Off Topic

An open letter to New Zealand Cricket

16 replies · 313 views
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
An open letter to New Zealand Cricket
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I guess this should go in the Cricket thread - but more people will read it out here.

I've also emailed this to NZ Cricket and will be emailing the ICC and BCCI.
 
 

To whom it may concern,

 

I live in Christchurch and was recently at a few local Twenty20 Cricket matches involving Shane Bond. It was great to see New Zealand�s best bowler in full action playing cricket in New Zealand. A few days later I was going to go and purchase tickets from Tiketek. As I contemplated how I was going to buy them (Internet or in store) something hit me.

What reason do I have for buying these tickets at all?

I have attended every Christchurch match for a number of years and would always, faithfully purchase tickets and attend matches without question. However today I am left wondering why I should even bother.

All I would be doing is supporting a corrupt cricket board in the form of the BCCI and a Cricket board that doesn't have the balls to do what�s right for the game and play its best players - NZ Cricket.

What right does the BCCI have to control cricket around the world? None. And yet they still do. You told Shane Bond that he could play for both his country and an ICL team now you should stand by what you have said.

Why should I pay to get into either of the 2 matches being played in the city this summer when I can't even watch the best available players? I do understand NZ Crickets predicament. If you play Bond and others like him India won't play you.

However on the ICC (of which you are a member) website it has a mission statement. Included in the mission statement are the following "Values":

1) Openness, honesty and integrity -

We work to the highest ethical standards. We do what we say we are going to do, in the way we say we are going to do it.

And yet Bond can't play? But you told him he could.... How is that doing what you say you are going to do?

2) Excellence -

Cricket's players and supporters deserve the best. It is our duty to set the highest standards.

Again, how is not playing one of this country�s best players giving supporters "the best?"

3) Accountability and responsibility -

We take responsibility for leading and protecting the game. We provide outstanding service to our stakeholders. If others are harming the game we take necessary action.

So the BCCI banning certain players simply because they play in an opposition league is in the best interests of the game? And not play our countries leading fast bowler is also in the best interests of the game?

Perhaps you should start honouring what you say. Until then I refuse to attend any international cricket especially that involving India.

Yours Sincerely

Daniel Jourdain

Gangsta!2009-02-21 17:27:48
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I'm not 100% sure you got the facts straight there Gangsta.
 
It was the ICC decision to not allow ICP contracted players to play international.  NZC issued a statement that ICL players would be overlooked for selection.  And then after, Bond signed up with the ICL.
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Still the BCCI put alot of pressure on the ICC.
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
one man army

ive got a song that wont take long, Adelaide are rubbish.. the second verse is same as the first.. ADELAIDE ARE RUBBISH

Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
2ndBest wrote:
I'm not 100% sure you got the facts straight there Gangsta.
 
It was the ICC decision to not allow ICP contracted players to play international.  NZC issued a statement that ICL players would be overlooked for selection.  And then after, Bond signed up with the ICL.
 
From my understanding Bond was told by NZ Cricket that he could play, he went ahead and signed and then NZC issued there statement.
 
And although it was an ICC descion it was done with pressure from the BCCI. Thats why in the letter I wrote the BCCI banning players. Because although officially it was the ICC, if was done because the BCCI told them too.
Gangsta!2009-02-21 18:16:58
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Gangsta! wrote:
2ndBest wrote:
I'm not 100% sure you got the facts straight there Gangsta.
 
It was the ICC decision to not allow ICP contracted players to play international.  NZC issued a statement that ICL players would be overlooked for selection.  And then after, Bond signed up with the ICL.
 
From my understanding Bond was told by NZ Cricket that he could play, he went ahead and signed and then NZC issued there statement.
 
And although it was an ICC descion it was done with pressure from the BCCI.
 
 
So if your understanding is wrong then this is all invalid?

ive got a song that wont take long, Adelaide are rubbish.. the second verse is same as the first.. ADELAIDE ARE RUBBISH

Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Scottishbhoy wrote:
Gangsta! wrote:
2ndBest wrote:
I'm not 100% sure you got the facts straight there Gangsta.
 
It was the ICC decision to not allow ICP contracted players to play international.  NZC issued a statement that ICL players would be overlooked for selection.  And then after, Bond signed up with the ICL.
 
From my understanding Bond was told by NZ Cricket that he could play, he went ahead and signed and then NZC issued there statement.
 
And although it was an ICC descion it was done with pressure from the BCCI.
 
 
So if your understanding is wrong then this is all invalid?
 
Not at all. The BCCI still shouldn't (through the ICC) have the power to tell us who we can and can't play.
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
 
Fair enough, I was wrong.
 
Doesn't change the fact that the BCCI (thru ICC) shouldn't have the power to tell us who to - or more to the point not to - play.
Gangsta!2009-02-21 18:29:30
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cricket/article3266584.ece - January 29
 
 NZC said that Bond, 32, had initially been given permission to sign for the ICL because there was no clash with international fixtures. Subsequently, however, the ICC reminded New Zealand of a 2003 regulation that prohibits release of a contracted player for unsanctioned cricket.
 
So they did give him permission.
Gangsta!2009-02-21 18:35:36
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
So basically, it was the NZC ballsing up that screwed Bond.

Although in general I agree with your sentiment, the BCCI wields way too much power in world cricket. It's got to the point where India are my least favourite cricket team just because of that.
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Your letter is full of sh*t and so are you. You're being hypocritical in the greatest sense of the word.

Three for me, and two for them.

Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Buffon II wrote:
You're being hypocritical in the greatest sense of the word.
 
How so?
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Gangsta! wrote:
Buffon II wrote:
You're being hypocritical in the greatest sense of the word.
 
How so?


When i said i'd almost rather team lose under Bracewell which was in theory me boycotting the team due to his leadership you criticised me and said i should and i paraphrase "support the team and not the coach IMHO". Now what you're doing is exactly the same and i could say the exact same thing except replace coach with corrupt cricket board.

Three for me, and two for them.

Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Buffon II wrote:
Gangsta! wrote:
Buffon II wrote:
You're being hypocritical in the greatest sense of the word.
 
How so?


When i said i'd almost rather team lose under Bracewell which was in theory me boycotting the team due to his leadership you criticised me and said i should and i paraphrase "support the team and not the coach IMHO". Now what you're doing is exactly the same and i could say the exact same thing except replace coach with corrupt cricket board.
 
But I've never said that I don't want the team to win, I've simply said that I don't want my $ going in the back pocket of a corrupt cricket board.
Permalink Permalink
about 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Gangsta! wrote:
Buffon II wrote:
Gangsta! wrote:
Buffon II wrote:
You're being hypocritical in the greatest sense of the word.
 
How so?


When i said i'd almost rather team lose under Bracewell which was in theory me boycotting the team due to his leadership you criticised me and said i should and i paraphrase "support the team and not the coach IMHO". Now what you're doing is exactly the same and i could say the exact same thing except replace coach with corrupt cricket board.
 
But I've never said that I don't want the team to win, I've simply said that I don't want my $ going in the back pocket of a corrupt cricket board.


Yes but you're not really supporting the team are you when you have the chance to go to games in your city. Even during the Bracewell days i still went to every game at Eden Park. You're giving up your best chance at supporting the team all for some stand over a player dispute.

Three for me, and two for them.

Permalink Permalink