Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Well then why is he even part of the discussion then ?
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
So is India safe to tour or is it just a media beat-up?
- Thread starter Craig
- Start date
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
The fact that It is the Aussie Players themselves who have been questioning the role of FICA and perhaps the source of Modi's information.
Damien Martyn | IPL security
Marsh rejects Martyn double standards claim
JAMIE PANDARAM AND CHLOE SALTAU
February 26, 2010
Damien Martyn's claims that cricket officials are applying double standards in assessing the security threat for the IPL have been dismissed by the Australian players' association boss.
four_or_six
Cricketer Of The Year
Presumably because someone asked him to come. If some of the players want Ponting there during the discussion between themselves and their union that's perfectly acceptable. And as the FICA guy said, the players had differing opinions, which seems perfectly fine to me too. The job of a union is to represent all their members, not just a subsection of them.
First of all, every foreign player has to make up their own mind, with or without the help of their unions and associations.
Second of all, even if I was a player who was inclined to go - I'd be looking to persuade IPL into hiring a private security layer on top of the Indian security forces. This could take the form of a per player body guard (which some are rumored to be arranging on their own) or per-team and per site protection squads which will be more effective. This is actually the best thing player uniions could do, off the front page.
I know, it reflects poorly on India etc. But the terrorists are non-state actors (augmented by, certainly in the past and in the present by elements, quasi-state actors). Fundamentally, this is doing the inverse - augmenting the Indian state security apparatus with non-state security forces. (And yeah, shaking down that journalist for more info, and employing somewhat extra-judicial means , while unpretty, isn't going to revolt me personally. Quite enjoyed the movie "A Wednesday" , so would be lying to say otherwise).
Done discreetly, this may be an effective layer, it's going to be a long term problem. India Inc (of which IPL is one glamor face) is generating billions of dollars, surely some of it is well spent in clearing away basic problems.
Second of all, even if I was a player who was inclined to go - I'd be looking to persuade IPL into hiring a private security layer on top of the Indian security forces. This could take the form of a per player body guard (which some are rumored to be arranging on their own) or per-team and per site protection squads which will be more effective. This is actually the best thing player uniions could do, off the front page.
I know, it reflects poorly on India etc. But the terrorists are non-state actors (augmented by, certainly in the past and in the present by elements, quasi-state actors). Fundamentally, this is doing the inverse - augmenting the Indian state security apparatus with non-state security forces. (And yeah, shaking down that journalist for more info, and employing somewhat extra-judicial means , while unpretty, isn't going to revolt me personally. Quite enjoyed the movie "A Wednesday" , so would be lying to say otherwise).
Done discreetly, this may be an effective layer, it's going to be a long term problem. India Inc (of which IPL is one glamor face) is generating billions of dollars, surely some of it is well spent in clearing away basic problems.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Right now it seems that FICA is doing more than representing the Players. They seem focused on a solidarity show (If one player pulls out we all pull out kind of thing) and arm twisting of Modi than showing any actual concerns.
Obviously many Aussie players are unhappy with their representation and some of them leaked their intentions to Mr. Modi who has every right to make sure his tournament is successful with or without players from FICA.
Obviously many Aussie players are unhappy with their representation and some of them leaked their intentions to Mr. Modi who has every right to make sure his tournament is successful with or without players from FICA.
Sir Alex
Banned
yeah telling FICA to **** off, we don't recognise you is called intervening
Ponting clashed with Hayden, Warne etc on this. I personally think he has no business in dictating them not to go to India.
Australian players clash with Ponting over participation in IPL - 1 - Cricket - Cricket and Sports - MSN India
In other news,
Australian players see 'positive' progress on IPL security | Cricket News | Indian Premier League 2010 | Cricinfo.com
Obviously giving in. Modi is a genius.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Jesus - Ponting is not dictating to anyone. He is part of the union, if the union makes a collective decision, he will obviously be involved. FFS - if you've ever been part of any union, solidarity is numero uno. Unions can't survive and have no power if its members do not show solidarity on issues, even if individuals don't agree with the overall union decision. On the other side, the corporations love nothing more than to have dissenters from the union, which legitimizes them and allows them to destroy the rest.
I am not saying which side is right, but to say Ponting should 'butt out' is frankly stupid. It's a Union FFS!
I am not saying which side is right, but to say Ponting should 'butt out' is frankly stupid. It's a Union FFS!
Last edited:
Sir Alex
Banned
As I said before, I don't think such stuff matters as long as the work is getting done, and he is damn good at getting it done. Politics in India in 1000 times murkier than what happens in Australia or England, yet he somehow has got virtually everyone on his side, and has managed to push things through. I know it might not exactly appeal to everyone's taste, but his bluntness is sometimes calculated to get the message through.
Sir Alex
Banned
Which sort of precipitates down to the point I wish to make. Individual players have contracted with the IPL with blessings from the respective Boards. I don't think some random player association of one country should intervene with what is happening in the happenings of a domestic tournament in another country. For example, if Infosys India has contracted an American expert and brought him down to Bangalore, the contract is purely between Infosys and the expert, with permission from the US and Indian governments. Some random union the guy is part of in the United States have absolutely no business approaching Infosys one day and ask them to show "proof" that everything's well with Infosys' security. Infosys has every right to say **** off.
Last edited:
Sir Alex
Banned
Matt79, I have posted the link a few posts above.
Sir Alex
Banned
Eventually barring perhaps English association, everyone will come in I believe. It is the players who have got to lose everything and I don't think retired players like Warne, Gilly, Hayden etc will bow to the players association. At the maximum they will lose their membership in the player's association, which I don't think is something they will lose sleep on.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Uh, actually no. People in most western countries have the right to form unions, and I would guess in India too (though I'm not well versed in Indian labor law). If people want to negotiate collectively, that is perfectly legal. And you'll get into a lot of trouble for saying '**** off' to an employee who simply wants to join a union. It's illegal and unethical.
Sir Alex
Banned
I disagree with the above. Player Associations are no way connected with the IPL and hence I believe it is not in their jurisdiction to even talk to Modi & Co on this. But the individual players have every right to speak on this to their individual teams. That is a very legitimate thing and I don't think IPL will compromise a bit on security issue. The dialogue here involves and should involve the player (or an agent approved by IPL to talk on his behalf) , the team, and the IPL board and absolutely noone else.
Sir Alex
Banned
Trade unions are not generally permitted in Indian IT companies anyway. The ones who actively take part in such union activities are given pink slips at the earliest. The point is while the player has every right to be part of any union or party, that union, unless recognised and approved by the Company, has no business approaching the Company on behalf of the employee on anything.
If the employee has genuine concerns, he is free to speak on that issue to the guys above him and if he does not appreciate their reply, has every right to leave the organisation and come out.
As a Company head I will never allow a group of random strangers to one day barge into my office and demand that "such and such" conditions be met or otherwise they'd coerce all the employees they have in their membership would quit the Company. I'd say '**** off' and look for replacements instead.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Going against the union is a very serious thing. First, you are essentialy destroying the power of the collective in favor of individual gain. Generally, you'll lose a lot of friends doing that.
More importantly, you are essentially giving up a seat at the negotiating table. Let's say you break with the union over this issue because you don't think it's insignificant. Fine, two years later another issue comes up that you DO care about. Guess what - the union is busted and now it's just you vs the corporation. Good luck getting your concerns addressed. You've just sold yourself down **** creek without a paddle.
I am backing Ponting 100% here - he is absolutely right to be saying that whatever we decide, we need to decide as a group and have everyone stick with it. He is not going - he has no stake - but I think he understands the power of maintaining bargaining leverage now and in the future.
Good for him.
More importantly, you are essentially giving up a seat at the negotiating table. Let's say you break with the union over this issue because you don't think it's insignificant. Fine, two years later another issue comes up that you DO care about. Guess what - the union is busted and now it's just you vs the corporation. Good luck getting your concerns addressed. You've just sold yourself down **** creek without a paddle.
I am backing Ponting 100% here - he is absolutely right to be saying that whatever we decide, we need to decide as a group and have everyone stick with it. He is not going - he has no stake - but I think he understands the power of maintaining bargaining leverage now and in the future.
Good for him.
Sir Alex
Banned
You are looking at the player/employee point of view. In which case I agree with you largely. I was looking from the angle of the employer/IPL.
Of course, players have right to seek anyone's counsel they deem fit on this. And they can ask their collective to "assess" the situation independently and advise them. But finally the decision should be left to the individual employee. IPL here is not threatening any individual player who declines to participate in the IPL, but merely expressing blunt displeasure in unrelated third parties coming in between the dialogues.
Hayden, Warne, Gilchrist etc are virtually at the fag end of their playing careers, and hence I don't think they'll be really worried about losing their acceptability in the player unions. They are not going to benefit anything really from going by their union talk when they themselves are convinced about the security that IPL will provide. Yes, it is a bit of moral and ethical issue, yes it is against socialist principles, but if they come in the way of ensuring what their real motive was for, ie, assuring player justice, they need to be given the shrug.
I think a Union which takes a stance only seemingly to sate their egoes despite their players' general unwillingness to toe that line, is actually a detrimental one. Further I am not sure how "objective" can Ponting's assessment be in this issue considering he was "bought out" (read dropped) by Kolkota Knight Riders.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Firstly, It is not 'Whatever' we decide. If we believe the reports, he is basically suggesting a 'Boycott'. Obviously he has nothing to lose but others who are not contracted by Board do.
I am not sure what is being bargained here. It is either you go or don't go and it is going to be true every year, every tour, there doesn't seem anything to bargain unless someone thinks that the security threat in the future is going to be less and they can stay off of the IPL Blacklist (if there is going to be one).
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
FICA is not comparable to union, at least not when Ponting is contracted and makes millions while some others are dependent on IPL to make some money. If Ponting wants a show of solidarity then he should give up his Australian Contract and join the hands with the likes of Gilly, Hayden etc.
FICA is a useless, toothless body It did nothing when players were suffering due to the IPL/CA excesses, ask Jason Gillespie.