To look for a racial or geographical bias when wise eyes will look at the processes and systems in place.

Wise words RWS, but there will always be instances where the systems and processes will not be implemented effectively, or fairly, by the officials concerned, and in those cases, it is hard to get away from perceptions of bias, since we are all human and cricket does have a long and sometimes shameful past.

The more rules, procedures and processes that are put in place to remove human biases, or perceptions thereof, the better, and ICC has made the right moves in this regard over the past five years. The proposed move of the ICC HQ from N-W London to Dubai will be another excellent move; much easier to allege 'colonial/imperial' bias when the ICC is based at Lord's and shares offices with that bastion of Imperialism, the MCC. Much harder to allege bias, when the ICC is across the pond from the sub-continent. Whatever removes or diminishes the perceptions of bias is a good thing, since perceptions are notoriously hard to manage.

[R W S]

The physical relocation of the ICC away from it's London base is indeed no bad thing. And the move to a 'neutral' country where no full member has proximity to interfere is, if not inspired, at least shrewd. Perhaps in other ways too.

The case in point ~SA & AH ~ does seem to highlight a lack of quality - and I understand that there are currently, seemingly inadequate, processes in place within the ICC to ensure consistency. I await future disclosures on the reasons behind the different punishements with interest.

... it is hard to get away from perceptions of bias ...

It is harder still if you go around looking for them.