England risk shut-out from ICC

[four_or_six]

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/england/content/current/story/343215.html

I hate this side of cricket.

 

[Richard]

Something of a lose-lose situation indeed. Ah well, this govornment hasn't got that much left to lose any more, I hope they make the climbdown.

Kinda wish this Twenty20 championship thingy had been held over here last year after all.

 

[four_or_six]

Something of a lose-lose situation indeed. Ah well, this govornment hasn't got that much left to lose any more, I hope they make the climbdown.

Kinda wish this Twenty20 championship thingy had been held over here last year after all.

I don't know what to think really. In a way I think they should stick with it, in a way I don't.

 

[GIMH]

Don't think the government should back down. The whole thing is farcical tbh

 

[TT Boy]

If the Zimbabweans are refused visas then why isn’t Benjani given the same treatment? He still represents Zimbabwe doesn’t he?

 

[GIMH]

Yeah but not when he's playing for citeh

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Don't think the government should back down. The whole thing is farcical tbh

Agreed. England getting banned would show how ridiculous this whole thing is.

"We don't mind gross mismanagement, lacking pay to the players, massive corruption and ousting of a generation of cricketers, but deny a suited representative of said corrupt entity entry to your country...now that's ground for suspension."

 

[silentstriker]

Does England ban diplomats from China? ICC would have no choice to but to move things away from England in that case.



But, the fault here is with the ICC. They should have gotten rid of Zimbabwe a long time ago.

 

[andruid]

The way things have worked out it the only people who woulf have been really hurt by banning Chingoka from the UK, if that s the plan of action is the ICC who would have to organise their little shin-dig elsewhere

 

[Googenheim]

Agree with the point regarding China. The inconsistency prevents England emerging from this with complete credit.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I'd back the government 100% even if it meant losing ICC events. Money isnt everything.

 

[Richard]

Agree with the point regarding China. The inconsistency prevents England emerging from this with complete credit.

It doesn't. Everyone knows there is nothing to be gained from fighting China. To expect someone to do so is plain ignorant.

Anyway, as I said, I see more damage being done to English cricket if Chingoka is refused entry than damage done to Labour if he is admitted. Labour have already let their crown slip, badly, FFS my mum's talking about voting for Cameron in the next election, and perhaps even more remarkably, so am I. Neither of us have ever voted Tory in our lives (admittedly I've only had 1 chance and I voted Lib Dem anyway) and I think that sums-up how bad things have recently been.

I'm completely unaware of the figures, but it sounds like there'd be biiiiiiiiiig problems if this Twenty20 lark was shifted elsewhere.

 

[social]

Ridiculous

ICC needs to grow a back-bone and ........

wait a minute, that'll never happen

20/20 back to SA

 

[silentstriker]

It doesn't. Everyone knows there is nothing to be gained from fighting China. To expect someone to do so is plain ignorant.

And the international isolation is really hurting Mugabe, is it? He is sitting on his fat ass with enough food while the country starves.

The ICC should be ashamed here, but I love how England/India/Australia (and every other country) love to take a high and mighty moral stand against weak countries. If you're going to take a moral stand, I'd completely applaud and respect you if you took it consistently. Expel and ban Chinese diplomats with whats been happening in Tibet, but obviously we all know that will never ever happen. Zimbabwe is weak, so its very easy to show off your moral compass to the world and use them as an example.

In any case, ICC can't do anything because it is forbidden to do anything by its very rules. They need to change the rules to say in case of exceptional internal circumstances, the board reserves the right to permanently strip Test status from a member board. It's unseemly to allow Chingoka to fly around the world talking great things about Zimbabwe cricket while his country's cricket, and the country itself is in shambles.

 

[ret]

for most representatives, it's easier to fly to DBX than to LHR [heahrow] ..... for .e.g. DXB is like 3 hrs from BOM, while LHR is some 8 hrs. similar flying times for others in the sub-continent .... those flying from OZ n NZ would appreciate a meeting in Dubai too, if flying time is a priority .... may be it's the same case for those in Africa

 

[andruid]

for most representatives, it's easier to fly to DBX than to LHR [heahrow] ..... for .e.g. DXB is like 3 hrs from BOM, while LHR is some 8 hrs. similar flying times for others in the sub-continent .... those flying from OZ n NZ would appreciate a meeting in Dubai too, if flying time is a priority .... may be it's the same case for those in Africa

Lots of the cheaper NBI to LHR Packages stop over in Dubai or in Qatar, and I guess the case is the same with JHB.

On another issue strictly speaking absolutely no government has a perfect human rights reccord and I find it rather disgusting how selectively the West uses the idea to protect its own interests. If the ICC doesn't have the balls to deal with ZImbabwe cricket firmly and fairly then why should the British Govt make their problem?

 

[Chubb]

And the international isolation is really hurting Mugabe, is it? He is sitting on his fat ass with enough food while the country starves.

The ICC should be ashamed here, but I love how England/India/Australia (and every other country) love to take a high and mighty moral stand against weak countries. If you're going to take a moral stand, I'd completely applaud and respect you if you took it consistently. Expel and ban Chinese diplomats with whats been happening in Tibet, but obviously we all know that will never ever happen. Zimbabwe is weak, so its very easy to show off your moral compass to the world and use them as an example.

In any case, ICC can't do anything because it is forbidden to do anything by its very rules. They need to change the rules to say in case of exceptional internal circumstances, the board reserves the right to permanently strip Test status from a member board. It's unseemly to allow Chingoka to fly around the world talking great things about Zimbabwe cricket while his country's cricket, and the country itself is in shambles.

There's no such thing as an ethical foreign policy. No country in history has ever attempted to take consistent moral stances about things happening in other nations. What you describe is normal foreign policy practice and it is a dman sight better than the alternatives. Nations take moral stances when they either have something to be gained or are in a position to do what is considered to be the morally right thing without repercussions. Can you imagine what would happen if Britain or any other nation antagonised China too much? there is very little the international community can do about the situation there. It is up to the Chinese to sort it out for themselves. The same is true of the growth of fundamentalist Islam- Muslims must solve the problem themselves. In the case of Zimbabwe, it is clearly possible to take action in order to secure the future of that country. They don't have any WMDs pointed at Jo'burg or at Washington. The army is a joke. They have nothing nations can't get anywhere else. They don't have a billion consumers.

Anyhow I have said before that if anything the British government banning the tour would put the ICC in a tougher position than the ECB. The ICC could not punish the ECB by taking the 2020WC away, for a decision taken by the British government, without causing international uproar. It would be grotesquely unfair on cricket in Britain to do that. I don't think that the governments of the other cricketing nations (leave aside their cricketing bureaucrats) would stand for it. The ICC would become a true international laughing stock (though it is pretty much already), and worse, would be seen to be supportingthe interests of a dictator ahead of those of a democrqacy, and the interests of a corrupt and malfunctioning board over a properly run one. So the British government should ban the tour and force the ICC's hand, make them put up or shut up. That's what I would do if I was in the FCO anyway.

 

[silentstriker]

There's no such thing as an ethical foreign policy. No country in history has ever attempted to take consistent moral stances about things happening in other nations. What you describe is normal foreign policy practice and it is a dman sight better than the alternatives. Nations take moral stances when they either have something to be gained or are in a position to do what is considered to be the morally right thing without repercussions. Can you imagine what would happen if Britain or any other nation antagonised China too much? there is very little the international community can do about the situation there. It is up to the Chinese to sort it out for themselves. The same is true of the growth of fundamentalist Islam- Muslims must solve the problem themselves. In the case of Zimbabwe, it is clearly possible to take action in order to secure the future of that country. They don't have any WMDs pointed at Jo'burg or at Washington. The army is a joke. They have nothing nations can't get anywhere else. They don't have a billion consumers.

Anyhow I have said before that if anything the British government banning the tour would put the ICC in a tougher position than the ECB. The ICC could not punish the ECB by taking the 2020WC away, for a decision taken by the British government, without causing international uproar. It would be grotesquely unfair on cricket in Britain to do that. I don't think that the governments of the other cricketing nations (leave aside their cricketing bureaucrats) would stand for it. The ICC would become a true international laughing stock (though it is pretty much already), and worse, would be seen to be supportingthe interests of a dictator ahead of those of a democrqacy, and the interests of a corrupt and malfunctioning board over a properly run one. So the British government should ban the tour and force the ICC's hand, make them put up or shut up. That's what I would do if I was in the FCO anyway.

I don't disagree that no one has ever taken a consistent stand. That doesn't mean you shouldn't call people out on it.

In any case, I'm certainly not critisizing the ECB. Mugabe is a crackpot and the less everyone has to deal with him the better. And the ICC is a joke, but we all knew that.

 

[social]

Not just about foreign policy

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23404802-5015684,00.html

Mugabe and his cronies are raping the game as well

 

[Richard]

And the international isolation is really hurting Mugabe, is it? He is sitting on his fat ass with enough food while the country starves.

The ICC should be ashamed here, but I love how England/India/Australia (and every other country) love to take a high and mighty moral stand against weak countries. If you're going to take a moral stand, I'd completely applaud and respect you if you took it consistently. Expel and ban Chinese diplomats with whats been happening in Tibet, but obviously we all know that will never ever happen. Zimbabwe is weak, so its very easy to show off your moral compass to the world and use them as an example.

In any case, ICC can't do anything because it is forbidden to do anything by its very rules. They need to change the rules to say in case of exceptional internal circumstances, the board reserves the right to permanently strip Test status from a member board. It's unseemly to allow Chingoka to fly around the world talking great things about Zimbabwe cricket while his country's cricket, and the country itself is in shambles.

There's no such thing as an ethical foreign policy. No country in history has ever attempted to take consistent moral stances about things happening in other nations. What you describe is normal foreign policy practice and it is a dman sight better than the alternatives. Nations take moral stances when they either have something to be gained or are in a position to do what is considered to be the morally right thing without repercussions. Can you imagine what would happen if Britain or any other nation antagonised China too much? there is very little the international community can do about the situation there. It is up to the Chinese to sort it out for themselves. The same is true of the growth of fundamentalist Islam- Muslims must solve the problem themselves. In the case of Zimbabwe, it is clearly possible to take action in order to secure the future of that country. They don't have any WMDs pointed at Jo'burg or at Washington. The army is a joke. They have nothing nations can't get anywhere else. They don't have a billion consumers.

Anyhow I have said before that if anything the British government banning the tour would put the ICC in a tougher position than the ECB. The ICC could not punish the ECB by taking the 2020WC away, for a decision taken by the British government, without causing international uproar. It would be grotesquely unfair on cricket in Britain to do that. I don't think that the governments of the other cricketing nations (leave aside their cricketing bureaucrats) would stand for it. The ICC would become a true international laughing stock (though it is pretty much already), and worse, would be seen to be supportingthe interests of a dictator ahead of those of a democrqacy, and the interests of a corrupt and malfunctioning board over a properly run one. So the British government should ban the tour and force the ICC's hand, make them put up or shut up. That's what I would do if I was in the FCO anyway.

Pretty much was thinking what Chubb wrote TBH.