Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
Comment from today's Guardian;
I say, chaps, it's cricket
John O'Farrell
Friday November 26, 2004
The Guardian
No one in the cricketing establishment ever imagined that things could possibly reach this stage, but recent events have shocked the world of sport. England have finally got a decent cricket team.
Angry protests have been made by British comedy writers, furious at this flagrant breach of years of satirical tradition; shell-shocked sketch writers have called on the government to invest far less at grassroots and build luxury flats on school playing fields in the hope that we might see a return to the golden age when England were all out for five against Tellytubbyland (Atherton 0, caught Laa-Laa, bowled Dipsy).
However, any competence that the English cricketing establishment may have discovered on the field of play has been more than made up for by a staggering incompetence behind the scenes. A couple of years ago when they were pawing over their dusty old atlas that still had the British empire coloured in pink, they agreed that the perfect place for a nice trouble-free winter tour would be Southern Rhodesia, or whatever it's called these days. "Are you sure? Why does it have to be Zimbabwe?"
"Well, all the hotels in Iraq were fully booked."
After two years of planning, England were due to play the first game of their tour in Harare today. But then the tour was off. And then it was back on again. Then it was about to be called off but was confirmed as definitely on. Finally they changed their minds for the hundredth time and there was light applause from the pavilion. The BBC's Jonathan Agnew said that Zimbabwe "kept moving the goalposts", which makes me worry that he knows even less about cricket than I do.
Events hung in the balance as the players themselves made their own feelings plain: "We, the England team, have decided that there are basic ethical principles at stake here. As such, we will not be going into the war-torn hell-hole that is Zimbabwe, but will make a moral stand by seeing out the next week of the winter tour here in this five-star hotel in sun-kissed South Africa."
"Two more pina coladas?"
"Over here, please."
"Great news - Zimbabwe has relented; we might be able to go!"
"Oh no, but I've got my trunks on now. And the cocktail waitress agreed to rub suncream on my back..."
It was right that the players were prepared to make a stand because this time the Zimbabwean government had really gone too far. The cricket correspondents were not being given their press accreditation. Okay, tyranny, torture and oppression we can live with, but denying those chaps from the Telegraph and the Times their press accreditation; now that's off the scale!
The team were supported in their wish to call off the tour by such moral lodestars as Mike Gatting: "There has to be a very serious dilemma about representing your country on the cricket field in a land where people are suffering so much at the hands of their government," said the captain who led the rebel tour to apartheid South Africa. Calls for the matches to be cancelled were even made by John Major, to which the press said: "Hmmm, the name definitely rings a bell; did he used to bowl for Glamorgan?"
The Zimbabwe cricket authorities insist this tour is in no way a political stunt, though they have demanded one or two changes. Opening for Zimbabwe will be their new star batsman, President Robert Mugabe. England bowlers have been asked to bowl underarm and not to use such a hard ball. If he hits it into next door's garden, he can keep on getting hundreds of runs even if the other team are angrily shouting "Lost ball!"
The fact that a cricket team got Mugabe to back down on something, succeeding where economic boycotts and UN resolutions have failed, has proved just what a potent political force sport really is. "We must keep sport and politics apart," said a Zimbabwean minister, whose despotic president also happens to be the patron of the Zimbabwe Cricket Union. Sport is political because everything is political (with the possible exception of a couple of backbench Liberal MPs).
But while the cricketers in Harare will be wearing pads and helmets, the protesters outside the ground will have no such protection. If the players are to be forced to take part, they should use the occasion to make the most pointed passive protest possible; standing back and letting themselves be bowled out for a duck; deliberately knocking down their wickets with their bats, standing completely still while easy catches bounce right next to them. It would send a heartening message around the world about what England still symbolises. "I see the English cricket team are back to their usual form then."
comment@guardian.co.uk
I say, chaps, it's cricket
John O'Farrell
Friday November 26, 2004
The Guardian
No one in the cricketing establishment ever imagined that things could possibly reach this stage, but recent events have shocked the world of sport. England have finally got a decent cricket team.
Angry protests have been made by British comedy writers, furious at this flagrant breach of years of satirical tradition; shell-shocked sketch writers have called on the government to invest far less at grassroots and build luxury flats on school playing fields in the hope that we might see a return to the golden age when England were all out for five against Tellytubbyland (Atherton 0, caught Laa-Laa, bowled Dipsy).
However, any competence that the English cricketing establishment may have discovered on the field of play has been more than made up for by a staggering incompetence behind the scenes. A couple of years ago when they were pawing over their dusty old atlas that still had the British empire coloured in pink, they agreed that the perfect place for a nice trouble-free winter tour would be Southern Rhodesia, or whatever it's called these days. "Are you sure? Why does it have to be Zimbabwe?"
"Well, all the hotels in Iraq were fully booked."
After two years of planning, England were due to play the first game of their tour in Harare today. But then the tour was off. And then it was back on again. Then it was about to be called off but was confirmed as definitely on. Finally they changed their minds for the hundredth time and there was light applause from the pavilion. The BBC's Jonathan Agnew said that Zimbabwe "kept moving the goalposts", which makes me worry that he knows even less about cricket than I do.
Events hung in the balance as the players themselves made their own feelings plain: "We, the England team, have decided that there are basic ethical principles at stake here. As such, we will not be going into the war-torn hell-hole that is Zimbabwe, but will make a moral stand by seeing out the next week of the winter tour here in this five-star hotel in sun-kissed South Africa."
"Two more pina coladas?"
"Over here, please."
"Great news - Zimbabwe has relented; we might be able to go!"
"Oh no, but I've got my trunks on now. And the cocktail waitress agreed to rub suncream on my back..."
It was right that the players were prepared to make a stand because this time the Zimbabwean government had really gone too far. The cricket correspondents were not being given their press accreditation. Okay, tyranny, torture and oppression we can live with, but denying those chaps from the Telegraph and the Times their press accreditation; now that's off the scale!
The team were supported in their wish to call off the tour by such moral lodestars as Mike Gatting: "There has to be a very serious dilemma about representing your country on the cricket field in a land where people are suffering so much at the hands of their government," said the captain who led the rebel tour to apartheid South Africa. Calls for the matches to be cancelled were even made by John Major, to which the press said: "Hmmm, the name definitely rings a bell; did he used to bowl for Glamorgan?"
The Zimbabwe cricket authorities insist this tour is in no way a political stunt, though they have demanded one or two changes. Opening for Zimbabwe will be their new star batsman, President Robert Mugabe. England bowlers have been asked to bowl underarm and not to use such a hard ball. If he hits it into next door's garden, he can keep on getting hundreds of runs even if the other team are angrily shouting "Lost ball!"
The fact that a cricket team got Mugabe to back down on something, succeeding where economic boycotts and UN resolutions have failed, has proved just what a potent political force sport really is. "We must keep sport and politics apart," said a Zimbabwean minister, whose despotic president also happens to be the patron of the Zimbabwe Cricket Union. Sport is political because everything is political (with the possible exception of a couple of backbench Liberal MPs).
But while the cricketers in Harare will be wearing pads and helmets, the protesters outside the ground will have no such protection. If the players are to be forced to take part, they should use the occasion to make the most pointed passive protest possible; standing back and letting themselves be bowled out for a duck; deliberately knocking down their wickets with their bats, standing completely still while easy catches bounce right next to them. It would send a heartening message around the world about what England still symbolises. "I see the English cricket team are back to their usual form then."
comment@guardian.co.uk
