Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: NZ Say No to Kenya

  1. #1
    International Captain nibbs's Avatar
    Chopper Challenge Champion! Roulette Champion!
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    6,875

    NZ Say No to Kenya

    I just think the decision made by the ICC to allow games in Kenya to go ahead is just stupid. Really, do they know what some Black Cap players have been through in recent times?

    Its just crap, sending a team, which has just witnessed a terrorist attack, into a place where they could possibly witness another one. What happened in Pakistan has left its mark on many players, some that will be on their minds for many years to come.

    The ICC are a bunch of pricks

    :!( :!( :!( :!( :!( :!(
    "Matt Damon"

  2. #2
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    25,599
    had to be said.

  3. #3
    Tim
    Tim is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,888
    While you're choice of words were not the best Muzza, I have to agree that the ICC are not the best organisation currently around.

  4. #4
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,723
    Although I don't agree with the games going ahead, I feel that countries should still honour their agreements, however right or wrong politically that may be.

    This is a sport, not politics!
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.


  5. #5
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    It's going to take a lot for NZ to get into the Super 6 now! I don't think the game should have been played. NZ have had a lot of problems with terrorists lately and they are right not to go.
    "Age is just a stupid number"

    20...that's a rather big number :(:(:(

  6. #6
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,857
    The Kenya issue isn't about politics (the Kenyan leader, Daniel Arup Moi, has finally been removed for office after a non-fixed election - note to Mugabe...), it's about safety and whether the Kiwi players are at any greater risk than anywhere else.

    To be honest, I do not think that NZ are a special case. Yes, there was an attack in Mombasa, but that was aimed at Israel. As far as I remember, Australia and Pakistan managed a tour safely a few months back, and Australia would be a far bigger target (re: toeing the US line on everything) than NZ.

    That said, I can fully understand why the NZ players are reluctant to go.
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  7. #7
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    ICC should allow teams to forfeit matches without forfeiting points, providing they have a good reason. New Zealand (and England for that matter) have a good reason.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."


  8. #8
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,857
    Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
    ICC should allow teams to forfeit matches without forfeiting points, providing they have a good reason. New Zealand (and England for that matter) have a good reason.
    There is this proviso in the rules, if the ICC agree the reason is good enough then the points are shared. However, the ICC don't appear to think that the reason is good enough.

  9. #9
    Tim
    Tim is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,888
    Neil: I don't really think this is about NZ being directly involved, its about the fact that NZ experienced near death..well just last year & its too soon for them to return to an area where there is a reasonable state of alert.

    If the NZ team were to be caught up in another terroist attack, well I think that would spell the end of most of the NZ players careers because they would not trust the ICC, nor the NZ cricket board for putting their lives in danger so soon after Pakistan.

    Kenya may be fine, but if you saw Stephen Fleming on his arrival back from Pakistan last year then you'll know that this team really went through the screws.

    If NZ don't want to go to Kenya well thats their problem, but if anything is to go wrong while Sri Lanka is there then I hope its not a case of "I told you so"

  10. #10
    Tim
    Tim is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,888
    I just heard on the news that NZ still have a few more options of requesting the match to be played in South Africa. Their last resort is the South African Courts.

    This really is a huge blow to NZ's campaign..we're now going to have to beat at least two out of South Africa, Sri Lanka & The West Indies instead of maybe one if we had taken points against Kenya.

    It's frustrating, I sit & think that the players should just get on with it..but then I remember back to when the team returned from Pakistan & to be honest I don't blame them for wanting to stay in South Africa.

  11. #11
    International Debutant
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    2,585
    Things have certainly taken an interesting turn lately & here is my assessment of recent events. This will not be short as I try to walk thru' the scenario - as much for my own understanding as for anyone else's opinion. (Apologies in advance Rik).

    As I understand the situation NZ requested a transfer of venue to SA as a result of further security information received that indicated active terrorist cells in Kenya & a risk scenario involving foreign nationals of other nations. IMO this is then a reasonable request based upon the high profile of the WC as a potential target.

    At this stage let me say that I think there is a very big difference in risk assessment when considering threat potential to tourists, as opposed to any organisation. The tourists may be able to go umolested, whereas the organistaion may not, particularly if they were a respresentaion of that Nation (and of their Govt by extension of name), even if they were the same individual people in both groups!

    While the countries involved in matches in Kenya may not be obvious targets (as opposed to the USA for example), the venue / forum is high profile and an ideal world platform on which to make a statement. The WC has 2 of the most voiciferous supporters of US policy re Iraq etc in England & Australia. Any terrorist wanting to make a statement to the USA & their supporters do not have to hit those 3 targets specifically.

    In regard to the Kenyan situation with the previous targets being US & Israeli, if these 'targets' are removed from the field as a result of their respective Govts warnings, NZ is then possibly elevated in potential target status as the 'next best thing available', yet at the same time the risk assessment of NZ as a specific target remains low.

    It has been suggested in the other thread on this topic that NZ have been 'in the wrong place at the wong time' on the 3 previous occaisions the touring NZ cricket team has witnessed acts of terrorism. IMO this is bunkum as the same can be said of any and every 'civilian' casualty in any armed conflict, be it an act of terrorism or of war - they are called collateral damage and acceptable losses etc.

    More importantly 2 of the 3 attacks took place outside the team's hotel, and in 2 different countries! This to me is not all together random in target selection especially as the majority of victims killed in the most recent attack in Pakistan were foreign nationals - they may not be specifically targeting NZ, but they sure have been conveniently in 'the wrong place at the wrong time'. It could be suggested that NZ has been selected as 'collateral damage' on previous occaisions because no one really has a grudge against them - hence the risk assessment is seen as being negligable and therefore a 'soft' target, whereas the English or Aussies teams would have a higher profile and tighter security net.

    Next there is the question of conflict of interest & trust. Specifically the conflict between the objectives of the organisers and, the trust the NZers have in them not to put their interests above the potential well being of others in downplaying the potential risks. I realise that this is a fairly inflamatory call, and I do not mean to imply that the organisers would deliberately put anyone at risk by ignoring a specific threat.

    What I am implying is as follows:
    * No other cricketing team has been witness to such acts of violence on foreign soil as NZ - regarless of whether it has been a case of 'being in the wrong place at the wrong time' or not;
    * The last attack in Sri Lanka outside the NZ hotel saw NZ comply with the wishes of the ICC & Sri Lanka to remain to complete the tour. The consequences of that action led to the premature end to player's careers and the desintegration of both the national team and national body - NZ cricket was left in turmoil for some years in rebuilding their game;
    * it was pointed out to me in an earlier thread that NZ was basically forced to undertake their recent tour of Pakistan thru pressure brought to bear by India, presumably thru the ICC. NZ undertook the tour against their better judgement and the subsequent attack proved they were right and the others were wrong;
    * As such NZ became pawns to the game of cricket & the powers that be. I doubt that any of the 'major' cricketing nations would have been placed in these situations.
    * As a consequence there must be a certain reluctance by NZ to trust those 'powers' implicitly in this situation.

    It must be the right of any individual or team to be able to make their own decisions regarding their bests interests in any potential situation such as this. At the same time they must be aware of and prepared to accept the potential consequences of their actions, but should not be coerced at either National or International levels into any undertaking they are not in agreement with.

    In this instance I totally agree with the actions of Martin Sneddon and the NZ cricket board for calling it as they see it, an in then having the guts to back it up by taking a stand. I have no idea if this action has been prompted by the players or if the board have acted on their own accord. Regardless of this I applaud their decision and, even if there were to be no subsequent disruptions of any kind due to any attacks, I would wish for them to have the strength of character to do the same again, particularly in regard to the recent Pakistan Tour scenario.

    Finally let me say that I am still disappointed at the lack of action taken at Govt levels re the WC situatiion regarding Zimbabwe & Kenya. I find it distasteful that the respective national cricketing boards have been hung out by their Govts to do their dirty work for them when they (the boards) and the ICC are primarily in a 'no win' situation.



  12. #12
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    7
    Yeah you cant blame the black caps for not going to Kenya after the bomb incident in ****. It was a real life death situation for them. I can remember Flemings story after the bomb went of he walked outside and through the smoke came a man with an arm missing screaming for his life. I bet that would wipe the smirk of Mr Speeds face, Jerk!!!

  13. #13
    PY
    PY is offline
    International Coach PY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Posts
    10,736
    A bit of common sense possibly? would be a nice change
    http://uk.cricinfo.com/link_to_datab...01FEB2003.html
    A True Champion - Bob. Rest in peace. 15/04/06
    "People today have too big a devil and too small a God"

    - Stephen Currie

    "The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?" Psalm 27:1

  14. #14
    Rik
    Rik is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Rik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shropshire, England
    Posts
    8,353
    anzac, I know you like long posts...but yours didn't just take the biscuit...IT TOOK THE SODDING JAR!

  15. #15
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    20
    "This is a sport, not politics!"

    Y'know I'm sick n tired of hearing that line.

    Every Sport has its own form of politics - people in powerful administrative positions can't help themselves when it comes to preserving their backsides and making the next big sponsorship deal.

    Whilst the actual playing field of sport provides the warm n fuzzy amusement for the fans and the outlet for the sportsperson to get their adrenalin rush, the reality is that in the multibillion dollar world of sport, the behind the scenes actions of the Packers and Murdochs of this planet, fighting for TV contracts and major sponsorship deals makes sport a product or commodity to be packaged and sold to an eager public rather than the simple "its just a sport" line.

    The very fact that Packer developed the World Series cricket idea wasn't based on his charity to pay players more dough - it was all about ratings and ownership of a big brand for TV. Murdoch was envious of the monoploy and wanted a bit of the action and so eventually he destroyed Rugby League by creating the Super League mess.

    Politics anyone? - both cases were as political as any porkbarreling pollie at election time.

    The Politics of sport is a subject too long for this forum - You might have a look at Berlin 1936 for starters.

    Don't be suckered into thinking its just a game...there are too many fatcats getting their juicy cut out this and the ICC know full well that boycotted matches means no advertising or gate revenue, no chance to wine & dine in the corporate boxes...it's as simple as that.

    WW :O Open your eyes - you know its true

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •