4 thoughts on “The CRICKETher Weekly – Episode 186”
Your “we tried” comment exposes another dimension to this matter and that is the extent to which cricket journalists are being silence on this matter and not holding those in authority to account.
We know you (Raf, Syd) are two that have.
Which other cricket journalists, to your knowledge, are standing up for Afghanistan Women’s cricket by speaking out for them and holding those in authority to account, for example, when interviewing them (or even when interviewing players who are willing to play against Afghanistan) ?
The maxim of the law is “Qui tacet consentit” meaning silence gives consent. This carries over into this Afghanistan issue to mean that those in a position to speak out (key point) but do not are deemed by their lack of action to be agreeing with the treatment of Afghanistan women cricketers (whether politicians, journalists, administrators or players).
So 4 journalists in all …….. what does that say about the other journalists or cricket journalism ?
One wonders what the rainbow symbols on the stumps, the rainbow incorporated into team kits (eg Oval Invincilbles) and taking the knee actually mean in cricket. Is it really just a smoke screen sent up in the hope the public won’t notice it is taking no action against sex discrimination in its own sport; indeed even pouring money into the men’s team (let alone breaking its own rules) ?
Just how cheap are such gestures and precisely what do they represent if, when push comes to shove, no actual action will be taken, no finger lifted ?
Does it mean that cricket will support diversity and stand up (or kneel down) for equality but only if it doesn’t cost it any money ?
CRICKETher 
Your “we tried” comment exposes another dimension to this matter and that is the extent to which cricket journalists are being silence on this matter and not holding those in authority to account.
We know you (Raf, Syd) are two that have.
Which other cricket journalists, to your knowledge, are standing up for Afghanistan Women’s cricket by speaking out for them and holding those in authority to account, for example, when interviewing them (or even when interviewing players who are willing to play against Afghanistan) ?
The maxim of the law is “Qui tacet consentit” meaning silence gives consent. This carries over into this Afghanistan issue to mean that those in a position to speak out (key point) but do not are deemed by their lack of action to be agreeing with the treatment of Afghanistan women cricketers (whether politicians, journalists, administrators or players).
LikeLike
Katya Witney of Wisden has continued to raise the issue. And Ali Mitchel has tried to keep it in the spotlight as well.
LikeLike
So 4 journalists in all …….. what does that say about the other journalists or cricket journalism ?
One wonders what the rainbow symbols on the stumps, the rainbow incorporated into team kits (eg Oval Invincilbles) and taking the knee actually mean in cricket. Is it really just a smoke screen sent up in the hope the public won’t notice it is taking no action against sex discrimination in its own sport; indeed even pouring money into the men’s team (let alone breaking its own rules) ?
Just how cheap are such gestures and precisely what do they represent if, when push comes to shove, no actual action will be taken, no finger lifted ?
Does it mean that cricket will support diversity and stand up (or kneel down) for equality but only if it doesn’t cost it any money ?
LikeLike
Hello Raf and Syd, Love your Vodcast. Rant on, my lovelies, rant on. The ICC deserve every swift kick up the arse that you give them. Have you seen this article? https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/thomas-bach-ioc-monitor-support-womens-cricket-afghanistan-la28-1403728 https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/thomas-bach-ioc-monitor-support-womens-cricket-afghanistan-la28-1403728 Let’s hope that the IOC has more integrity than the ICC and bans the Afghan men’s team from the Olympics unless Afghan women’s team is there also. No women, no men.
LikeLike