|
Last week the news of the Nigerian soccer development hit me like a flash of lightning from the blues.
In our younger days we learned that Africa consists mostly of politically unstable countries with leaders of limited vision and a part of the world where democracy is a semi-luxury.
However, the Nigerian episode in this 2010 World Cup has changed my opinion somewhat. I feel persons in the calibre of Goodluck Jonathan do really feel for the game, but, yet are concerned enough to bow down to ethical moves with regard to sport and keep that section of recreation run by sport administrators.
 The news item released by the Associated Press last week gives a fair insight into the whole episode.
Nigerian president Goodluck Jonathan has dropped a threat to suspend the national soccer team from playing for two years because of its poor World Cup showing and corruption allegations.
In a statement, Jonathan's office said the decision came after a meeting on Monday with the Nigeria Football Federation. The federation's executive committee fired the group's president and vice president Sunday in an effort to appease the government.
FIFA had set a deadline Monday evening for the Nigerian government to drop its suspension plans or face even harsher international sanctions than those Jonathan threatened to impose. In a statement, FIFA acknowledged the government had backed off and "therefore, the Nigerian Football Federation remains vested with all its statutory rights."
FIFA regulations forbid governments from interfering in national soccer federations and it has suspended countries for breaking the rules, a ban that extends to club teams, referees and officials.
The golden message in that story was the soccer administrators who kicked out their top brass and not a sports minister was one who does not know the soccer ball from a glow ball.
At the same time it also shows how sensitive FIFA is to political interference in sport at any level in a country.
In Nigeria their top sport is soccer and that is the sport that keeps their flag afloat in that part of the globe and any low view of that sport is taken very seriously even at the very top of the hierarchy. However sensitive the situation may have been at that tense moment, the President of the country did the right thing and prevented any harmful repercussions plaguing the sport.
In Sri Lanka, the story runs the other way. I feel that is because the ICC, unlike FIFA, has no mechanism to check political interference. Even the ICC should gear itself to take tough stands against governments that directly interfere with cricket and take steps to thwart such actions.
The best example of this also comes from the same continent. During the 2003 cricket World Cup, the political situation in Zimbabwe came to the fore on the cricket field. Zimbabwean players, Andy Flower and Henry Olonga, went against the status quo and wore black arm bands during matches in protest against the "death of democracy in Zimbabwe" -- a reference to their concern over the political actions of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe. Both players subsequently retired from cricket and emigrated from Zimbabwe.
On April 2, 2004, Zimbabwe Cricket (ZC) announced that Heath Streak had resigned from captaincy and retired from cricket. Over the following days it became clear that Streak had been dismissed.
From that point onwards, the ICC and the ZC clashed and political interference dragged the game down, but the ICC was pussy-footing around the whole issue. At present the standards of Zimbabwe cricket have gone down drastically. At the same time most top cricket playing nations stay away from playing cricket in Zimbabwe for purely political reasons.
The situation in Pakistan is different, but that is also riddled with political interference. As a result, in spite of being one of the most talented cricketing nations and winning the World Cup mostly through the individual guile of former skipper Imran Khan, Pakistan has been struggling to stamp its authority in cricket on the World Map.
In India there are truck loads of politicians involved in cricket at various levels, but the roots of the BCCI is so strong it still operates as a separate independent unit.
In Sri Lanka, the ball has spun the other way. At one point of history in Sri Lanka the Sports Law was introduced to safeguard the rights of sportspersons and sports administrators in this country. But what has happened today is that the very same medicine that was introduced to kill a cancer has turned septic inside the sports body and the most hit is cricket which has the biggest following in the country.
Now other sports are plagued by this disease. When one hears of how the rugby contest ended and finally who the kingmaker was, one feels very sorry for that sport too. But, I feel cricket suffers more.
Right now can the sports minister lure any cricketer who is worth a pinch of salt to take up a position in the cricket administration? They run a mile. When one just takes the SLC hierarchy, how many of them can be put into the top bracket besides the selection committee?
It is not only the administrators. Now even the players themselves have learned that if you do not approach high places when necessary, things may not work as planned for you.We would like to ask the ICC why they are tolerating a “permanent interim” body to run the game in Sri Lanka. Why cannot they take a stern stand, and request the country to play by the meaning of the word. If it is an interim body that is appointed, provide them with a stipulated time to put things right and get back to the democratic norms of elected bodies.
Even now things have gone too far. The game is ruled by a weak body. This is evident when a newly appointed Sports Minister sacks the Selection Committee overnight and appoints a new one. Then he sacks the head of the SLC’s ICC secretariat and reappoints him overnight and then sacks the Tour Organizing Committee and appoints a new one and then re-appoints them once again. Isn’t this all a big joke?
However now we ask why has he appointed an Interim Committee to run the game if he has to keep making adjustments himself? For the sake of the survival of this beautiful game, the ICC should become more sensitive to political interference in the game. If not we may soon have a team worse than Zimbabwe. |
E-mail
