
England's decision to withdraw from the Champions Trophy in Pakistan at the last moment once again leaves the cricketing fraternity – the fans, the media, the players, the organisers etc. in a state of animated suspense. 'T
o be or not to be' acquires a cricketing relevance as Australia, South Africa and New Zealand remain non committal regarding their participation at the biennial event. While it is easy to get carried away with the racial connotations arising out of this most unpleasant divide between those for and those against – it is hard to rationalize the events leading up to this last minute stalemate.
The ICC in 2006 awarded Pakistan the opportunity to host the event - this in keeping with its rotation policy for the tournament. At that time, Pakistan was no closer to being regarded as the shimmering example of a Utopian state than it is in the present day. If at all, Pakistan seems closer to political stability now - with General Musharraf having stepped down and democracy finding its way back on the contours of Pakistan's chequered history. However these are developments of the very recent past and no soothsayer worth his salt could have laid claim to having predicted the events as they stand today.
The other thing that raises the hackles is if there is so much of a problem with the constant threat of terror - why not adopt a consistent stand on the matter. That England and Australia kept playing in 2005 during the Ashes while the London serial blasts would have them do otherwise, is certainly a mystery that needs to be tackled by the sleuths at Scotland Yard. Surely the Australians can't be culpable of wanting to hold on to the Ashes at any cost then and show utter disregard for the Champions Trophy now - a tournament they've won only for the first time since its inception, in the last edition.
Yes, players' security and their safety are of paramount importance. It is only where the mind is without fear can the head be held high. But why must there be this constant divide between the fair skinned folk and their brethren from the subcontinent on the common threat of terrorism. It must baffle the neutral observer that while players in Australia, England, New Zealand and South Africa are given to openly holding court on not playing cricket wherever terror casts its morbid shadow, there is not so much as a murmur from cricketers in this part of the world when it comes to deciding against a planned tour on the same count. In the former case the cricketing board of the particular country takes its cue from the players and decides on a course of action, while it would be safe to assume that players blindly follow the diktat imposed by their autocratic boards in the latter case.
With the 2007 World Cup in the Caribbean - given its duration and format - proving to be a colossal disaster, it was generally felt that the Champions Trophy in its latest format (the eight highest-ranked ODI teams as placed 6 months out from the tournament) would return one day cricket to its original glory. With England deciding to abstain, the wise thing to do would be to switch to another venue rather than compromise on the quality of the tournament by bringing in Bangladesh – the next best in terms of ranking to round up the eight participating countries. However, the decision to put Sri Lanka on stand-by as an alternate venue defies logic as the Rain Gods over there at this time of the year live up to their reputation of playing party poopers in style. More importantly with the LTTE having gained the ability to strike from air in the recent past it could be more a case of jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.
As always it is the ICC that is singularly responsible for the current melee. It could have easily given Australia the opportunity to host the tournament once their season begins around October - November. For that matter, allowing previous hosts the opportunity to re-host the tournament is a far better option than having it shelved for reasons beyond the standard definition of common sense. Irrespective of what transpires from hereon, the administrators of the game need to take a long hard look at the events of this summer and ensure that the game is purged of such embarrassing hold ups once and for all. Who needs an ICC production of a cricketing soap when we get our own daily primetime dose of the same.
1. I think Australia decided to carry on with Ashes 2005 because they felt that the bombings were a one off incident & they also had greater confidence in the administrative set up to restore order soon, unlike present day Pakistan where evry day brings more bad news.Infact parts of Pakistan, like Peshawar are actually put of control of the local government.I think the real issue is as much of mental peace of mind as much as physical security.Empirical evidence suggests that countries are thinking on the right lines when it comes down to assessing the ground situation.