Savak
World Star
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2006
- Runs
- 51,047
- Post of the Week
- 3
England have failed to repay debt they owe to Pakistan
Michael Atherton
Chief Cricket Correspondent
Tuesday September 21 2021, 12.00pm BST, The Times
English cricket, the governing body and players, had a chance to do the right thing this week. They had a chance to repay a debt, uphold their honour and side with a cricketing nation that has undergone the kind of challenges others cannot even begin to contemplate. Instead, citing a mealy-mouthed statement, they did the wrong thing.
What England did was pull out of a commitment to fulfil a mini-tour to Pakistan — two T20s as far as the men are concerned, a four-day trip in all — before a full tour next year. New Zealand had pulled out of their tour a few days earlier, citing a specific security threat, and Pakistan had feared the domino effect that was likely to result. Their fears were well grounded; our low expectations of England’s response were duly met.
What they were calling the big season in Pakistan — with visits from New Zealand, England, West Indies and Australia, the most high-profile season since international cricket returned there three years ago — is in tatters. Australia’s reputation for doing the right thing is as low as England’s, so it would be a surprise if they front up eventually as well. Pakistan will be facing a financial hammer blow.
It was clear from the ECB’s statement that security concerns were not the principal reason for the cancellation of the tour. The Times understands there has been no change to the general advice given, at government level or by the ECB’s security consultants, in the wake of the specific threat that caused New Zealand to cancel their tour. It would surely have been front and centre of any press release had there been so. Should the security advice have changed the ECB should have stated so, without going into detail, unequivocally.
Instead, player welfare was cited as the main reason. Player welfare is an important issue, especially so with Covid, and the implication is that the wariness of travelling to Pakistan after New Zealand’s withdrawal would exacerbate those concerns. The players were spooked. Player welfare in this regard does not wash: while many players have spent long periods in Covid-restricted environments, there are many within the English game who have not, and who could have been asked to tour if others were unavailable.
It was incumbent upon the ECB to try to put out a team, any team, once the security arrangements were deemed satisfactory. When Covid struck in the summer, the ECB were happy to play Pakistan with a second/third team. Why not now? If then, having committed to tour, it was apparent that the selectors (by the way, where are they when you need them?) could not find 14 players willing to travel, then that, too, should have been stated clearly. If there was a block refusal based on advice from the Professional Cricketers’ Association, this should be stated unequivocally.
If security advice is the reason for the cancellation, that would be totally understandable, but to cite Covid fatigue, effectively, is to have a short memory of what touring teams, not least Pakistan, went through in England last summer at the height of the pandemic, so helping to save the professional game from financial catastrophe. At the time of Pakistan’s arrival last year, Covid death rates in this country were the third highest in the world, more than 150 times the rate in Pakistan. Still Pakistan came, keeping who knows how many professional cricketers and support staff in their jobs.
The sense of anger and betrayal in Pakistan is real and understandable. Ramiz Raja, the new chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board, is a former cricketer rather than an administrator and therefore talks a player’s language. He has been refreshingly blunt and has talked of learning a harsh lesson where England are concerned. Already the board there is making contingency plans around England’s planned tour next year. They do not expect England to travel, despite the commitment, and have lost any trust and faith in them. It is hard to blame them.
Citing player welfare is strange when the ECB have essentially washed their hands of their players’ travel and cricketing commitments for three months of the year. If, as an employer, they are so wary of bubble and cricket fatigue, surely they should take more interest in the players’ availability for the Indian Premier League? Now, of course, those who are playing in the tournament will be available for the knockout stages. It suits India and England, but not Pakistan, who have no direct stake, their players being still barred from the competition.
This decision is worse than England’s withdrawal from South Africa last winter and India’s cancellation of the Manchester Test this month. While both those actions were hard to justify, they were at least understandable given Covid had come into close proximity to both teams.
Last year, writing a column about the remarkable act of generosity shown by West Indies and Pakistan in coming to England at the height of the pandemic, I asked: “It is a hypothetical question, and impossible to know the answer, but would England be so swift to help if the situation were reversed?” I went on: “If West Indies and Pakistan do travel this summer, their generosity should not be forgotten.”
The game’s governing body in this country has short memories, although it is likely that others will not forget this moment so easily. And, of course, we know the answer to the hypothetical question now. We probably knew it all along.
Link: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...a?shareToken=24319ff93c8ffa943014f6c7cf268528
Michael Atherton
Chief Cricket Correspondent
Tuesday September 21 2021, 12.00pm BST, The Times
English cricket, the governing body and players, had a chance to do the right thing this week. They had a chance to repay a debt, uphold their honour and side with a cricketing nation that has undergone the kind of challenges others cannot even begin to contemplate. Instead, citing a mealy-mouthed statement, they did the wrong thing.
What England did was pull out of a commitment to fulfil a mini-tour to Pakistan — two T20s as far as the men are concerned, a four-day trip in all — before a full tour next year. New Zealand had pulled out of their tour a few days earlier, citing a specific security threat, and Pakistan had feared the domino effect that was likely to result. Their fears were well grounded; our low expectations of England’s response were duly met.
What they were calling the big season in Pakistan — with visits from New Zealand, England, West Indies and Australia, the most high-profile season since international cricket returned there three years ago — is in tatters. Australia’s reputation for doing the right thing is as low as England’s, so it would be a surprise if they front up eventually as well. Pakistan will be facing a financial hammer blow.
It was clear from the ECB’s statement that security concerns were not the principal reason for the cancellation of the tour. The Times understands there has been no change to the general advice given, at government level or by the ECB’s security consultants, in the wake of the specific threat that caused New Zealand to cancel their tour. It would surely have been front and centre of any press release had there been so. Should the security advice have changed the ECB should have stated so, without going into detail, unequivocally.
Instead, player welfare was cited as the main reason. Player welfare is an important issue, especially so with Covid, and the implication is that the wariness of travelling to Pakistan after New Zealand’s withdrawal would exacerbate those concerns. The players were spooked. Player welfare in this regard does not wash: while many players have spent long periods in Covid-restricted environments, there are many within the English game who have not, and who could have been asked to tour if others were unavailable.
It was incumbent upon the ECB to try to put out a team, any team, once the security arrangements were deemed satisfactory. When Covid struck in the summer, the ECB were happy to play Pakistan with a second/third team. Why not now? If then, having committed to tour, it was apparent that the selectors (by the way, where are they when you need them?) could not find 14 players willing to travel, then that, too, should have been stated clearly. If there was a block refusal based on advice from the Professional Cricketers’ Association, this should be stated unequivocally.
If security advice is the reason for the cancellation, that would be totally understandable, but to cite Covid fatigue, effectively, is to have a short memory of what touring teams, not least Pakistan, went through in England last summer at the height of the pandemic, so helping to save the professional game from financial catastrophe. At the time of Pakistan’s arrival last year, Covid death rates in this country were the third highest in the world, more than 150 times the rate in Pakistan. Still Pakistan came, keeping who knows how many professional cricketers and support staff in their jobs.
The sense of anger and betrayal in Pakistan is real and understandable. Ramiz Raja, the new chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board, is a former cricketer rather than an administrator and therefore talks a player’s language. He has been refreshingly blunt and has talked of learning a harsh lesson where England are concerned. Already the board there is making contingency plans around England’s planned tour next year. They do not expect England to travel, despite the commitment, and have lost any trust and faith in them. It is hard to blame them.
Citing player welfare is strange when the ECB have essentially washed their hands of their players’ travel and cricketing commitments for three months of the year. If, as an employer, they are so wary of bubble and cricket fatigue, surely they should take more interest in the players’ availability for the Indian Premier League? Now, of course, those who are playing in the tournament will be available for the knockout stages. It suits India and England, but not Pakistan, who have no direct stake, their players being still barred from the competition.
This decision is worse than England’s withdrawal from South Africa last winter and India’s cancellation of the Manchester Test this month. While both those actions were hard to justify, they were at least understandable given Covid had come into close proximity to both teams.
Last year, writing a column about the remarkable act of generosity shown by West Indies and Pakistan in coming to England at the height of the pandemic, I asked: “It is a hypothetical question, and impossible to know the answer, but would England be so swift to help if the situation were reversed?” I went on: “If West Indies and Pakistan do travel this summer, their generosity should not be forgotten.”
The game’s governing body in this country has short memories, although it is likely that others will not forget this moment so easily. And, of course, we know the answer to the hypothetical question now. We probably knew it all along.
Link: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...a?shareToken=24319ff93c8ffa943014f6c7cf268528
