England calls off tour....

[silentstriker]

Even if all that was true, I don't see the relevance. The attacks took place in India, so the presumed nationality of the terrorists is a moot point.

Yup.

Moreover, the precedent was set, for better or worse, with the postponement of the Champions Trophy in Pakistan for "security concerns". If we tour India now, after attacks that have been reported as specifically targeting US & UK citizens, it's not only grossly unfair on Pakistan, it actually looks like hypocrisy.

Call me naive, but I do think some sense will prevail and they won't tour. This is far worse than anything in Pakistan, as these guys apparently looked for US/UK citizens. If they go ahead now, they've pretty much ended cricket in Pakistan, as it shows the security concerns there are nothing but an excuse. Because at that point, they are not even pretending to care. They're simply black listing a country. That's it.

 

[Richard]

Isn't it more a declaration that they have far more faith in the Indian security forces than the Pakistani ones?

And while being very far from an expert in the field, that doesn't seem a completely sans-reasoning idea.

 

[Precambrian]

And it goes without saying that Flintoff's non-presence takes the England Test attack from potentially potent to very possibly extremely weak.

Nitpicking, but I suppose potentially impotent is the opposite of the phrase above.

Anyway if the Tests do go ahead (which I certainly hope from a cricket POV they do, obviously) I imagine this thread can be merged with the *Official* tour thread?

Yep.

 

[Fusion]

A little OT I know, but Akram proposes an India-Pakistan Test in Mumbai.

Probably wishful thinking in the current atmosphere, but I think it would be a great way for Pakistan to show solidarity with India. It would send a powerful message of life in Mumbai prevailing, and in fact overcoming the evil intentions of the terrorists.

 

[Precambrian]

A little OT I know, but Akram proposes an India-Pakistan Test in Mumbai.

Probably wishful thinking in the current atmosphere, but I think it would be a great way for Pakistan to show solidarity with India. It would send a powerful message of life in Mumbai prevailing, and in fact overcoming the evil intentions of the terrorists.

Absolute bull ****. Akram has no brains? The last thing on the Mumbaite's minds would be to go and watch a test match at this point in time. And not to mention the security nightmare for those involved.

 

[Fusion]

Absolute bull ****. Akram has no brains? The last thing on the Mumbaite's minds would be to go and watch a test match at this point in time. And not to mention the security nightmare for those involved.

I don't think he's suggesting a Test match take place tomorrow. It would obviously be after things have settled down a bit. I'm sure sporting events, especially Cricket events, will continue to take place in Mumbai in the future. In fact, they can symbolize that “life will go on” and that terror can not disrupt the spirit of the city/country.

 

[Precambrian]

I don't think he's suggesting a Test match take place tomorrow. It would obviously be after things have settled down a bit. I'm sure sporting events, especially Cricket events, will continue to take place in Mumbai in the future. In fact, they can symbolize that “life will go on” and that terror can not disrupt the spirit of the city/country.

Oh yeah. No doubt test matches WILL BE staged in Mumbai, maybe after 1 year. Right now everythings so muddled that there are many things which should be prioritised before cricket there.

 

[Uppercut]

Isn't it more a declaration that they have far more faith in the Indian security forces than the Pakistani ones?

That's what i thought. I'd feel the same way tbh, i have a general distaste for theocracies, and Pakistan is one. It's just a feeling, and players 100% have the right to decide where to tour and where not to tour based on their own security concerns, rational or not. A few Pakistani ex-cricketers bleating about hypocrisy won't make them give a ****.

 

[pskov]

That's what i thought. I'd feel the same way tbh, i have a general distaste for theocracies, and Pakistan is one. It's just a feeling, and players 100% have the right to decide where to tour and where not to tour based on their own security concerns, rational or not. A few Pakistani ex-cricketers bleating about hypocrisy won't make them give a ****.

Pakistan is not a theocracy. It had been until very recently essentially a military dictatorship, but Musharraf's powerbase was eroded significantly in the past two years or so which led to elections. No it is not as transparently democratic as say the UK or India, the military does still have a rather worrisome level of influence in politics and some parties are openly based on religious platforms, some of them fundamentalist in nature, but to describe Pakistan as a theocracy in the modern sense of the term and thus lump it with Iran and Saudi Arabia and the like is incorrect.

 

[pskov]

To me this is what looks like is going to happen:

1. The BCCI is acutely aware of what a disaster it could be for them if the tests do not go ahead, so promises to the ECBs security team and any independent review that any and all steps will be taken to keep the England team safe e.g. round the clock police on guard in the hotel, bodyguards on the team coach and so on.

2. In light of these assurances, the ECB says the tour will go ahead.

3. Several senior players decide they will not tour anyway. Most or all of the reserve and fringe players go on tour as they want to cement their place in the team.

4. England play virtually a second XI and get hammered by a determined India 2-0.

5. Everyone comes home and due to the massive security efforts no one was harmed thankfully. However the future of sides going to India in the immediate future is still up in the air as it is unclear whether teams would want to tour in such conditions.

 

[Richard]

If I was a player, I think (and that's all I can do - I can't possibly know for sure) I reckon my attitude would be along these lines:

All my rational thought is telling me if I go back to India my chances of coming to any harm are very slim indeed. But the stuff I've seen on TV there is something I can't easily forget. I also know that I'm very possibly going to be completely unable to get this off my mind when I get onto the field and thus will be of little use to my side anyway.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Agree word-for-word with the last two points.

 

[Jungle Jumbo]

I found this an interesting read this morning. Most of the views have been bandied about before, but I can't help but feel that players need to take a little more responsibility - especially to the Indian people. Of course, I can't really appreciate the family element though.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/simon_barnes/article5263669.ece

 

[Uppercut]

Pakistan is not a theocracy. It had been until very recently essentially a military dictatorship, but Musharraf's powerbase was eroded significantly in the past two years or so which led to elections. No it is not as transparently democratic as say the UK or India, the military does still have a rather worrisome level of influence in politics and some parties are openly based on religious platforms, some of them fundamentalist in nature, but to describe Pakistan as a theocracy in the modern sense of the term and thus lump it with Iran and Saudi Arabia and the like is incorrect.

Hum, it might not be a full-blown theocracy, that was perhaps a poor choice of words, but there are some chilling features of one there. They have over 100 people sitting on death row for "blasphemy", for example. Many more get killed by extremists, feeling that they have the government's protection.

Obviously it's not comparable to Iran or Saudi Arabia, but it's hardly comparable to India either, which was the point i was trying to make.

 

[Sanz]

They will be given foolproof security for sure. However finally upto the players.

Simon Barnes of the TIMES says England must tour India to prove a point to the terrorists.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/simon_barnes/article5263669.ece

Even though I appreciate Mr. Barnes sentiments, I dont think Cricketers should be made a scapegoat of this sort jingoism of going out there to prove a point and eventually risking their lives.
Cricketers have a responsibility to play cricket and just like each one of us they have the right to make the best decision for themselves and their family. If they are comfortable, they should go, if not, they should not. As simple as that. Cricket is not everything, there is much more to live than your and mine entertainment.

 

[Precambrian]

Mr. Geoff Lawson, former Pakistani coach spoketh thus :

"I think a few of the England players should reflect on what happened in their country before they start pulling out of cricket matches in India."

That's loyalty.

 

[Top_Cat]

Last I checked, Geoff Lawson wasn't a noted counter-terrorism expert so I'd think they'll put their faith in someone a little more qualified. It's a really strange argument, especially considering the fairly vast differences between the attacks in the respective countries, that because England had a terrorist attack on its soil, it should stay in India. Point?

 

[Precambrian]

Last I checked, Geoff Lawson wasn't a noted counter-terrorism expert so I'd think they'll put their faith in someone a little more qualified. It's a really strange argument, especially considering the fairly vast differences between the attacks in the respective countries, that because England had a terrorist attack on its soil, it should stay in India. Point?

Must be trying to get an assignment with an academy or the junior team in India.

 

[silentstriker]

Isn't it more a declaration that they have far more faith in the Indian security forces than the Pakistani ones?

And while being very far from an expert in the field, that doesn't seem a completely sans-reasoning idea.

Why would that be?

Even though I appreciate Mr. Barnes sentiments, I dont think Cricketers should be made a scapegoat of this sort jingoism of going out there to prove a point and eventually risking their lives.
Cricketers have a responsibility to play cricket and just like each one of us they have the right to make the best decision for themselves and their family. If they are comfortable, they should go, if not, they should not. As simple as that. Cricket is not everything, there is much more to live than your and mine entertainment.

Agreed.

If I was a player, I think (and that's all I can do - I can't possibly know for sure) I reckon my attitude would be along these lines:

All my rational thought is telling me if I go back to India my chances of coming to any harm are very slim indeed. But the stuff I've seen on TV there is something I can't easily forget. I also know that I'm very possibly going to be completely unable to get this off my mind when I get onto the field and thus will be of little use to my side anyway.

Agreed.

If I was a player, I'd definitely go to Pakistan. Here though, they've specifically targetted UK and US citizens - that'd make me think twice, and I'd probably choose to stay at home.

Whether England have a duty to India is a separate issue to whether the individual players do. They aren't marines, no one should ask them to do something they are uncomfortable doing and put themselves in harm's way for just a game.

 

[Uppercut]

Why would that be?

Cultural and religious reasons? India has a lot more in common with the West, and people here aren't very trusting of largely Islamic armies, to say the least.

Emotions over logic, but it doesn't matter. I don't think there's any notable risk going to either country tbh, the security would be ridiculously tight in both places. Still, they'll choose to go wherever they feel comfortable.