As Australia face the threat of being called “Two faced”, are the determining factors so high in favour of India that makes it hard to be prejudiced? Does cricket continue to be a divided world despite all the unifying factors that bring cricket lovers together?
Word on the street is - had this been Pakistan where the blasts occurred, Cricket Australia would not have waited for Reg Dickason to assess the security concerns before postponing a scheduled tour. But with India, the story is different. Money is to be had. Nay, plenty of money is to be had and therefore, more thought had to be applied. But really how far can the BCCI allay security fears and how much can Australia and other western countries explain their reason to discriminate against other Asian nations when the threat to life exists almost anywhere in the world?
There is a certain amount of trepidation with western countries touring the Indian subcontinent. It is almost as if ‘if a stomach virus cannot get you, a bomb will’ attitude. (Marcus Trescothick certainly took his time clearing up that it was a bug in his mind rather than the food he consumed in India that made him sick enough to want to fly home even before the tour started.) Even with Pakistan providing presidential security to the touring teams, the fears were far from allayed resulting in the Champions Trophy being deferred and still under reasonable cloud of doubt as regards the same venue the same time next year.
Perhaps it is the political/financial stability that play a role in assuaging those fears. While in India, the threats of a terrorist attack has perceptibly risen, perhaps when compared to its neighbour, Pakistan that has seen a smack of politically designed attacks that have further undermined the credibility of the country. In all fairness, India showed no reservations about going to Pakistan for the Champions Trophy as also, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh before for the Asia Cup which went through peacefully.
It is hard to understand how the life of the common man who loves the sport seems in a more vulnerable than the player he admires. It has to be remembered these spectators throng from far flung places, endure heat and fluctuating weather, endure even worse toilet and drinking facilities, the less said about food arrangements the better and yet continue to also endure the risk of being at the receiving end of an unexpected vicious attack while the players enjoy a fair degree of protection and immunity from the common foibles of life.
But coming back to the point, it would not have been long before India stood in lien awaiting the verdict ( Sri Lanka having already witnessed during the 1996 World Cup) even though London has been on the terror venue agenda for nearly a decade and the incidents of crime in South Africa and bar brawls and unexpected ambush have left touring players far from bemused in countries like Australia. Not all stories are made known and perhaps if every stray incident may have been highlighted (like a few idiotic fans mimicking monkeys only because Andrew Symonds made such a hue and cry about it while in India last year), cricket would see more divided factions than are already visible on the surface.
Cricket cannot only be the domain of a few countries. What is being seen with Pakistan cricket team is plain pathetic. Infighting and mutiny may be a part and parcel of their dressing room but a team that plays no cricket cannot be acceptable for the image of globalizing the game. Zimbabwe is already the example of exactly what happens when nothing is done despite the need to do so and Bangladesh is already showing the fall out. Will Asian nations now have to face this fate because South Africa and Australia see no danger in being in London but feel their fears heightened in Asia? What happens when Asian teams decide on a tit for tat? The policy is not being advocated here. But if Australia decides to go ahead with the tour to India, rather than being seen as playing to a divide and rule policy, it should be seen in the manner of hope that perhaps Asia has more to offer and is not as depicted only in the bodies strewn pictures or the poverty laden streets. Whether the cricket world continues to remain divided in its approach is not even in doubt.
