Zimbabwe explain Twenty20 exit

Eurosport - Fri, 04 Jul 21:46:00 2008

Zimbabwe Cricket chairman Peter Chingoka revealed the decision to pull out of the 2009 World Twenty20 in England was taken after considering the huge financial losses all parties would have incurred had it been moved.

CRICKET Zimbabwe (captain Prosper Utseya in middle) celebrate their remarkable five wicket win over Australia Cricket - ICC Twenty20 World Cup - Australia v Zimbabwe - Newlands Stadium - 0

The England and Wales Cricket Board - and many of their counterparts around the world - breathed a sigh of relief today when it was confirmed Zimbabwe intend to withdraw from the second Twenty20 tournament.

The announcement followed days of frantic negotiations between delegates at the International Cricket Council annual meeting in Dubai, after the ECB last week banned Zimbabwe from their scheduled tour of England early next summer.

With the World Twenty20 due to immediately follow that series, instruction from Gordon Brown's Government was that Zimbabwe's cricketers would be unwelcome for the high-profile event - on account of the human rights abuses perpetrated in their country under the regime of president Robert Mugabe.

Resolution to the crisis was not forthcoming as ICC deliberations extended into an unplanned third day, with India thought sure to block any suggestion of stripping Zimbabwe of their full member status.

Instead, though, Zimbabwe Cricket themselves averted the collision course by agreeing to pull out.

Chingoka felt the fact the losses would have extended not just to England but to the ICC and the other nine full members was too big a burden.

"We opted out because we are not guaranteed visas for the tournament and why would we force ourselves to a wedding where we are not wanted - we don't want to be gatecrashers," he said.

"We made a decision that is in the best interests of the game because everyone would have lost out financially had the event been moved elsewhere at this late stage.

"The ICC is already committed to global partners through pre-sold commercial rights and to undo the whole process at this stage would have prejudiced not only the ECB but it would have directly affected financial returns, from the event, to all members.

"Members would get much less revenue - compared to what's on the table now - had the event been taken elsewhere because no other country matched England in terms of financial returns.

"Also there would have been punitive claims from companies that got pre-sold rights on the basis that the tournament was being held in England.

"So on looking at these scenarios Zimbabwe could not push wholesome demands (to remain a full member and also take part at the Twenty20 World Cup) in the interests of everyone."

And Chingoka was able to take positives from the outcome.

"It was a major breakthrough for us after losing the support of Cricket South Africa because in the end we kept all our rights intact and also protected our revenue base," he said, before looking ahead to future series.

"Sri Lanka are willing to come to Zimbabwe in November while the West Indies are also interested to come and help us identify our needs to enable us return to Test cricket soon. We will be playing with friendly boards who want to play us."

Reuters

Comment 1 - 11 of 11

Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

  1. Botswana can take Zimbabwes place at the ICC. They seem to wag their tails every time Britain yawns. This is bloody discrimination.

    From Long Jon, on Fri 4 Jul 4:13PM

  2. Hooray!! confusion!! sports and politics, where and when???
    Why didn't you use your political giantism so that England could participate in Euro2008 final tournaments after been eliminated by Croatia.
    What next is to block visa provision for and nation which will defeat england in any sport!! hahaa.
    Good lucky Mr. Power......

    From godlisten2002, on Fri 4 Jul 1:11PM

  3. think the scope is beyond sport. All heads os states stick their heads out whenever a team of any sort of sport in their countries achieve something. Mugabe is no excuse. He favoured that game for a longtime. It remained as the image he wanted to hold. Suspend the team and Mugabe will feel it. AU remains to blame. SADCC is a group of pple with same feathers. Mbeki shd get out of way and leave Botswana do the job of mediation. I support the ban of Zim team

    From jjpate93, on Fri 4 Jul 11:46AM

  4. I think the scope is beyond sport. All heads os states stick their heads out whenever a team of any sort of sport in their countries achieve something. Mugabe is no excuse. He favoured that game for a longtime. It remained as the image he wanted to hold. Suspend the team and Mugabe will feel it. AU remains to blame. SADCC is a group of pple with same feathers. Mbeki shd get out of way and leave Botswana do the job of mediation. I support the ban of Zim team. Tom (mozambique)

    From tomfontel, on Fri 4 Jul 10:51AM

  5. well South African sports(wo)men were in isolation for similar reasons for many years - and as cricket goes I recall you had cricketers joining the Kerry Packer rebels. Perhaps they can play for other franchises around the world?
    Agree though, the UK govt have screwed up here. They abandoned Zim to the despot in 1980, never did anything about it (ref the lack of strategic importance of the country) and now everyone is merely wristslapping. Pathetic.

    From baobabjim, on Fri 4 Jul 10:18AM

  6. That was a schoolboy miscalculated decision taken by England especially by Gordon Brown to punish non political cricketers from a country two thirds of which don't support the despot. It's just like a headmaster expelling the whole classroom because of a couple of disruptive yobbish students. I think it will be a good idea for the ICC to allow Zimbabwean exiles to form a participating team for a future humane government because there is a lot of Zimbabwean talent scattered all over the world just being wasted into oblivion.

    From mr_supremo2010, on Fri 4 Jul 9:58AM

  7. Next on the agenda is the Beijing games. All countries should boycott them. It was an absurd move to award China the games in the first place.

    From Sussex BY The Sea, on Fri 4 Jul 9:31AM

  8. Looks like the UK government does not understand to talk and discuss issues like grown-ups....anytime it finds a difficult situation like handling Zimbabwe or even handling the Russian government...the newly formed uk government takes the easiest approach, close doors..and pretend they do not exist any more, like we heard nothing, we know nothing about them, which is always the wrong approach ...Why stop playing sports when some crack refuses to let go power in a country. Having sporting and bilateral, cultural ties are the first thing people do prove that the host nation do care and not the same as the guest nation where mugabe looks like he doesn't care much. Same happened with Russia, pulling out diplomats...expelling diplomats, etc. Sorry state of politics indeed.

    From sidhartha p, on Fri 4 Jul 9:21AM

  9. Still there is racism is going on strongly in the world like Big developed countries like England and Australia are there means it is shamefull of behave like that .and if any resources is getting frm that country means they wuld have ben mum but no, that 's wise they are not needed..........................

    kiran

    From kiranry_008, on Fri 4 Jul 9:19AM

  10. they are horrible tryina make political statements trhu sport, thereby killin it.what has this world come to.its nothe cricket players they are after, its the hierachy of the country.if you ask me,i think they are beavin no diff from a terrorist.

    From Simbarashe M, on Fri 4 Jul 9:07AM

  11. damn right too... just imagine, if they had oil or other precious reserves the US would have gone in to remove Mugabe by now and restore law and order..... just like in Iraq...ooh, hang on a minute, that didnt work either did it....maybe I meant Korea...or Vietn.....

    From Keith R, on Fri 4 Jul 8:56AM
Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

Not already a Yahoo! user ? to get a free Yahoo! Account