Heartland

anybody give a toss about the world cup?

the opening ceremony is taking place tomorrow about 10 minutes walk from my place, so the atmosphere is pretty heavy around here.

Any thoughts on the England and Oz matches in Zimbabwe?

hallucienate wrote:anybody give a toss about the world cup?

Certainly do! I'm looking forward to it. Some damn good games to look forward to. England are back in good form, and actually have a squad where they're going to have to leave out some good players from the team, rather than desperately pick mediocre players to fill eleven places.

Australia are obviously going to favourites, but I reckon South Africa and New Zealand both have a good chance of winning it too. Is Kallis out, or was it just an injury scare?

India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are all in with a shout too, but I think Pakistan and Sri Lanka are too unpredictable, and the Indians' wristy technique might suffer on SA's hard bouncy pitches.

hallucienate wrote:
the opening ceremony is taking place tomorrow about 10 minutes walk from my place, so the atmosphere is pretty heavy around here.

Cool! Are you going to it, or any of the matches?

hallucienate wrote:

Any thoughts on the England and Oz matches in Zimbabwe?

Hmm. Long post required to answer that. I'll try and do it over lunch-time.
Suffice to say for now, that it was really bad planning, and has soured the World Cup a bit from the off.

Basically, I dont think it should have been left up to the players/ECB (same goes for Australia, but I know less about their stance) to decide. The schedule was drawn up in 1999 and the government here knew about it then, so they should have made their opinions on it known then, rather than starting to say it was disgraceful about 2 months ago.

Zimbabwe were allowed to come here last year to participate in the Commonwealth Games, so it seems to be a case of double standardsto me.

There's loads of financial (obviously this is separate from the ethics) reasons why the ECB can't pull out if the govt doesn't financially re-emburse them. Firstly, Zimbabwe are due to tour here next year and it will cost English cricket millions in lost sales if they pull out, and maybe cause the collapse of domestic english cricket. They are likely to pull out if England boycott Zimbabwe as Mugabe is chairman of the ZCU (Zim Cricket Union). I know that that doesn't even touch on the moral aspect of it, but english cricket can't actually afford to pull out without compensation. Then there is the financial cost to Zimbabwe. They have paid out millions to ensure the stadia are ready and up to scratch for the World Cup, and if the matches aren't played there, who will compensate them for the loss of revenue? Basically, I think that would impact heavily on the poorer parts of Zimbabwe.

As I understand it Harare and Bulawayo where the matches are due to take place (there are 6 to be played in all- 1 by England and 1 each by Australia, Holland, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka) are both anti-Mugabe councils. I'm not positive about this, but that's what I've been lead to believe.

Mugabe is clearly a man who doesn't care about his people, or for that matter seem even representative of his people, but I think cricket is being unfairly used by the our government to try and make a point. The British government is quite happy to continue trade and business links with Mugabe, so it seems unfair expect the cricketers to make a moral judgement that could result in the collapse of their chosen career.
It wasn't clever of the ICC to plan to hold matches their in the first place if you ask me though.

Sorry, this is all very garbled and badly written, as I didn't wait until lunch-time to think/type it out properly, because I've got a meeting. I realise I've touched on the financial/cricketing side of it more than the moral/ethical side, but I know more about the cricket than the actual politics of Zimbabwe. If anything I've said regarding the politics is completely untrue I'd be happy to be put right.

sam donut wrote:Certainly do! I'm looking forward to it. Some damn good games to look forward to. England are back in good form, and actually have a squad where they're going to have to leave out some good players from the team, rather than desperately pick mediocre players to fill eleven places.

Pity SA and England aren't in the same group

sam donut wrote: Australia are obviously going to favourites, but I reckon South Africa and New Zealand both have a good chance of winning it too. Is Kallis out, or was it just an injury scare?

he's in

I'm actually gonna do something unusual for me and back a South African sports team. They seem in good form and are on (mostly) home ground.

sam donut wrote: Cool! Are you going to it, or any of the matches?

nope, us mere mortals have a hard time getting and affording tickets. Anyways, there's no booze on sale inside the stadiums, so whats the point?

sam donut wrote:

hallucienate wrote:
Any thoughts on the England and Oz matches in Zimbabwe?

Hmm. Long post required to answer that. I'll try and do it over lunch-time.
Suffice to say for now, that it was really bad planning, and has soured the World Cup a bit from the off.

Agreed, it is a bit of a cock-up and things are still not finalized. I hope it doesn't overshadow the entire series as that'd be really unfortunate.

most of what you said in your post is true, I'm not 100% sure about Bulawayo but Harare is MDC and not Uncle Bob's ZANU-PF. The mayor of Harare has said he cannot promise the safety of cricketers in his city.

The real political trouble started in 2000 with the "fast track" land reforms. Although there were troubles between Zim and England before this is major issue between the two countries.

I've been more interested in the politcal angle as it is close to home, and a complete meltdown in Zim would affect SA negatively.

I was not aware of the financial side of ECB as that is not reported here, but it adds an interesting turn to the situation.