Accepting neutral venue dangerous precedent
I must confess to be baffled by the reluctance of the West Indies to tour Pakistan
Omar Kureishi
09-Jan-2002
I must confess to be baffled by the reluctance of the West
Indies to tour Pakistan. First the situation in Afghanistan
was cited and now the tension between India and Pakistan.
The West Indies do not seem to be unduly impressed by the
fact that England went ahead with its tour of India and are
now returning to India to play the one-day series.
The idea that the series should be played at a neutral venue
should be acceptable only if it is agreed that, if and when,
Pakistan is required to play the West Indies again, that
series too would be played at a neutral venue. I think the
Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) has been most patient with the
West Indies. I think the PCB should have reported the matter
to the ICC and simply told the West Indies to go fly a kite.
The West Indies Cricket Board betrays a lack of common
sense. As I wrote last week, if there was the slightest
danger, Pakistan itself would have called off the tour.
Security concerns about players is a patently bogus excuse
for getting out of a tour. If there is danger to the life
and limb of members of a visiting team, there is the same
danger to members of the home team. Is it the West Indian
position that we care less about the safety of our players?
Accepting to play the series at a neutral venue is setting a
dangerous precedent. I see the possibility, as a credible
scenario, of vested interests like television companies,
throwing their oar in and a series going to a neutral venue
which is the highest bidder.
The irony is that the West Indies rate among the weakest
teams in international cricket. They bear no resemblance to
the West Indies of yesteryears. I would have thought that
they would have been grateful that anybody would be prepared
to play against them.
Australia whitewashed South Africa and about this a little
later. It is the events preceding the last Test match at
Sydney that merit comment. The South African team for this
Test match was changed by the UCB and Justin Ontong was
included. This was done because the representation of the
coloured players was deemed to be inadequate.
This created a storm and several former South African Test
players including Clive Rice, Fanny de Villiers and Pat
Symcox weighed in against the United Cricket Board (UCB).
In theory, the best team should be selected to play for the
country irrespective of race, colour or creed. But South
Africa is not a normal case. We must not forget that with
its apartheid history, leave alone play South African
blacks, the blacks had to watch cricket from segregated
stands. There was not a squeak out of those white players
who now boldly criticise the UCB.
Moreover, it was not, as if, Justin Ontong was a duffer. He
looked a pretty good player and in both the innings, he was
on the receiving end of leg-before umpiring decisions that
were dicey. But that is neither here nor there. But I think
that the UCB should clarify its selection policy so that a
tour selection committee including the captain are in no
doubt about what the policy is. But the 'white' South
Africans must realise that the apartheid mindset or psyche
is still very much there and simply by encouraging cricket
in the townships is not enough.
The blacks have to be brought into the main stream and when
there are two players of comparable merit, one white and the
other black, the black should be given the preference. The
blacks have a lot of catching up to do. But this little bit
of, off the field drama had no bearing on the performance of
the South African team. The series had been lost by the time
the drama enfolded. The South Africans need to do some
serious re-thinking.
The batting did come good in the second innings but it was
the veteran Gary Kirsten who scored a magnificent hundred
and Kirsten will probably call it a day after the World Cup
next year and there is no replacement in sight. There is
also no replacement in sight for Allan Donald who looks to
be over the hill. But the main weakness is that South Africa
does not have a quality spinner. Perhaps, the wickets at
home do not encourage spin bowling but spin is back and to
be a quality Test team, one has to have a top class spinner.
Shane Warne has had much to do with Australia being the
world's best team. He, not only, gets wickets but his
presence on the field acts as a tonic for the others. He is
now making runs regularly and is taking some great catches
in the slips. But what was most disappointing was the
fielding of the South Africans, not only by their own high
standards, but by the standards of Test cricket. It was not
skill that was missing but there seemed to be a lack of
concentration. In the past, the South Africans gave the
impression that they enjoyed fielding. Not so, in this
series. Shaun Pollock's own bowling form is taking its toll
on his captaincy and he led the South Africans without
imagination, almost, as if, his heart was not in the job.
Pakistan is in Bangladesh but quite frankly there isn't too
much interest in the tour but, perhaps, once the tour begins
seriously, people will start getting excited about it. On
paper, it appears to be an one-sided series but cricket is
not played on paper.
In any event, the tour will be a big boost for Bangladesh
cricket as well as a chance for some young Pakistan players
to stake a permanent place in the side. In any event,
Pakistan will be playing before a full house and that
creates its own atmosphere.