Championless Trophy? - stop the bs and go

[Dasa]

Finding Matt79's post pretty insulting myself tbh.

If they are logical reasons and its on advice by security experts, why do they go to Sri Lanka? You sure its not something else thats stopping people from going to Pakistan?

Exactly.

 

[Aamir Alauddin]

Talking about killing my own people and dialogs ! How many years of dialogs were needed for Bugti ?
I mean I heard a Mazari saying that he can live with a pig but can't live with a Punjabi . I mean if it's a matter which needs dialogs then I guess we are wasting our time. I never saw racism or stupidity in my native village or city in Punjab and Can you guarantee my life if I'll visit Wana or Bugti land in Baluchistan ?
You know why India has lesser family based BS ? Because ! they nationalized lands instead of industries in early 70's and the landlord leaders in Pakistan destroyed the whole industry by nationalizing it !!!!!
Peco factory is just an example but they really were on top of every other relative company and before nationalization they were working well where workers were putting more hours and they were well groomed and they were not involved in just drinking and sleeping and after nationalization there were just paan spits every where and there was no work there .
Whatever Musharraf is doing is just safer and I feel comfortable with that and I hate drama queens who are just destroying Pakistan and that's it . Finish them and that's it . Pests have no right to live .......

Dear Fraz, if you are frustrated by someones comments then don't propagate it like that. One person can't represent the whole nation. I am a Punjabi and living in NWFP these days, the area really under fire. But the local people who are Pathans have given me the status of a guest and treat me much better than their own families. What would you call it? Never degrade your country because of a few people. We are the best as far as hospitality is concerned.

 

[Fusion]

This isn't personally directed at you alone Dasa, but I think its dishonest and condescending - what's worse in a dishonest way - that everytime someone points out that Pakistan or similar is a hazardous environment on this board they get told they don't know what they're talking about and accused of being scaredy cat headless chickens. Frankly I trust the Australian government a hell of a lot more than anyone who posts on these boards or the opinion of the Pakistan government - and people can be offended by that, but its the hard truth in my view. People can throw accusations of political or even cultural bias if they want to, that doesn't make themselves right. I don't really care about the outcome of this issue, but I find the tone that lots of posters here adopt re this issue insulting and in some cases telling of their own ignorance.

I think, for the most part, that people advocating Pakistan's side on this have been very civil and presented a logical argument. Sure there are one or two flame baiters, but that's on the other side as well. Regarding your last statement, frankly your overall tone on this matter can also be considered insulting and condencending.

 

[godofcricket]

Talking about killing my own people and dialogs ! How many years of dialogs were needed for Bugti ?
I mean I heard a Mazari saying that he can live with a pig but can't live with a Punjabi . I mean if it's a matter which needs dialogs then I guess we are wasting our time. I never saw racism or stupidity in my native village or city in Punjab and Can you guarantee my life if I'll visit Wana or Bugti land in Baluchistan ?
You know why India has lesser family based BS ? Because ! they nationalized lands instead of industries in early 70's and the landlord leaders in Pakistan destroyed the whole industry by nationalizing it !!!!!
Peco factory is just an example but they really were on top of every other relative company and before nationalization they were working well where workers were putting more hours and they were well groomed and they were not involved in just drinking and sleeping and after nationalization there were just paan spits every where and there was no work there. Whatever Musharraf is doing is just safer and I feel comfortable with that and I hate drama queens who are just destroying Pakistan and that's it . Finish them and that's it . Pests have no right to live .......

The examples your giving me i can't really argue on each basis since it would mean i probably need to write a whole story to tell you the exact details and thats not the write place anyway i think. Lets just talk on what we really wana argue about. The Waziristan issue. Let me just tell you again that who ever tried to capture or gain control of that area has never ever succeeded, the mughals, the sikhs (Hari Singh got killed), alexander the great, the british rule for 80 years (remember the british were at that time a super power like the US is today) if you didnt know most british soliders killed in those 80 year rule were in waziristan and they constantly struggled to gain control because these pashtun people got united if they had a common enemy (the british were at that time and now its the pakistani army).

According to reports there "might" be around 2000 Al-qaeda people in that area out of the 10,00000 people living there, now tell me one thing, do you think attacking that area with F-16's, helicopter gunship is a good idea? Its probably the most idiotic thing you can possibily do. Now if you agree with musharraf then you better visit that place or see a documentry on the people living there, it is creating an outrage amoungst people and they are ALL turning against the army, like they always do if a common enemy tried to attack them. Does this in any way remind you of the east pakistan issue? Just to kill bloody 2000 of these alqaeda people would you bomb the place? Have u got any sort of idea how many civilians have been killed, how many people have been made homeless? Your words "just finish them of" is soo absurd (being very nice with you here).

Now the thing about insurgents. India has 14 insurgencies, 700000 soliders are deployed in kashmir and not once have they bombed the place the way pakistan is doing in waziristan. The only "problem" with the people in waziristan is that they dont want to be ghulams of anyone. Dont forget the Azad kashmir we have today its only becuase of these pashtuns people. I can go on and on if you still wana argue on this, will keep providing with facts and figures.

 

[FRAZ]

The examples your giving me i can't really argue on each basis since it would mean i probably need to write a whole story to tell you the exact details and thats not the write place anyway i think. Lets just talk on what we really wana argue about. The Waziristan issue. Let me just tell you again that who ever tried to capture or gain control of that area has never ever succeeded, the mughals, the sikhs (Hari Singh got killed), alexander the great, the british rule for 80 years (remember the british were at that time a super power like the US is today) if you didnt know most british soliders killed in those 80 year rule were in waziristan and they constantly struggled to gain control because these pashtun people got united if they had a common enemy (the british were at that time and now its the pakistani army).

According to reports there "might" be around 2000 Al-qaeda people in that area out of the 10,00000 people living there, now tell me one thing, do you think attacking that area with F-16's, helicopter gunship is a good idea? Its probably the most idiotic thing you can possibily do. Now if you agree with musharraf then you better visit that place or see a documentry on the people living there, it is creating an outrage amoungst people and they are ALL turning against the army, like they always do if a common enemy tried to attack them. Does this in any way remind you of the east pakistan issue? Just to kill bloody 2000 of these alqaeda people would you bomb the place? Have u got any sort of idea how many civilians have been killed, how many people have been made homeless? Your words "just finish them of" is soo absurd (being very nice with you here).

Now the thing about insurgents. India has 14 insurgencies, 700000 soliders are deployed in kashmir and not once have they bombed the place the way pakistan is doing in waziristan. The only "problem" with the people in waziristan is that they dont want to be ghulams of anyone. Dont forget the Azad kashmir we have today its only becuase of these pashtuns people. I can go on and on if you still wana argue on this, will keep providing with facts and figures.

I am not stupid enough to declare killings of every one living there . I am thinking positively because I am thinking for Pakistan actually a united Pakistan . The examples from the way past are not applicable now FULL STOP Now an isolated North American land is stronger than any other country . My forefathers were the only ones fighting British and never surrendered like others and actually they did rule Punjab for a brief time before that time of 1857 .And they never got the Nawab status and political positions for their 30 coming generations and you know why? I know when I am speaking then it definitely means that I am speaking in the favor of the country without any BS and bias. History is different that this and that country went there and this and that really happened . First of all there was nothing there to go and conquer . You think the British of that time wanted to go there for sheep ? The British were defeated because the British wanted the Mid Asia route and they failed in conquering Afghanistan because of the bravery of the local Afghans initially but British were so involved in India that they just couldn't afford to just go again and again and invade another kingdom (although pretty small) . So the past examples totally don't apply here on this issue . Well you know when a fugitive can come in my house ? (a) He is holding me on a gun point (b) I am helping the fugitive to hide ... What do you think is your answer ? So find a dirty dozen and give them to the authorities or if you love them against the wishes of governement then fight with them .
So you think I was wrong when I said that illegal trade happens in this area for decades ? you think I am wrong when I say that there is illegal gun trade going on there ? So you think that convicts go and take a refuge in that area ? You know what ! I think that it's only a 0.1 % of the population there which is actually harassing the common progressive minded and strong and truly religious people living in that area and those 0.1 % should be found and dealt with along with a fraction of local helpers (eventually who are drug smugglers too ) ...

 

[FRAZ]

Dear Fraz, if you are frustrated by someones comments then don't propagate it like that. One person can't represent the whole nation. I am a Punjabi and living in NWFP these days, the area really under fire. But the local people who are Pathans have given me the status of a guest and treat me much better than their own families. What would you call it? Never degrade your country because of a few people. We are the best as far as hospitality is concerned.

We are off track and being emotional here ? I never claimed that or said that .

 

[Top_Cat]

If they are logical reasons and its on advice by security experts, why do they go to Sri Lanka? You sure its not something else thats stopping people from going to Pakistan?

Such as? Seriously, why would the Aussies be so reticent to tour India but not Pakistan if the threat level is the same in certain parts? I know someone such as yourself would be well above idle speculation and whose reasons would be based pretty firmly in reality.

 

[silentstriker]

Such as? Seriously, why would the Aussies be so reticent to tour India but not Pakistan if the threat level is the same in certain parts?

Sri Lanka too. Overall threat in Sri Lanka is same as Pakistan, according to the Australian Government. If they are simply taking advice of the government, they would flat out not go there, right?

I know someone such as yourself would be well above idle speculation and whose reasons would be based pretty firmly in reality.

I am not Australian, nor have I been to Australia, so I can't tell you for sure. If its anything like the US, it's probably a mix of islamophobia, ignorance about the region, negative media portrayals, etc.

 

[Top_Cat]

Sri Lanka too. Overall threat in Sri Lanka is same as Pakistan, according to the Australian Government. If they are simply taking advice of the government, they would flat out not go there, right?

Hard to say. Perhaps there's other compelling info that isn't on the DFAT website. The rating system plus associated info is hardly comprehensive. A comprehensive assessment wouldn't just include the current state of affairs, for example, but some predictions and that might be the determining factor. I wouldn't be taking it as anything other than a fairly superficial guide.

I am not Australian, nor have I been to Australia, so I can't tell you for sure. If its anything like the US, it's probably a mix of islamophobia, ignorance about the region, negative media portrayals, etc.

Certainly you hear more in the news here about violence in Pakistan than in SL or India. It's a media hotspot but surely, not without reason. The media here has little to gain by warning people off Pakistan like the US is doing with Iran. It's not as if we're about to attack the place......

Media here works differently too. We don't have anywhere near the same amount of punditry as on Fox, CNN, etc. Here, Australian news outlets are more likely to omit news rather than whip something up for a cause (I don't know what's worse, really).

 

[Matt79]

Finding Matt79's post pretty insulting myself tbh.

I think, for the most part, that people advocating Pakistan's side on this have been very civil and presented a logical argument. Sure there are one or two flame baiters, but that's on the other side as well. Regarding your last statement, frankly your overall tone on this matter can also be considered insulting and condencending.

Well, sorry if you guys found that rude, but I also find the repeated assertions that players who are concerned about going to Pakistan, or Sri Lanka for that matter, are either cowards or biased against the country in question, or simply idiots who are brainwashed by right-wing media propaganda to be unfair and also quite rude. You, and others, might not agree with their point of view, but I'm finding refusal to acknowledge it might be a point of view they've arrived at from reasonable, albeit probably not expert, level of knowledge of the situation quite churlish.

And if truth be told, and you both, along with SS, are two of the more eloquent and reasonable posters who have been arguing for the "they should go" argument, I'm not the only one to have adopted a less than polite tone through this...

Personally I reckon it's fine to criticise the players if they don't want to go, they most likely are ignorant and the 'security people' (as SS has implied, having knowledge of the industry himself) can hardly be relied upon to provide the full story.

Your above point is completely ludicrous.

And I'm ignoring the Aamir Alauddin's and yes, the Sideshowtim's of the board in making that point.

 

[godofcricket]

I am not stupid enough to declare killings of every one living there . I am thinking positively because I am thinking for Pakistan actually a united Pakistan . The examples from the way past are not applicable now FULL STOP Now an isolated North American land is stronger than any other country . My forefathers were the only ones fighting British and never surrendered like others and actually they did rule Punjab for a brief time before that time of 1857 .And they never got the Nawab status and political positions for their 30 coming generations and you know why? I know when I am speaking then it definitely means that I am speaking in the favor of the country without any BS and bias. History is different that this and that country went there and this and that really happened . First of all there was nothing there to go and conquer . You think the British of that time wanted to go there for sheep ? The British were defeated because the British wanted the Mid Asia route and they failed in conquering Afghanistan because of the bravery of the local Afghans initially but British were so involved in India that they just couldn't afford to just go again and again and invade another kingdom (although pretty small) . So the past examples totally don't apply here on this issue . Well you know when a fugitive can come in my house ? (a) He is holding me on a gun point (b) I am helping the fugitive to hide ... What do you think is your answer ? So find a dirty dozen and give them to the authorities or if you love them against the wishes of governement then fight with them .
So you think I was wrong when I said that illegal trade happens in this area for decades ? you think I am wrong when I say that there is illegal gun trade going on there ? So you think that convicts go and take a refuge in that area ? You know what ! I think that it's only a 0.1 % of the population there which is actually harassing the common progressive minded and strong and truly religious people living in that area and those 0.1 % should be found and dealt with along with a fraction of local helpers (eventually who are drug smugglers too ) ...

Ok lets forget about the history even though it has alot of significance with the people of waziristan. If you look at your previous post, it says “whatever musharraf is doing is just safer and I feel comfortable with it” which I simply thought was ridiculous, I have already explained you why this is one of the most stupidest things a leader can do, sending F-16’s and bombarding our own people is disgusting to say the least, now tell me can the bomb differentiate between a civilian and a terrorist or an insuregent?

You also completely mis-understood me when I meant dialog, the government could/should do a dialog with the leaders of the waziristan area to remove these alqaeda or any insuregents from their territory and they are more than capable of doing that by themselves, only and only if they ask the government for help yes we need your army for this operation then only send your forces to help them and even then you don’t send these raptors and gunships, PLEASE PLEASE fraz you seriously have to understand this, just look at the history of these poor people, they have sacrifised themselves for Pakistan and your bombarding them, killing children, women and making them all against you, if you still think its making you feel comfortable and safer then your on your own and I don’t need to argue with you anymore. What musharraf has done is what US wanted not what was in the interest of our nation. That’s why people call musharraf a puppet of the US because the US doesn’t know the real situation or the history of our country or people and they only think and react through a way which has worked for them and a way which will never ever work for us.

Your first sentence is pretty obvious and most of the people in Pakistan want a united Pakistan, its not something only you want.

 

[chaminda_00]

Certainly you hear more in the news here about violence in Pakistan than in SL or India. It's a media hotspot but surely, not without reason. The media here has little to gain by warning people off Pakistan like the US is doing with Iran. It's not as if we're about to attack the place......

Media here works differently too. We don't have anywhere near the same amount of punditry as on Fox, CNN, etc. Here, Australian news outlets are more likely to omit news rather than whip something up for a cause (I don't know what's worse, really).

The reason why you hear less about Sri Lanka, then Pakistan is due purely to the fact that one is a civil war that is based just in that country and doesn't involve other countries or based on religion. Whereas in Pakistan the type of conflict is more an international issue due to muslim element and the fact that it close to conflict in Afghanistan that Australia is involved in.

In reality though Sri Lanka is alot more dangerous then Pakistan.

 

[silentstriker]

Certainly you hear more in the news here about violence in Pakistan than in SL or India. It's a media hotspot but surely, not without reason. The media here has little to gain by warning people off Pakistan like the US is doing with Iran. It's not as if we're about to attack the place......

That has very little to do with it. It's the same reason why you hear less about the violence in Africa than in the middle east. People don't care, so you don't hear about it. How many in Australia (or the US) want to hear about the Tamil Tigers? But that doesn't mean it's any more safe.

 

[silentstriker]

Hard to say. Perhaps there's other compelling info that isn't on the DFAT website. The rating system plus associated info is hardly comprehensive. A comprehensive assessment wouldn't just include the current state of affairs, for example, but some predictions and that might be the determining factor. I wouldn't be taking it as anything other than a fairly superficial guide.

They seem pretty clear in the descriptions, and I agree that it is superficial, but then what non-superficial information are they basing their decisions on that SL will be safe? As someone pointed out in this thread, bombs don't discriminate. But I suppose they might in Jaipur and Colombo?

Sri Lanka is at least as dangerous as Pakistan.

 

[Fusion]

Well, sorry if you guys found that rude, but I also find the repeated assertions that players who are concerned about going to Pakistan, or Sri Lanka for that matter, are either cowards or biased against the country in question, or simply idiots who are brainwashed by right-wing media propaganda to be unfair and also quite rude. You, and others, might not agree with their point of view, but I'm finding refusal to acknowledge it might be a point of view they've arrived at from reasonable, albeit probably not expert, level of knowledge of the situation quite churlish.

And if truth be told, and you both, along with SS, are two of the more eloquent and reasonable posters who have been arguing for the "they should go" argument, I'm not the only one to have adopted a less than polite tone through this...


And I'm ignoring the Aamir Alauddin's and yes, the Sideshowtim's of the board in making that point.

Sorry if you found my post to be insulting towards you, though I took pains (I thought) to not attack you, but the point of the post. You were making a hypothetical point that if a player doesn’t find a country “fun” to tour, he should be allowed to skip it. I thought such a policy would be ludicrous, so I said it. However, coming to the point about the “tone” of this debate, I have never called any player a “coward” for not wanting to tour Pakistan. I, along with Dasa and many others, have put forth our argument that Pakistan is safe to tour and a proper assessment of the situation would support that thought. If you are ignoring the obvious flame baiters, than I fail to see how you would find the tone of our posts as “insulting, dishonest, and condescending” (as you stated in your post earlier).

 

[FRAZ]

Sorry if you found my post to be insulting towards you, though I took pains (I thought) to not attack you, but the point of the post. You were making a hypothetical point that if a player doesn’t find a country “fun” to tour, he should be allowed to skip it. I thought such a policy would be ludicrous, so I said it. However, coming to the point about the “tone” of this debate, I have never called any player a “coward” for not wanting to tour Pakistan. I, along with Dasa and many others, have put forth our argument that Pakistan is safe to tour and a proper assessment of the situation would support that thought. If you are ignoring the obvious flame baiters, than I fail to see how you would find the tone of our posts as “insulting, dishonest, and condescending” (as you stated in your post earlier).

He has all his rights to think in that way because may be he thinks that his favorite actions will be for the benefit of cricket globally.
Rational thinking or goodwill gestures are long gone now and it's a different era where any thing can be said regardless having sense or no sense .

 

[Top_Cat]

The reason why you hear less about Sri Lanka, then Pakistan is due purely to the fact that one is a civil war that is based just in that country and doesn't involve other countries or based on religion. Whereas in Pakistan the type of conflict is more an international issue due to muslim element and the fact that it close to conflict in Afghanistan that Australia is involved in.

In reality though Sri Lanka is alot more dangerous then Pakistan.

Yeah that's probably as much to do with it as anything. Didn't consider that angle.

Mind you, you and SS are the archetypical reason why it's so hard to get threat assessments right; you're saying it's more dangerous, SS is saying 'at least as dangerous'. Who's right? Who do you believe? Do either of you have all of the requisite info to make such a call (I know I don't! But then, I'm not arguing for the cricketers to stay home)? Does anyone really?

Anyway, as more time passes, I'm sure the assessment of Pakistan as being less safe than the others will diminish. The voices of blokes like Geoff Lawson will eventually get through I reckon.

 

[Jono]

It’s one thing to claim that it’s dangerous to tour so the players don’t want to go. That point is debatable, but understandable. But if the argument is “because of all the heavy security, I won’t have any fun”, then the players would deserve all the colorful adjectives hurled their way. They are rich because they are part of a system. That system requires them to meet certain obligations. They have to tour unattractive places so the whole system/organization continues to function (and hence lets them earn their millions). Your above point is completely ludicrous.

That's your opinion and you are of course entitled to it. Although as an aside, I'm not certain that the "whole system" will cease to function is Australia doesn't tour Pakistan.

I completely agree with Fusion here. If Australia aren't going for security concerns, and solely security concerns, fine.

If they aren't going because they won't have the freedom they would in Australia, and won't have as much 'fun', then seriously cut their pay cheques in half because that's disgraceful and is not a legitimate argument for them not to go.

Seriously, the sub-continent isn't a perfect place, far from it, but the way some countries treat touring there, we may as well go back to the 40s and only have tours in developed nations. That way everyone will get their 'big' stadiums, able to go clubbing at night and they won't have to spend Christmas in India like the English didn't want to do.

 

[Burgey]

I completely agree with Fusion here. If Australia aren't going for security concerns, and solely security concerns, fine.

If they aren't going because they won't have the freedom they would in Australia, and won't have as much 'fun', then seriously cut their pay cheques in half because that's disgraceful and is not a legitimate argument for them not to go.

Seriously, the sub-continent isn't a perfect place, far from it, but the way some countries treat touring there, we may as well go back to the 40s and only have tours in developed nations. That way everyone will get their 'big' stadiums, able to go clubbing at night and they won't have to spend Christmas in India like the English didn't want to do.

But they've toured everywhere else in the subcontinent. They've been to India for numerous ODI tours and the tests in 01 and 04. Went to SL too iirc.

I don't really think CA is taking into account whether there's a Pakistani version of Home Nightclub in making its decision. Of course, some players might and if they do, then they're idiots.

 

[chaminda_00]

Yeah that's probably as much to do with it as anything. Didn't consider that angle.

Mind you, you and SS are the archetypical reason why it's so hard to get threat assessments right; you're saying it's more dangerous, SS is saying 'at least as dangerous'. Who's right? Who do you believe? Do either of you have all of the requisite info to make such a call (I know I don't! But then, I'm not arguing for the cricketers to stay home)? Does anyone really?

Anyway, as more time passes, I'm sure the assessment of Pakistan as being less safe than the others will diminish. The voices of blokes like Geoff Lawson will eventually get through I reckon.

Right now Sri Lanka would be more dangerous then Pakistan. Around the election time Pakistan was more dangerous. It is all realitive to the time frame. Overall they are about the same in certain parts and have been for decades.

But really as long as you stay away from those parts you are safe enough in both.

The point really is that if your not going to one country due to security concerns, then why are you going to another country when they have similar issues.