Zimbabwe Suspension situation (BCCI to support ZC)

SciD

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Online Cricket Games Owned
Tell that to Mugabe. You don't seem to understand that every match they play, the Zimbabwean government makes more money to kill people with, and to screw up the country. If this is all the world can do to stem their supply of dirty money, then it's at least a start.

:rtfl I never knew cricket was funding terrorists.
 

smssia0112

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
:rtfl I never knew cricket was funding terrorists.
It's not much of a laughing matter, but a suppressed (by Ray Mali) audit conducted by KPMG revealed that the ZC money was going to their government. This is why Malcolm Speed was stood down as CEO of the ICC, because he wanted to take action against the ZC.
 

spartie

School Cricketer
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
ZC, like any national team, is a symbol that the government is stable and prosperous. The only way to keep politics out of cricket is to dissolve national teams all together and have regional ICC XIs or clubs touring the world.
ZC has suffered horribly from meddling by Mugabe and his goons, and they've lost test status because of it. Zim will drop to associate status of its own accord. Ousting ZC as a grand political statement hurts the future of the sport in Zim and plays into Mugabe's rhetoric of being punished for his anti-imperialism. Zimbabwe should be downgraded to associate status, rather than being expelled, because the squad has been dissected for political ends and the quality of the cricket has suffered horribly.
 

pal

International Coach
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Online Cricket Games Owned
ZC money was going to their government.
If we're so concerned about money going to rogue governments, why aren't we boycotting the China Olympics, where you have a country that is not only repressive of human rights in its domestic policy, but is also oppressing another country?

Spartie makes a valid point. A sensible approach would be to downgrade ZC's status. Money would be a negligible factor in that case and you're not punishing Zimbabwe's cricket players excessively for things out of their control.
 

SciD

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Online Cricket Games Owned
Dhoni will be making more money than Zim players combined. ;)
 

Sureshot

Executive member
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Location
England
Online Cricket Games Owned
If we're so concerned about money going to rogue governments, why aren't we boycotting the China Olympics, where you have a country that is not only repressive of human rights in its domestic policy, but is also oppressing another country?

Spartie makes a valid point. A sensible approach would be to downgrade ZC's status. Money would be a negligible factor in that case and you're not punishing Zimbabwe's cricket players excessively for things out of their control.

Many people are boycotting the Olympics, including me. Reason why countries aren't boycotting it (as far as I know), is due to the power China has, regarding trade agreements, etc.
 

spartie

School Cricketer
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
Many people are boycotting the Olympics, including me. Reason why countries aren't boycotting it (as far as I know), is due to the power China has, regarding trade agreements, etc.

that, and olympic boycotts have historically accomplished nothing, save for allowing the larger participants to dominate almost all the events. It just gives strong participating countries (ie: China) less competition and a higher medal count. What changed after the 1976 boycott? 1980? 1984? A whole lot of political posturing and a whole lot more nothing. Sport as an element of political isolation, ie: South Africa's ban from international competition, is a long and slow process of the international community staying committed to destroying the reputation and legitimacy of a repressive/dangerous regime. That is the only kind of sporting boycott that has proven to be in any way effective.
 

smssia0112

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
If we're so concerned about money going to rogue governments, why aren't we boycotting the China Olympics, where you have a country that is not only repressive of human rights in its domestic policy, but is also oppressing another country?

Spartie makes a valid point. A sensible approach would be to downgrade ZC's status. Money would be a negligible factor in that case and you're not punishing Zimbabwe's cricket players excessively for things out of their control.
I never said I didn't want Australia to, I'd be delighted if we did, but China is nowhere near in the strife that Zimbabwe is in, and whilst I am against the Chinese government as well, I know that the country will never boycott the Olympics. I, on the other hand, will be paying the same attention to it as I do every time - very little.

spartie said:
Sport as an element of political isolation, ie: South Africa's ban from international competition, is a long and slow process of the international community staying committed to destroying the reputation and legitimacy of a repressive/dangerous regime. That is the only kind of sporting boycott that has proven to be in any way effective.
Which is what we want to do here, isolate Zimbabwe. If countries refuse to get involved, they should stop supporting them too by handing them money through sport.
 

usy

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 2, 2005
Online Cricket Games Owned
How does not giving a visa help?

If Britain care so much, why don’t they take any strict action, or are tied to America, and can’t do nothing without their “permission”. If they not want to take any action, fair enough, let Zimbabwe play.
 

Sureshot

Executive member
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Location
England
Online Cricket Games Owned
We are taking quite strict action. There is a difference between that, and an action of "force".

It helps in not giving him a visa because he supports terrorism. Bush said, "You support a terrorist, you are a terrorist". Ignoring how funny it was watching him try to say that, he is dead right.
 

usy

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 2, 2005
Online Cricket Games Owned
If bush said that then why is the British government with American Gov (not the people). ANyways, it just shows how weak people are from there hearts.
 

Sureshot

Executive member
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Location
England
Online Cricket Games Owned
You're missing a word in your first sentence. It makes no sense to me.
 

usy

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 2, 2005
Online Cricket Games Owned
Don’t be all confused , I’m make it simple, Bush administration are some kind of terrorists, and Britain government supports them. Nobody cares, or whatever.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top