Mike Stanger: ICC Associate & Affiliate credibility is at stake

In this strictly personal column, Mike Stanger monitors reaction to Cricket Scotland's decision not to travel to Zimbabwe for the scheduled  Intercontinental Cup game next month, and sums up the conflicts of interest behind the scenes...
 

If war is the result of failed politics, and sport is 'war by other means' (Carl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz, 200 years ago, according to Wikipedia), it is perhaps not surprising that, rather than go to war, politicians often use sport to try to get their way.

Thus the rather irritating stushie surrounding Scottish cricket over Zimbabwe and the ICC Intercontinental Cup has left us all befuddled in the cricketing world - but not half so confused as a large section of the population of that beleagured African country, which still has a way to go to achieve the regime change desired by the international community.

But, in the past 24 hours, thanks to the world-wide web, I have been able to read the views of that 'independent' sector of African opinion relayed by The Zimbabwean online newspaper - 'A voice for the voiceless', it proclaims. I commend it to you for its interesting insight into the topic (here's the link).

More widely in the media, the no-win decision of the Cricket Scotland Board appears to have been received with full respect - and, indeed, approval - given that the situation was not of its making.

So who now carries the responsibility for trying to allow a fairly important international cricket match to take place?

"The decision is regrettable," said Zimbabwe Cricket's managing director Ozias Bvute, according to one other online report. "We have consulted with various authorities, who have ruled out the possibility of these matches being played in a neutral venue," he added.

Presumably those are the same authorities who approved of that proposal two years ago when the ICC concocted a way to start bringing Zimbabwe back into the international cricketing community.

But Mr Bvute was not finished: "I remain of the belief that sport can build bridges, and I have confidence that it can also act as a catalyst for healing and national unity." Well we can all say hurrah to that sentiment: that was the idea behind the original plan for playing at a neutral venue. So let's play.

No-one can really blame Zimbabwe Cricket, or whoever was behind them, for lobbying the ICC to change the rules in the middle of the competition. And 'blame' can certainly be attached to the 'hardening of attitude' towards Zimbabwe at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office in the wake of the UK's own recent democratic regime change.

But, ultimately, it is the International Cricket Council's responsibility. And, despite the banner-waving of Mr Bvute, it must surely be possible for the ICC to put appropriate pressure on the Zimbabwe authorities to allow this game to take place somewhere in Africa, as they originally planned.

The fly in the ointment, though, is the Irish conundrum. They had already been 'snared' by the Zimbabwean glasnost before the new British coalition government had gathered its ideas together. But the Ireland cricket team represents all of Ireland, so we have the curiosity that those players  from Northern Ireland - British citizens - will be travelling to Harare to play cricket, despite the 'unequivocal' advice of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office against sports tours to Zimbabwe by British teams.

Much is being made of the fact that sporting links with South Africa were being resumed before Nelson Mandela was released from long-term incarceration. That was admirable, but it was also part of a two-way process of reconciliation.

Scottish cricket is probably not considered important enough to the Zimbabwean authorities to allow for two-way consultative traffic. So, once again, the ICC must police the political crossroads in order to avoid a head-on collapse of its ideals and principles.

The credibility of the Intercontinental Cup - and perhaps of all ICC Associate and Affiliate cricket - is at stake. Presumably war is not an option.
 

• NOTE: The views expressed in this Blog are not necessarily those of Cricket Scotland or its officers.