NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't know how many of you know about the upcoming Cricket tour in Zimbabwe, but I feel this issue goes beyond cricket.

The England Cricket team is obliged to fulfil a contract to tour Zimbabwe, if it backs out it will face a fine that it cannot afford, as well as a suspension. Financial nessesity is forcing it to go. Despite the fact that many cricket fans, ECB members and players expressing concern. However, there is a get out clause, if the Government disallows it to go, it won't be fined. However the Government is sitting on the fence and refuses to ban the tour stating that it a matter for the ECB to decide and a matter that the Government has no right to interfere in.

I'm sure I don't need to point out the causes for concern. Mugabe's Zimbabwe has an apalling human rights record and terrible civil rights and political freedoms which is well known and doesn't need to be reiterated here.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3498558.stm
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cricket/story/0,10069,1205604,00.html
http://sport.independent.co.uk/cricket/story.jsp?story=515958


And please, don't turn this into a thread on why cricket sucks, that is not the topic.

Someone must care.

Who voted yes?

I didn't vote, but they should go. It's a game, play the game, y'know?

It's more than that. Mugabe leads a repressive regime that actively discriminates on colour and political allegiance. Zimbabwe, formely the 'Grainbasket of Africa' and used to be an exporter of food, is now in a state of famine. Due partially to his repressive policies, as well as bad weather. The cricket team will be given 5-star treatment at the expense of the citizens who are starving.

no, and neither should Australia we should send troops instead

I cannot comment for England, that's for the English to decide, but I don't think Australia should go. We banned South Africa for similar offences, what makes Zimbabwe any different? And did you see the lastest score - the racially correct team was bowled out by Sri Lanka for 35 - the lowest score in any international match.

The ICC has ruled that the only way the ECB can avoid fines is if the British Govt. orders them not to go.

I don't like the idea of that power being in the hands of the British Govt.

I guess the issue is - should sport be a moral issue? We all combined and excluded apartheid South Africa, but that requires multilateral action and Mugabe doesn't seem to be enough of a bogeyman.

If the government do not intervene then the ECB should go, the penalties (both financial and diplomatic) for not going would deal a crippling blow to cricket in England. That said I believe the government should intervene and find it astounding that they refuse to do so, the Zimbabe regime is appalling and this labour government seems to be doing very little to address the issue of Zimbabwe generally.

To Keltana - the reason for Zimbabwe fielding such a poor team was not because of racial purity but rather a dispute concerning the Zimbabwe captaincy and the selection panel to name but a few things. It was actually the players who refused to play for the team. That said - 35!!! I only wish I could have seen it.

To heck with Rhodesia. You English should have stayed longer and properly civilized the place. Britannia rules the waves!

What price Morals?

If they had morals then the individual cricketeers should refuse to go.

It would not be disloyal to the country if a cricketeer stated that he would refuse to play for England against Zimbabwe.

And why pass the buck to the government? Take a financial hit, money isn't everything.

The government will stay out because they do not want to be accused of colonial politics. And the world apparently thinks its ok to be a racist if your racism is against whites. I read an article the other day that african leaders, including the South African president and Nelson Mandela applauded Mugabe at some dinner for his "brave stand against former colonial powers!"

These same "colonial powers" that protested to "Free Mandela" and imposed sanctions against South Africa to do so.

:twisted:

Tatenda Taibu is wicket keeping the first 18-20 overs, bowling tight overs in the middle order, captaining at the same time and then batting at #5. He's 20.

Zimbabwe cricket is in a bit of trouble.

"And the world apparently thinks its ok to be a racist if your racism is against whites"

Nng. If you read the Daily Mail you'd be forgiven for assuming that only whites get persecuted in Zimbabwe. It's bollocks, Mugabe is a malevolent tyrant oppressing whole sections of Zimbabwean society.

It disgusts me that the Mail & co find nothing wrong in pressing the UK government to accept white Zimbabweans as political refugees (which is fair in itself) yet condemn them for considering applications from anyone with a darker skin tone. Hypocritical and cowardly racism, pure and simple.

No :!:

And why pass the buck to the government? Take a financial hit, money isn't everything.

If the ICC decides to respond to the ECBs refusing to tour Zimbabwe by preventing them from receiving and touring other nations (as is quite possible) then the kind of money being talked about would completely destroy cricket in England. Besides it isn't passing the buck when the government ought to have taken a clear lead in the first place.

I voted yes. There should be only one reason for not touring a country, and that is if the safety of the team is in danger. It is not the cricket team which has caused the problems for Zimbabwe. It's not the fans (if you don't count Mugabe...) who have caused the problems, so why should they be penalised and not be allowed to see their team play? It's the government. It's the same as why South Africa should have been allowed sporting contact with the rest of the world during the Apartheid years. Sport and politics shouldn't mix.