Does China have hope in Cricket?

[Dick Rockett]

I don't see what cricket has to do with these sort of things really. Looking at your statement in another way, the ICC doesn't need to be seen to condone any government policy.

The ICC is there to facilitate the international play of countries that are at an international quality level. Now I do think that there are some rare cases where cricket ostracism is justified. South Africa during apartheid was one of them. However, I feel that the ICC should defer to the international political community when it comes to these judgements. Banning South Africa was justified because the international community had placed sanctions on South Africa. It would have created a lot of outrage if the ICC had done anything else.

On the other hand, modern day China is a very much tolerated part of the international community. I don't see too many, if any countries placing sanctions on China, so the ICC needs to defer to international opinion and include China. I think any other policy sets up a dangerous precedent for the ICC in an era where they hope to expand cricket. If they exclude China from international cricket now, what stops them from excluding half the countries in the world for "below average human rights records." The ICC shouldn't exclude countries from international cricket just because some people don't like them.

Although a policy of defering to the international community may not seem like the "moral" thing to do, it is the only logical one. Anything else only hurts cricket without any benefit. The ICC making a lone moral stand against a country isn't going to effect that country's policies as the folks that really matter, other governments, condone their behavior. On the other hand, international cricket misses out on all the talent that that country could have brought to the table.

I feel that we should leave it up to the real international policy makers, governments, to make the moral desicions. After that we need to adapt to the world around us, and not make things too hard for ourself with needless "moral stands."

While I agree with what you are saying in theory, you are quite naive about the China situation. You cannot compare apartheid-era South Africa with today's China, simply because the economic positions of both countries are so vastly different.

At the time of apartheid, South Africa was an economic basket case and placing sanctions on them had little to no effect on the markets in the rest of the world. Yet, it wasn't until well into the 80s that prominent world leaders such as Thatcher and Reagan even admitted that SA needed to change for the benefit of its own people. Their sporting isolation was only really put into effect as early as it was due to the efforts of people in free countries letting their governments know how angry they were.

To contrast with China today is to see a totally different picture. China leads the world in executions, and has an appalling record on freedom of speech, the right to protest or practice a religion of one's own choice. The main difference between them and the South Africa of old is that China is oppressing all of its citizens, not just one ethnic group. Yet the international community does nothing, as you have rightly pointed out. But they are not idle because they tacitly approve of what China does to its own people - they turn a blind eye because China has the world's fastest growing economy and is rapidly heading towards becoming the largest economic powerhouse on the planet. To impose sanctions on China at this point in history would be a fiscal disaster - that is why the international community is (disgracefully, IMO) letting these human rights abuses continue. It is for the same reasons that the ICC is pushing cricket there. Not for the good of the game, but for the good of the ICCs balance sheet.

 

[brockley]

They said the same thing about america,in cricket where is it now.

 

[shortpitched713]

While I agree with what you are saying in theory, you are quite naive about the China situation. You cannot compare apartheid-era South Africa with today's China, simply because the economic positions of both countries are so vastly different.

At the time of apartheid, South Africa was an economic basket case and placing sanctions on them had little to no effect on the markets in the rest of the world. Yet, it wasn't until well into the 80s that prominent world leaders such as Thatcher and Reagan even admitted that SA needed to change for the benefit of its own people. Their sporting isolation was only really put into effect as early as it was due to the efforts of people in free countries letting their governments know how angry they were.

To contrast with China today is to see a totally different picture. China leads the world in executions, and has an appalling record on freedom of speech, the right to protest or practice a religion of one's own choice. The main difference between them and the South Africa of old is that China is oppressing all of its citizens, not just one ethnic group. Yet the international community does nothing, as you have rightly pointed out. But they are not idle because they tacitly approve of what China does to its own people - they turn a blind eye because China has the world's fastest growing economy and is rapidly heading towards becoming the largest economic powerhouse on the planet. To impose sanctions on China at this point in history would be a fiscal disaster - that is why the international community is (disgracefully, IMO) letting these human rights abuses continue. It is for the same reasons that the ICC is pushing cricket there. Not for the good of the game, but for the good of the ICCs balance sheet.

I see it as a situation of cost-benefit. Excluding China from international cricket would be pointless, as it wouldn't have any effect on the situation in China. On the other other, although accepting China into international cricket would help the ICC monetarily, it would also undoubtedly help cricket in the country as well as cricket competition throughout the world. This all assumes the hypothetical situation in which China develops an international class cricket side.

 

[Dick Rockett]

I see it as a situation of cost-benefit.

That's where our ideologies differ, my friend. IMO, cost-benefit is irrelevant when considering gross violations of human rights.

 

[shortpitched713]

That's where our ideologies differ, my friend. IMO, cost-benefit is irrelevant when considering gross violations of human rights.

Of course cost-benefit is irrelevent when attempting to address such matters in any meningful way. But in what meaningful way can the ICC address China's human rights record? Not let them play cricket? I bet thats going to effect China's human rights policies.

The only ones that would affect in any real way would be talented Chinese cricketers, who may not neccessarily support China's human rights policies, but would be excluded from international cricket anyway. However, I respect where your coming from in promoting a moral stand by the ICC on this issue. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Of course cost-benefit is irrelevent when attempting to address such matters in any meningful way. But in what meaningful way can the ICC address China's human rights record? Not let them play cricket? I bet thats going to effect China's human rights policies.

China didn't (and mostly still doesn't) care about cricket. It's not as if there's a whole bunch of dedicated players running around the Chinese countryside who would be desperately disappointed if the ICC turned around and took a moral stand on human rights.

The ICC recognised a massive untapped market, saw dollar signs, and dived in. It had nothing to do with nurturing Chinese talent because there wasn't any until the ICC got involved. The whole situation as it currently stands (and hence any moral quagmires) is entirely of the ICC's own making. They could quite easily have addressed China's human rights record by not going there, but chose to chase the money instead.

Anyway, I get that you don't agree with me, and I respect that.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

China's human rights policies aren't going to change anytime soon, save huge international political pressure. Should cricket suffer (or at least not benefit as it could) because of something that's completely out of the sporting world's hands?

I agree, China's record is reprehensible. But should sport forever remain the pawn of politics?

 

[Matt79]

nup, huge international pressure ain't going to do squat. Any change will come as gradual reform, unlikely since its all working very nicely for the CCP at the moment, or from the population themselves - unlikely since the educated section of society is getting nicely rich.

 

[LA ICE-E]

surely it all this effort wont go to nothing...

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/other/content/story/269854.html

Asian Cricket Council ups development

Investment in China grows

During its development committee meeting, the ACC chalked out a development plan for the next five years with special emphasis on China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore and Japan.

The ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed visited China earlier this year and was impressed with the interest in the game there. ACC chief executive Ashraful Huq revealed the ACC had also requested special funds from the ICC for China. " China's school team of under 15 years of age will be among eight teams participating in a school event in Thailand next month," said Huq, a former secretary of the Bangladesh Cricket Board. Already, $200,000 has been provided by the ACC, a sum which would be matched by a further $200,000 from the ICC, he added.

An Under-15s competition among schools was held in Beijing in July this year while the first inter-university competition was also held there last month.

Sports officials in Beijing first expressed an interest in cricket a decade ago. China was admitted onto the ACC in 2004 and joined the ICC the following year. A Chinese women's team would tour England at the invitation of the Marylebone Cricket Club next year.

The Chinese Cricket Association, headed by Zhang Xiaoning, hopes to have 15,000 cricketers by 2009. Numbers are forecast to rise to 60,000 by 2012 and 150,000 by 2020. Huq said the ACC was also emphasising the promotion of women's cricket in Asia. "We have top four Asian nations in men's cricket but we need to put more emphasis on women's cricket. We need to encourage other Asian nations to take up women's cricket and for that we have special plans."

The ACC has given the task to India's Subhangi Kulkarni, who will represent the organisation in developing women's cricket.

 

[laksh_01]

Chinese Could be the best cricketing nation.... Trust me they are gonna be the best fielding side from their very first match but the point is - Do they have the fire to top Australia by 2025?

 

[Smudge]

Trust me they are gonna be the best fielding side from their very first match

 

[Athlai]

Bangladesh may be the best side by 2025 for all we know.

 

[slugger]

The USSR had a few human rights issues, but they where not excluded from football (soccer) at any time throughout this period.. excluding ww1 and ww2 and they were never banned from the olympics. there is now only a small group of Communist countries, china is one of them. their people no the rules/laws living in said state.. ive visited shanghai a number of times... its not like they living in dark agers with which burning infront of the church tower. i felt more safer walking around shanghai at the dead of night than i do about west auckland..

im sure theyll be a good at cricket straight off the bat and within 10 years of joining the circut theyll be awesome...

 

[slugger]

Also Saudia Arabia has a excution rate per cap. than China and im pretty sure they still getting soccer games and recently have made the soccer world cup. (oh wait they got all the oil)... dont cut off ya nose desprite ya face.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Forget Test status, they'll be winning the 2019 world cup!

It's very possible to win a world cup without being a test calibre nation. Look at how far Kenya got recently . They were two games away from winning the WC, yet they are nowhere near Test calibre. They would need a lot of luck and some good streaking combined with a collective slump in a couple other nations...but thats a lot more likely than being a winner in the test arena. Or they could just repeatedly play England to gain confidence .

But if they try playing England in Tests...they wouldn't last two days. Its just too hard to keep it going for five days.

Test Status > ODI wins

 

[biased indian]

wht is it Dig Week......

 

[Son Of Coco]

Can we mate the children of Ambrose and Lara and kidnap them to India to produce the ultimate all rounder?

I think that would be illegal given their age!

 

[Richard]

ITSTL dig.

 

[Engle]

I think that would be illegal given their age!

What, the mating or the kidnapping ?

 

[Richard]

Both TBH.