Cricket stuff that doesn't deserve its own thread

[Starfighter]

Only people being penalised in that case are Australian cricketers as game will be ruled a forfeit

Some would view incurring a real cost by sticking to a principle in the Word Cup as being much braver and more powerful than cancelling a T20 series that won't be remembered in six months' time. Not surprised some people have an issue when all the cancellations so far save CA money (though whether those people are objecting in good faith is a different question).

 

[social]

Some would view incurring a real cost by sticking to a principle in the Word Cup as being much braver and more powerful than cancelling a T20 series that won't be remembered in six months' time. That's why some people have an issue with way this has been done (though whether that's actually in good faith is a different question).

I seriously doubt that it’s been done in good faith

Having said that, I thought Afghanistan was supposed to be banned unless/until they met ICC criteria wrt women’s cricket?

Was that a figment of my imagination or did they simply release a feel good ruling without having any intention of following through?

Neither would surprise

 

[Burgey]

Hypocrisy of the highest order. Had no moral issue to play Afghanistan when they needed a win to stay in the WC a few months ago. But morals magically click into place when it comes to bilateral series...

CA postpones T20I series against Afghanistan due to 'human rights' issues

CA says they did so because "conditions for women and girls in Afghanistan are getting worse"

www.espncricinfo.com

Hit me up when India plays a bilateral against Pakistan. Or refuses to play them in an ICC event.

 

[Starfighter]

Having said that, I thought Afghanistan was supposed to be banned unless/until they met ICC criteria wrt women’s cricket?

Was that a figment of my imagination or did they simply release a feel good ruling without having any intention of following through?

Neither would surprise

I believe they are, but the ICC's rules are about as solid as icecream under a hot sun. Of course CA could try prove they're more principled than the ICC, but that'd almost certainly be pointless.

 

[Stefan9]

As the article says, CA has no control over ICC events

England refused to play in 2003. Lost the points. What stopped aus doing the same. Or was the WC points more important then morals then.

 

[Stefan9]

Hit me up when India plays a bilateral against Pakistan. Or refuses to play them in an ICC event.

India also being hypocrites doesn't change the fact that aus are.

 

[social]

England refused to play in 2003. Lost the points. What stopped aus doing the same. Or was the WC points more important then morals then.

Australia forfeited against SL in ‘96

 

[Spark]

Once again the brilliant logic of hypocrisy uber alles rears its head: it's better to have no standards than a partial standard poorly enforced.

 

[Stefan9]

I seriously doubt that it’s been done in good faith

Having said that, I thought Afghanistan was supposed to be banned unless/until they met ICC criteria wrt women’s cricket?

Was that a figment of my imagination or did they simply release a feel good ruling without having any intention of following through?

Neither would surprise

They were but ICC decided it would be unfair on the players so have allowed them to continue. Lack of governance from the ICC shocking as usual.

 

[Stefan9]

Australia forfeited against SL in ‘96

So whats the excuse for not doing it in 2023? If they believe their moral stand against Afghanistan is as important as they claim.

 

[social]

So whats the excuse for not doing it in 2023? If they believe their moral stand against Afghanistan is as important as they claim.

Money

 

[Nintendo]

Once again the brilliant logic of hypocrisy uber alles rears its head: it's better to have no standards than a partial standard poorly enforced.

I genuinly think WA would start a civil war if we missed a WC semi because we refused to play Afghanistan.

 

[Xix2565]

I genuinly think WA would start a civil war if we missed a WC semi because we refused to play Afghanistan.

Would it be funny is the real question.

 

[honestbharani]

Once again the brilliant logic of hypocrisy uber alles rears its head: it's better to have no standards than a partial standard poorly enforced.

I think the point is this is not a standard but a convenience.

 

[Burgey]

So whats the excuse for not doing it in 2023? If they believe their moral stand against Afghanistan is as important as they claim.

They didn’t go to SL in 1996 because of advice regarding risks of terror attacks iirc. Here they aren’t playing Afghanistan because of its treatment of 50% of its population.

Fmd if you’re siding with the taliban you’re probably beyond any reasonable help tbh

 

[Burgey]

I think the point is this is not a standard but a convenience.

There’s no inconvenience to beat up on Afghanistan in a T20 series in the lead up to Wc ffs. A 3-0 win while playing fringe players against barely FC standard opposition is the sort of tune up and confidence boost that’s perfect ahead of a tourney.

CA is massive on the women’s game here. It was probably the first widely popular mainstream sport in Aus to properly promote and put women front and centre. It’s not surprising they’d bin a series in these circs at all, and good on them tbh. Afghanistan shoukd be banned from international cricket rn anyway tbh

 

[SteveNZ]

Has anyone actually addressed Stefan's point which seems to be well made, that what is the difference between playing Afghanistan in a World Cup and playing a series against them which isn't in that country?

Because if money and prestige of a World Cup is the answer, it's a feeble one

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Because if money and prestige of a World Cup is the answer, it's a feeble one

Didn’t England once refuse to play Zimbabwe in a World Cup that cost them? The one where Kenya got to the Semis - or have I misremembered that?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Hypocrisy of the highest order. Had no moral issue to play Afghanistan when they needed a win to stay in the WC a few months ago. But morals magically click into place when it comes to bilateral series...

CA postpones T20I series against Afghanistan due to 'human rights' issues

CA says they did so because "conditions for women and girls in Afghanistan are getting worse"

www.espncricinfo.com

Yikes

 

[honestbharani]

There’s no inconvenience to beat up on Afghanistan in a T20 series in the lead up to Wc ffs. A 3-0 win while playing fringe players against barely FC standard opposition is the sort of tune up and confidence boost that’s perfect ahead of a tourney.

CA is massive on the women’s game here. It was probably the first widely popular mainstream sport in Aus to properly promote and put women front and centre. It’s not surprising they’d bin a series in these circs at all, and good on them tbh. Afghanistan shoukd be banned from international cricket rn anyway tbh

Yeah but you incur cost hosting those games and the viewership and gate figures and even sponsorship wont tally. That is why its a convenience. And CA cares about the women's game because they know there is a market for it. Not out of the goodness of their hearts, come on, FFS.