Doesn’t Misbah ul Haq’s saying, playing India would be great because they are the most improved side and then, adding that playing Sri Lanka will also be very good because they are a strong side, sound a little consolatory? Well, it has be to precisely that.
It certainly beats M.S. Gill’s statement on the lines of ‘can’t have one team committing mass murder in Mumbai while a cricket team goes to Pakistan to make peace. In the kind of atmosphere that has been created by the terror attacks in Mumbai, Sunil Gavaskar was only stating the facts when he said that the tour appeared unlikely given the mood and trend of the days following 26/11.
There is little doubt that cricket comes alive when there is an India versus Pakistan scenario. The Ashes have their own place in history but India versus Pakistan was supposed to be the flag bearer of the game. However, with the political turmoil creating so much friction, there is little way of ensuring that the game is run exclusive of what is happening all around.
It is alright to say sports should not mix with politics and in an ideal world, it should not. But when life is not played out in exclusivity, sensitivity to players’ concerns (and those of their families) is paramount which is why the England team could not be forced to comply with the tour. That they decided to keep their commitment is another matter.
Sensitivity is not only about the players but also, about the paying public. Pakistan were doing themselves no good when they threatened to give the ICL players dues recognition (which they are worthy of anyway) if India decided not to tour. Now threatening to tear all ties with India will only make it worse because Pakistan are already suffering from negative public image which has meant that no team has accorded the cricket team due respect. Their team image has sunk, their players have gone without an iota of feeling like an international team without a single Test and their own internal problems threaten to gobble them up.
Is it any wonder that the most anyone concerned with Pakistan cricket has watched is that of the ICL team, the Lahore Badshahs? Certainly they are presenting a contrast uncanny even as the national team is struggling to feed their starved fans back home and their political chaos have not been able to convince India to even consider conducting the tour at a neutral venue.
Statements from Imran Khan that terror cannot hit cricketers has been proven to be a falsified statement. Javed Miandad’s links to the underworld don, Dawood Ibrahim, via his son’s marriage to the don’s daughter has also caused considerable concern that for Miandad to be connected with India puts India in a difficult position to carry on the tour knowing well that India’s security was compromised from within Pakistan and yet they need to carry on as if nothing happened.
Cutting ties would mean destruction on more than one level. Pakistan has already been isolated enough that their cricket team is languishing without play and alienating India would also mean an extensive loss of revenue. In terms of the sub continent, the Indian sub continent simply cannot have a more divided world. Already the perception about the west in the sub continent and of the sub continent in the west have cost quite a few issues. In a two way world, further disintegration will only do the teams and the game more harm. Not only would it ruin the revenue possibility raised between contests between these two teams that attract world wide attention, it would also effectively once again set the cricket fan’s focus back on the Ashes and similar bilateral contests and yet deprive him of perhaps the most riveting one of the last decade.
Can cricket live in exclusivity when the possibility that Pakistan and India never play each other looms?
Inzy Against Cutting Ties Borne out of Cricket
Fraternal Relations Taking Their Toll
Pakistani Patriotism– Boycott ICL and IPL
Butt Expresses Danger of Parallel Cricket Worlds
Canceling a Tour - an Indian Perspective
He looks very happy, why?
