Zimbabwe's Future?

[Richard]

Given that all Pnottath's points on this issue are related to "the British can't be taken seriously where the Zimbabwe situation is concerned because they're only exhibiting colonialism" we can safely dismiss it all as nonsense.

The situation in Zimbabwe is infinitely worse, and has been for years, than the situation in either Pakistan or Sri Lanka (or most other places, for that matter). Get a clue on the situation before coming-out with this claptrap.

 

[07alfie]

Cricketing disgrace if Zimbabwe are allowed to play

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2008/07/02/sczimb102.xml
Why is there even a debate about whether Zimbabwe should play?

When our own culture minster is dead agaisnt it, how can any other even slightly liberal minded countries disagree. We have made our position as a country abunduntly clear and i think we should be incredibly disillusioned with our cricket community, if they think at all otherwise.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2008/07/02/sczimb202.xml

 

[Richard]

Merge?

 

[biased indian]

The situation in Zimbabwe is infinitely worse, and has been for years, than the situation in either Pakistan or Sri Lanka (or most other places, for that matter). Get a clue on the situation before coming-out with this claptrap.

so your are the correct person to say it ..when did you visit the three countries mentioned here ????

 

[Blamire]

Don't they have too much support from the subcontinent to be thrown out? IIRC India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka all support them. They need 7 out of ten votes to expel them, and there's 4 against the exclusion, the subcontinent and Zimbabwe themselves.

 

[Richard]

so your are the correct person to say it ..when did you visit the three countries mentioned here ????

I didn't, nor did I need to. I've listened to people who have done - which is evidently more than some people have.

 

[TT Boy]

so your are the correct person to say it ..when did you visit the three countries mentioned here ????

There was a discussion on the wireless a couple of nights ago about Zimbabwe and the presenter brought up other countries in Africa where the situation was far graver than in Zimbabwe (Somalia and the Congo were the examples) and a caller phoned disputing that argument saying "but those countries are not shown on the news”.

 

[TT Boy]

Given that all Pnottath's points on this issue are related to "the British can't be taken seriously where the Zimbabwe situation is concerned because they're only exhibiting colonialism" we can safely dismiss it all as nonsense.

The situation in Zimbabwe is infinitely worse, and has been for years, than the situation in either Pakistan or Sri Lanka (or most other places, for that matter). Get a clue on the situation before coming-out with this claptrap.

Haha, really? Shows how much attention I've been paying to sub-Saharan African politics in recent years.

Is it "Congo" again now then?

?

 

[Richard]

Yeah, where did I make any comment on Zimbabwe in relation to other African nations? That link you've attempted to draw is non-existant.

 

[TT Boy]

You suggest the situation in Zimbabwe is far worse than Pakistan and Sri Lanka but you just previously conceded that you haven’t paid any attention to sub-Saharan politics in years. Zimbabwe is apart of sub-Saharan Africa so you must have been paying some attention to sub-Saharan 'politics' to form such an opinion, correct?

 

[open365]

TT boy, are you saying that Sri Lanka and Pakistan should be revoked of their test status then?

I'm pretty sure you're not, so I'm assuming you're arguing that Zimbabwe should play test cricket.

In that case, why an earth do you want them to play international cricket? They are clearly a terrible terrible side who add nothing at all to the game.

Unless of course, you are just arguing against them are being banned for political reasons, despite the fact you agree with everyone else that they shouldn't play international cricket, in which case, it's a rather pointless argument.

 

[LA ICE-E]

TT boy, are you saying that Sri Lanka and Pakistan should be revoked of their test status then?

I'm pretty sure you're not, so I'm assuming you're arguing that Zimbabwe should play test cricket.

In that case, why an earth do you want them to play international cricket? They are clearly a terrible terrible side who add nothing at all to the game.

Unless of course, you are just arguing against them are being banned for political reasons, despite the fact you agree with everyone else that they shouldn't play international cricket, in which case, it's a rather pointless argument.

no it's a pretty valid point. they aren't up to the standards which is why they are to be banned but not for what is happening politically in that country otherwise it would set a dangerous precedent.

 

[TT Boy]

TT boy, are you saying that Sri Lanka and Pakistan should be revoked of their test status then?

I'm pretty sure you're not, so I'm assuming you're arguing that Zimbabwe should play test cricket.

In that case, why an earth do you want them to play international cricket? They are clearly a terrible terrible side who add nothing at all to the game.

Unless of course, you are just arguing against them are being banned for political reasons, despite the fact you agree with everyone else that they shouldn't play international cricket, in which case, it's a rather pointless argument.

Zimbabwe should not be banned for political reasons for its opening a big can of worms, the cricketing rationale is fair argument which can be contended but to me what they should be held accountable for and subsequently shown the door for is ‘misusing’ ICC funds. The Zimbabwean cricket board has not caused hyper-inflation or indeed caused people to starve within Zimbabwe but what they have done is pocketed millions of $ which they shouldn’t have.

 

[social]

no it's a pretty valid point. they aren't up to the standards which is why they are to be banned but not for what is happening politically in that country otherwise it would set a dangerous precedent.

That's the latest bs excuse - it's ALL about the political situation

 

[Langeveldt]

It was Olonga and Flower who tried to bring politics into world cup. And they had to pay the price for it. Sorry but the ICC World Cup is not the place to show your political viewpoints. Jus play the damn game and get off.

Haha, hideous start by Pnottath.. Playing the colonial oppertunism card and singing the praises of the BCCI.. I wish i could introduce you some of my black friends who have been intimidated by ZANU-PF youths, so much so that they can't even sleep in the same house every night.. Mugabe kills all who do not conform, black, white, Asian.. It matters not..

I don't even support the ban of ZC cricket, but there has been some absolute carnage posted on this thread.. Quite unlike this forum to have such poor opinion..

 

[LA ICE-E]

That's the latest bs excuse - it's ALL about the political situation

no the politics are effecting the cricket which is why something should be done. It may be all about politics but that for the other governments/ political organizations to deal with not the ICC. The ICC doesn't need to make political statements.

 

[Goughy]

TT Boy has a point. Im not going to go into whether a country like Pakistan deserves to be banned from cricket.

If the criteria was purely a country in crisis then it should be. It ranks 12th worst in the Failed States Index (out of nearly 200 countries) which measures the 12 political, economic, military, and social indicators of instability (Zimbabwe is 4th).

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3865&page=7

However, Zimbabwe combines the collapse of a country with the obvious politicization and corruption of its cricket board, the use of racial selection and intimidation through financial and physical means.

Its the complete failure of the cricket board within the failed country that requires its suspension. If the board was strong and fair then Id advocate continuing to play them.

Pakistan doesnt deserve to be banned but that is because Zim is being judged on a different criteria

 

[Precambrian]

Given that all Pnottath's points on this issue are related to "the British can't be taken seriously where the Zimbabwe situation is concerned because they're only exhibiting colonialism" we can safely dismiss it all as nonsense.

The situation in Zimbabwe is infinitely worse, and has been for years, than the situation in either Pakistan or Sri Lanka (or most other places, for that matter). Get a clue on the situation before coming-out with this claptrap.

Actually your simplification of all my arguments into jus being whining at british colonialism shows your ability to assimilate different viewpoints from yours.

SHEESH! AFTER ALL IT'S JUS A GAME!

 

[silentstriker]

Decision will be tomorrow.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/359368.html

 

[silentstriker]

TT Boy has a point. Im not going to go into whether a country like Pakistan deserves to be banned from cricket.

If the criteria was purely a messed up country then it should be. It ranks 12th worst in the Failed States Index (out of nearly 200 countries) which measures the 12 political, economic, military, and social indicators of instability (Zimbabwe is 4th).

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3865&page=7

However, Zimbabwe combines the collapse of a country with the obvious politicization and corruption of its cricket board, the use of racial selection and intimidation through financial and physical means.

Its the complete failure of the cricket board within the failed country that requires its suspension. If the board was strong and fair then Id advocate continuing to play them.

Pakistan doesnt deserve to be banned but that is because Zim is being judged on a different criteria

Very interesting. All the Asian countries, and Zimbabwe, are on the 'alert' level, except India, which is at 'Warning', along with the West Indies. England and South Africa are 'moderate', while only Australia and New Zealand are 'sustainable'.
http://www.fundforpeace.org/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=229&Itemid=366