When a Fixture Isn't a Fixture
- maehara
- Administrator
- Posts: 3986
- Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:27 pm
- Supports: Mashonaland Eagles
- Location: Ireland
- Contact:
When a Fixture Isn't a Fixture
So the wrangling over the next England v Zimbabwe series has begun. To be honest, I can see both sides of the argument on this one. It's not fair on the Zimbabwean side to use them as political pawns (which both ZC and the British Govt would do, given the chance) - especially as banning the team isn't going to make that slightest difference to Cde Mugabe. The players are just trying to earn a living in a country where that isn't exactly east. Unless there are some big changes to the political situation in Zim in the near future, though, I'm inclined to say ZC should just take the money...
- brmtaylor.com admin
- Administrator
- Posts: 7924
- Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: When a Fixture Isn't a Fixture
I can see both sides to the argument as well, but I'm more inclined towards saying the series should go ahead.
To satisfy both parties, a neutral venue should be selected. If it is a Test series, Sharjah or Dubai would be fair as both teams would not be used to the setting. South Africa is also an option, but Zimbabwe would have an advantage (which might be a good thing actually).
To satisfy both parties, a neutral venue should be selected. If it is a Test series, Sharjah or Dubai would be fair as both teams would not be used to the setting. South Africa is also an option, but Zimbabwe would have an advantage (which might be a good thing actually).
- maehara
- Administrator
- Posts: 3986
- Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:27 pm
- Supports: Mashonaland Eagles
- Location: Ireland
- Contact:
Re: When a Fixture Isn't a Fixture
Neutral venue was suggested for the cancelled Australia series as well - Cricket SA publicly said they'd be happy to host it - but again ZC were insistent on their right to host. We all know what happened next. (Although it's funny how it was okay for Australia Academy to visit, but not the national side...)
ECB are trying to tread a delicate diplomatic line, so I do feel sorry for them. But I also get very annoyed when people try to use sport for political reasons without actually thinking it through. Perhaps by 2009 the issue will be moot - but I wouldn't bet on it...
ECB are trying to tread a delicate diplomatic line, so I do feel sorry for them. But I also get very annoyed when people try to use sport for political reasons without actually thinking it through. Perhaps by 2009 the issue will be moot - but I wouldn't bet on it...
- maehara
- Administrator
- Posts: 3986
- Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:27 pm
- Supports: Mashonaland Eagles
- Location: Ireland
- Contact:
Re: When a Fixture Isn't a Fixture
Security's always just an excuse - there's nowhere on the current cricket circuit that isn't safe, given a little guidance from the people who live there and an ounce of common sense. I note that the WICB president(?) has made comments about how well their side has been looked after while in Zim, which ought to knock any other "security" excuses on the head.Kopje wrote:West Indies just toured Zim and left without a scratch or a security threat, i don't see why England, Aussie and New Zealand can't tour. As long as you stay out of trouble and politics, your stay in Zim is guranteed to be peaceful.
It's politics that are the real problem, and that's not so easily fixed...
Re: When a Fixture Isn't a Fixture
Neutral venues UAE Zimbabwe vs Afghanistan what happenedbrmtaylor.com admin wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2007 3:40 pmI can see both sides to the argument as well, but I'm more inclined towards saying the series should go ahead.
To satisfy both parties, a neutral venue should be selected. If it is a Test series, Sharjah or Dubai would be fair as both teams would not be used to the setting. South Africa is also an option, but Zimbabwe would have an advantage (which might be a good thing actually).