Discussion:
Boycott?
(too old to reply)
miked
2025-01-08 17:50:00 UTC
Permalink
200 MPs have sent a letter to ECB calling on England to boycott their
game against Afghans becos of the Talibans actions against womens rights
in the country.

In fact theyve already violated ICC rules in not allowing a womens team
to play, and no cricket is going on in the country. Seeing that majority
of afghan cricketers are playing abroad often for other countries, why
cant the ICC recruit afghan women cricketers who have left the country
and have them play in Oz where most of them have fled? The iCC surely
has the funding for such an enterprise, as they basically fund the
afghan mans team already. Since the Afghan mens team are basically
expats and refugees, why shouldnt the ICC allow womens team on the same
basis. Smacks of double standards.

mike
John Hall
2025-01-08 18:19:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by miked
200 MPs have sent a letter to ECB calling on England to boycott their
game against Afghans becos of the Talibans actions against womens rights
in the country.
In fact theyve already violated ICC rules in not allowing a womens team
to play, and no cricket is going on in the country. Seeing that majority
of afghan cricketers are playing abroad often for other countries, why
cant the ICC recruit afghan women cricketers who have left the country
and have them play in Oz where most of them have fled? The iCC surely
has the funding for such an enterprise, as they basically fund the
afghan mans team already. Since the Afghan mens team are basically
expats and refugees, why shouldnt the ICC allow womens team on the same
basis. Smacks of double standards.
mike
Yes, that would be good. I feel very sorry for the Afghan men's team,
who I don't suppose support the Taliban.
--
John Hall
"I look upon it, that he who does not mind his belly,
will hardly mind anything else."
Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-84)
max.it
2025-01-11 09:17:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Hall
Post by miked
200 MPs have sent a letter to ECB calling on England to boycott their
game against Afghans becos of the Talibans actions against womens rights
in the country.
In fact theyve already violated ICC rules in not allowing a womens team
to play, and no cricket is going on in the country. Seeing that majority
of afghan cricketers are playing abroad often for other countries, why
cant the ICC recruit afghan women cricketers who have left the country
and have them play in Oz where most of them have fled? The iCC surely
has the funding for such an enterprise, as they basically fund the
afghan mans team already. Since the Afghan mens team are basically
expats and refugees, why shouldnt the ICC allow womens team on the same
basis. Smacks of double standards.
mike
Yes, that would be good. I feel very sorry for the Afghan men's team,
who I don't suppose support the Taliban.
It wouldn't be a Boycott. A Boycott is a social sanction. Afghanistan
are ineligible because the requirements for participation have not
been met.
When socio-religious motivation makes it into law you get the problems
seen in Afghanistan cricket.
Back in the days of the death penalty the jury would find the accused
guilty but recommend leniency in sentencing. The judge had to ignore
the jury's recommendation because the verdict determines the sentence
for the court. The homicide act came along in the 50s and created a
hierarchy of murders based on the motivation of the murderer.

max.it
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
John Hall
2025-01-11 10:21:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by max.it
Post by John Hall
Post by miked
200 MPs have sent a letter to ECB calling on England to boycott their
game against Afghans becos of the Talibans actions against womens rights
in the country.
In fact theyve already violated ICC rules in not allowing a womens team
to play, and no cricket is going on in the country. Seeing that majority
of afghan cricketers are playing abroad often for other countries, why
cant the ICC recruit afghan women cricketers who have left the country
and have them play in Oz where most of them have fled? The iCC surely
has the funding for such an enterprise, as they basically fund the
afghan mans team already. Since the Afghan mens team are basically
expats and refugees, why shouldnt the ICC allow womens team on the same
basis. Smacks of double standards.
mike
Yes, that would be good. I feel very sorry for the Afghan men's team,
who I don't suppose support the Taliban.
It wouldn't be a Boycott. A Boycott is a social sanction. Afghanistan
are ineligible because the requirements for participation have not
been met.
When socio-religious motivation makes it into law you get the problems
seen in Afghanistan cricket.
Back in the days of the death penalty the jury would find the accused
guilty but recommend leniency in sentencing. The judge had to ignore
the jury's recommendation because the verdict determines the sentence
for the court. The homicide act came along in the 50s and created a
hierarchy of murders based on the motivation of the murderer.
max.it
But it is the responsibility of the ICC to determine whether the
eligibility requirements have been met. To you and me it's clear that
they haven't been, but the ICC seems prepared to sweep that under the
carpet. So if England - as an ICC member - decide independently not to
play their match against them, to me that would be a boycott.

The ECB's main argument for playing the match seems to be that, if they
don't, English players could be at risk of reprisals from terrorists
when playing international or franchise matches in Pakistan. As it is,
the England team have had very heavy security during their last two Test
series in the country.
--
John Hall
"I look upon it, that he who does not mind his belly,
will hardly mind anything else."
Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-84)
max.it
2025-01-11 14:59:38 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 10:21:15 +0000, John Hall
Post by John Hall
Post by max.it
Post by John Hall
Post by miked
200 MPs have sent a letter to ECB calling on England to boycott their
game against Afghans becos of the Talibans actions against womens rights
in the country.
In fact theyve already violated ICC rules in not allowing a womens team
to play, and no cricket is going on in the country. Seeing that majority
of afghan cricketers are playing abroad often for other countries, why
cant the ICC recruit afghan women cricketers who have left the country
and have them play in Oz where most of them have fled? The iCC surely
has the funding for such an enterprise, as they basically fund the
afghan mans team already. Since the Afghan mens team are basically
expats and refugees, why shouldnt the ICC allow womens team on the same
basis. Smacks of double standards.
mike
Yes, that would be good. I feel very sorry for the Afghan men's team,
who I don't suppose support the Taliban.
It wouldn't be a Boycott. A Boycott is a social sanction. Afghanistan
are ineligible because the requirements for participation have not
been met.
When socio-religious motivation makes it into law you get the problems
seen in Afghanistan cricket.
Back in the days of the death penalty the jury would find the accused
guilty but recommend leniency in sentencing. The judge had to ignore
the jury's recommendation because the verdict determines the sentence
for the court. The homicide act came along in the 50s and created a
hierarchy of murders based on the motivation of the murderer.
max.it
But it is the responsibility of the ICC to determine whether the
eligibility requirements have been met. To you and me it's clear that
they haven't been, but the ICC seems prepared to sweep that under the
carpet. So if England - as an ICC member - decide independently not to
play their match against them, to me that would be a boycott.
Would the Boycott would be against the ICC match going ahead against
it's own rules or against the Taliban sending a team or the team
itself?
Post by John Hall
The ECB's main argument for playing the match seems to be that, if they
don't, English players could be at risk of reprisals from terrorists
when playing international or franchise matches in Pakistan. As it is,
the England team have had very heavy security during their last two Test
series in the country.
The ECB are creating that hierarchy I mentioned, when in reality they
could be sanctioned for not playing and get wrapped up in all kinds of
litigious shittery and that's all the reason they need.

I remember the PK SL terrorist incident which was a sorry display of
how far off the mark PK security intel was and how highly suspicious
the entire incident was.
You can't protect against a risk until it becomes a threat.
Has there been any other incidents or threats against players anywhere
at all?

max.it
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
David North
2025-01-11 17:51:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by max.it
On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 10:21:15 +0000, John Hall
Post by John Hall
Post by max.it
Post by John Hall
Post by miked
200 MPs have sent a letter to ECB calling on England to boycott their
game against Afghans becos of the Talibans actions against womens rights
in the country.
In fact theyve already violated ICC rules in not allowing a womens team
to play, and no cricket is going on in the country. Seeing that majority
of afghan cricketers are playing abroad often for other countries, why
cant the ICC recruit afghan women cricketers who have left the country
and have them play in Oz where most of them have fled? The iCC surely
has the funding for such an enterprise, as they basically fund the
afghan mans team already. Since the Afghan mens team are basically
expats and refugees, why shouldnt the ICC allow womens team on the same
basis. Smacks of double standards.
mike
Yes, that would be good. I feel very sorry for the Afghan men's team,
who I don't suppose support the Taliban.
It wouldn't be a Boycott. A Boycott is a social sanction. Afghanistan
are ineligible because the requirements for participation have not
been met.
When socio-religious motivation makes it into law you get the problems
seen in Afghanistan cricket.
Back in the days of the death penalty the jury would find the accused
guilty but recommend leniency in sentencing. The judge had to ignore
the jury's recommendation because the verdict determines the sentence
for the court. The homicide act came along in the 50s and created a
hierarchy of murders based on the motivation of the murderer.
max.it
But it is the responsibility of the ICC to determine whether the
eligibility requirements have been met. To you and me it's clear that
they haven't been, but the ICC seems prepared to sweep that under the
carpet. So if England - as an ICC member - decide independently not to
play their match against them, to me that would be a boycott.
Would the Boycott would be against the ICC match going ahead against
it's own rules or against the Taliban sending a team or the team
itself?
AFAIAA, it's the Afghanistan Cricket Board who are sending the team, not
the Taliban. The boycott that the MPs were asking for was against the
Taliban's treatment of females generally, not about cricket specifically.
--
David North
John Hall
2025-01-11 20:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by David North
Post by max.it
On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 10:21:15 +0000, John Hall
Post by John Hall
Post by max.it
Post by John Hall
Post by miked
200 MPs have sent a letter to ECB calling on England to boycott their
game against Afghans becos of the Talibans actions against womens rights
in the country.
In fact theyve already violated ICC rules in not allowing a womens team
to play, and no cricket is going on in the country. Seeing that majority
of afghan cricketers are playing abroad often for other countries, why
cant the ICC recruit afghan women cricketers who have left the country
and have them play in Oz where most of them have fled? The iCC surely
has the funding for such an enterprise, as they basically fund the
afghan mans team already. Since the Afghan mens team are basically
expats and refugees, why shouldnt the ICC allow womens team on the same
basis. Smacks of double standards.
mike
Yes, that would be good. I feel very sorry for the Afghan men's team,
who I don't suppose support the Taliban.
It wouldn't be a Boycott. A Boycott is a social sanction. Afghanistan
are ineligible because the requirements for participation have not
been met.
When socio-religious motivation makes it into law you get the problems
seen in Afghanistan cricket.
Back in the days of the death penalty the jury would find the accused
guilty but recommend leniency in sentencing. The judge had to ignore
the jury's recommendation because the verdict determines the sentence
for the court. The homicide act came along in the 50s and created a
hierarchy of murders based on the motivation of the murderer.
max.it
But it is the responsibility of the ICC to determine whether the
eligibility requirements have been met. To you and me it's clear that
they haven't been, but the ICC seems prepared to sweep that under the
carpet. So if England - as an ICC member - decide independently not to
play their match against them, to me that would be a boycott.
Would the Boycott would be against the ICC match going ahead against
it's own rules or against the Taliban sending a team or the team
itself?
AFAIAA, it's the Afghanistan Cricket Board who are sending the team,
not the Taliban. The boycott that the MPs were asking for was against
the Taliban's treatment of females generally, not about cricket
specifically.
Yep.
--
John Hall
"I look upon it, that he who does not mind his belly,
will hardly mind anything else."
Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-84)
Loading...