*Official* The Zimbabwe Situation

[Bazza]

ZImbabwe is not a particularly dangerous place to visit. Security has been guaranteed and there is no reason to suspect anything should happen to any player from any team for visiting there in the world cup. Birmingham on the other hand has many issues with crime, including a very high profile one over the holiday period you may remember?

 

[PY]

Players have said they have severe doubts about the security on the trip....................obviously it has to be left to them but surely the ICC should finally get its thumb out of its ass and move the game.
And ive been to Birmingham quite a few times and it aint that bad, deffo not even comparable to Zimb(which granted i havent been to but have watched many a documetary/news when bored). Birmingham City Council has a hugely better human rights record than Mr Mugabe.

 

[Bazza]

We weren't talking about human rights, we were talking about how dangerous it is.

 

[Sulphate]

Sulphate

to say that birmingham is more a more dangerous place than zimbabwe is bizarre to say the least. all statistics show that crime rates are extreamly high in zimbabwe and gun crime inparticulary is very bad. now just because there was a few shootings in birmingham it doesnt mean it is as dangerous as zimbawbwe. the uk is behind france and italy in terms of gun crime rates while zimbawbwe is ahead of south africa. add to this the fact that the mugabe regime and its attempts to destroy any opposition in zimbawe, including any tourist that step out of line, then zimbabwe is not a safe place to visit. id feel a hell of a lot safer in iraq anyway

 

[Willow Whacker]

Al Qaeda Cup Link Article

This just in from Brisbane.


Al-Qaeda cup link
By Robert Craddock
February 3, 2003

AUSTRALIA's concern over playing in Zimbabwe during the World Cup intensified yesterday when veteran South African batsman Gary Kirsten said he would have refused to tour there.


South African opener Gary Kirsten would not play in Zimbabwe. AFP picture.

Kirsten's concern followed a report yesterday from Washington which claimed a US government report had revealed a plan by an al-Qaeda linked group of militant extremists to attack US targets in Zimbabwe if war was declared on Iraq.

The report said other attacks would take place in Pakistan, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey, South Africa and Israel.

Kirsten, 35, who is close to retirement, will be spared a clash with South Africa's World Cup squad management because the Proteas do not play any games in Zimbabwe or Kenya, which have both been branded high security risks.

But, at a charity function in Cape Town, he firmly expressed his view that the country was unsafe to tour.

"Politics should be left to the politicians so I won't buy into that side of the argument," said Kirsten. "But I would not play in Zimbabwe ... there is a security issue."

Australia's players are scheduled to meet this week with Australian Cricketers Association chief executive Tim May and Australian Cricket Board chief executive James Sutherland to further discuss whether they play their February 24 tour match against Zimbabwe in Bulawayo.

The ACB, whose security experts have said Zimbabwe is safe to tour, is adamant the match should go ahead though Sutherland has said if there are any genuine fears for the players' safety the board will change its mind.

Though reluctant to speak out publicly it is believed several senior players have reservations about making the tour but will do so if the board wants them to.

Australia, to their slight embarrassment, have never played Zimbabwe in a Test series despite a one-off Test in Harare in 1999 and are keen to help the nation's battling cricket structure stay on its feet.

Australia are scheduled to be in Bulawayo from February 21-25 though tournament officials have raised the possibility of a commando-style entry to the country from Johannesburg on the morning of the match, and a return flight out after the game to reduce the chance of a security risk.

Other options are to arrive the day before the game and leave the day after.

Australian captain Ricky Ponting said the issue was exclusively one of player safety and the moral issue of Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe would not come into their thoughts.

The ACB believes security in Zimbabwe will be so tight it may actually be safer to play there than in South Africa.

The Zimbabwe Cricket Union has posted a 24-hour guard around the wicket square in Bulawayo following threats by anti-government activists to dig it up.

The ICC confirmed yesterday there was no insurance cover should any of the six matches in Zimbabwe be ruined by political disturbances.

The ICC approached Lloyd's of London in July, 2000, but they would only offer compensation for inclement weather.

New Zealand will be forced to pay the ICC around $2million in compensation if, as expected, they forfeit their match against Kenya in Kenya and Australia would face a similar fee if they withdraw from Bulawayo.

Meanwhile, the English Cricketers Association is angry at being denied access to the Kroll Report which the ICC used as the basis of Thursday's decision to go ahead with the Cup matches in Zimbabwe.

The Courier-Mail


It won't go away and I can't see them playing at all for the security reason alone. I guess the moral positions will be debated forever at another time.

WW

 

[Neil Pickup]

Let's be very careful where we tread here.. bringing Al-Qaeda into a cricket discussion is the first step on a very slippery slope.

If you want to discuss this kind of thing, OTF is there but we will keep it on a very tight leash.

 

[Cloete]

i am going to get an earful for this, may-b rightly so,(not that u can say u're more right than me!) but it's wat i believe. I feel the ICC are a bunch of hypocrites. They can give Darren Lehmann a 5 match ban for racist remarks yet stil allow the greatest tournament in cricket to be played in a place like Zimbabwe!!! This is way out of line. To ban a player for saying things (yeah he shouldn't have said 'em) yet allow matches from cricket's greatest tourney to be played in a place that is run by a person KILLING ppl because they are white!!!!!! this is sheer hypocrity! i can't believe they could allow this. not to mention the safety issues involved. the ICC are a complete bunch of hypocrytical fools. this is just my opinion.

 

[Rik]

Yeah I sorta agree with Andrew here on the Zimbabwe issue. I mean would you want to play cricket in a country where the national captain's father is stuck in jail as he refused to stop farming and hand over his land? This is the reason why people are starving, not the money from cricket matches, but Mugabe giving the farms to the native Zimbabweans who don't have much of a clue about the modern farming methods used today. Also there is a big chance that there will be opposition demonstrations at the grounds and since the Police are controlled by Mugabe I doubt they will hold back. The sight of 2 cricket teams playing whilst policemen are beating demonstraters because they are against the one man who is single-handedly destroying Zimbabwe and it's economy is something I don't think I could stand to watch.

 

[Cloete]

That is sooo damn true!!! :wow:

 

[warrioryohannan]

Pakistan has recently played a test and oneday series in Zimb without any trouble.India,Pak,Holland and Namibia have no problem in playing in Zimb, they will infact go there and will play the matches in peace and i'm sure there won't be any trouble atall.

Those that have problem in playing over there should just boycott the matches, lose points and lose money (and in England's case they might lose an opportunity to reach the supersix).

On the political front, i think there are some evil rulers in the world who are just dying to go to war and in doing so will kill thousands of innocent middle eastern men.I think this world is full of murderers and hippocrates:!(

 

[Rik]

I would rather see World Peace than England win the World Cup though. Cricket is just a game, World Peace is everyone's dream.

 

[Ringua]

Though i appreciate what you had to say but what has cricket World Cup to do with World peace???

Unfortunately world peace is not possible as Uncle sam and his clonies are bent on staging war (not even respecting their own people's wishes)

 

[Rik]

Though i appreciate what you had to say but what has cricket World Cup to do with World peace???

Unfortunately world peace is not possible as Uncle sam and his clonies are bent on staging war (not even respecting their own people's wishes)

Well just look what Zimbabwe have done, they have refused to play any re-arranged games played in South Africa. That makes me feel there is something going on here, some reason they need the games played in Zimbabwe, and that reason I feel is Mugabe.

 

[aussie_beater]

Well just look what Zimbabwe have done, they have refused to play any re-arranged games played in South Africa. That makes me feel there is something going on here, some reason they need the games played in Zimbabwe, and that reason I feel is Mugabe.

One reason for that could be because they want the money that will legitimately come to the Zim board as compensation paid by the teams not playing in Zim. I am not sure what the situation would be in that regard, if the matches were played elsewhere as the teams involved would tell ICC that as long as the matches were played why would they empty their coffers to compensate anybody and the ball would be in ICC's court to pony up the money from their own pockets if at all.

 

[Tim]

Well the World Cup really has hit rock-bottom now.

But IMO its only Mugabe who is to blame. If he thinks he can run a regime like he is & expect other countries to happily play cricket in his backyard well he can think again.

And now the Zimbabwe Cricket Board come along all high & mighty & declare that they oppose common sense.
Now there is a conflict as to who goes where, IMO Zimbabwe should lose the points because its unlikely that they'd even get passed the Super Six let alone the prelims.

 

[aussie_beater]

IMO Zimbabwe should lose the points because its unlikely that they'd even get passed the Super Six let alone the prelims.

Why should Zim lose the points ? If anybody should lose points at all, its the teams who refuse to play a scheduled match and surely not the other way round.

 

[warrioryohannan]

Well just look what Zimbabwe have done, they have refused to play any re-arranged games played in South Africa. That makes me feel there is something going on here, some reason they need the games played in Zimbabwe, and that reason I feel is Mugabe.

The reason is not Mugabe, there are two reasons, one has been pointed out by A_B earlier while the other one is that Zimbabwe won't like to lose home advantage by playing their matches in SA.

Also India had made it very clear that they would strongly oppose any move to re-arranage England's/Aussies's matches with Zimbabwe in SA, this is because (apart from other reasons) it would be unfair that India would have to take on Zimbabwe in Zimbabwe with Zimbabwe having home advantage while the Aus/Eng would have the luxury of facing Zimbabwe on a neutral venue!

 

[warrioryohannan]

And now the Zimbabwe Cricket Board come along all high & mighty & declare that they oppose common sense.
Now there is a conflict as to who goes where, IMO Zimbabwe should lose the points because its unlikely that they'd even get passed the Super Six let alone the prelims.

The only team that will and should (if they do boycott the matches) lose points are Eng & Aus.

However if the law and order situation in Zimb deteriotes and ICC rescedule the matches to SA and Zimbabwe Cricket authority refuse to play in SA in the changed scenario, only then Zimbabwe can be penalized!

The best way out for England is to follow the Australian plan, they should just think of spending half day in Zimb, and as soon as the match is over England cricketers should fly off to SA.

 

[marc71178]

One reason for that could be because they want the money that will legitimately come to the Zim board as compensation paid by the teams not playing in Zim. I am not sure what the situation would be in that regard, if the matches were played elsewhere as the teams involved would tell ICC that as long as the matches were played why would they empty their coffers to compensate anybody and the ball would be in ICC's court to pony up the money from their own pockets if at all.

I feel if the matches aren't played in Zim, then the ICC should stump up some, and the competing nations some as well.

Interesting isn't it how the 2 most recent World Cup's split across more than one country have had these sorts of problems?

Heaven help us for WC07!

 

[marc71178]

The reason is not Mugabe, there are two reasons, one has been pointed out by A_B earlier while the other one is that Zimbabwe won't like to lose home advantage by playing their matches in SA.

I don't think home advantage is a real problem - IMO the Tournament should always be all played in one country - the ICC try to spread it, and look what happens!