English cricketer Moeen Ali had been wearing two wrist bands about Gaza while playing against India. ICC has recently banned him from wearing such bands presenting the logic that they are trying to keep Cricket away from politics.
Do you think ICC is right about its stand keeping cricket and politics seperate? Has it been consistent in its action?
ngland batsman Moeen Ali has been asked to remove wristbands bearing the slogans “Save Gaza” and “Free Palestine” following a conversation with the ICC match referee, David Boon.
Moeen, a devout Muslim who welcomes the position of role-model and says he wears a long beard as he “wants people to know I am a Muslim,” wore the wristbands on the first two days of the third Investec Test between England and India at The Ageas Bowl.
While the ECB defended Moeen’s stance, describing his actions as humanitarian rather than political, Boon reminded Moeen of the ICC clothing and equipment regulations.
According to section F of the relevant ICC code: “Players and team officials shall not be permitted to wear, display or otherwise convey messages through arm bands or other items affixed to clothing or equipment unless approved in advance by the player or team official’s Board. Approval shall not be granted for messages which relate to political, religious or racial activities or causes.”
Boon also told Moeen that, while individuals are free to make political - or humanitarian - statements in their private lives, they do not enjoy such freedom while playing international cricket.
An ICC spokesman said: “The ICC equipment and clothing regulations do not permit the display of messages that relate to political, religious or racial activities or causes during an international match. Moeen Ali was told by the match referee that while he is free to express his views on such causes away from the cricket field, he is not permitted to wear the wristbands on the field of play and warned not to wear the bands again during an international match.”
While the ICC have not guaranteed they will take no further action against Moeen, it seems safe to presume that all parties now consider the matter closed. He could, in theory, face a maximum penalty of a fine of up to 50% of his match fee if he is deemed to have committed a Level One offence.
It is not the first time cricket has struggled with the grey area between legitimate free speech and political statements. **Andy Flower and Henry Olonga were both widely praised for their black armband demonstration during the 2003 World Cup, which was designed to turn a spotlight on the political situation in Zimbabwe and neither faced ICC sanction.
Both sides observed a minute’s silence ahead of the third day’s play to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War. The England team are also wearing shirts bearing the Help for Heroes logo. Help for Heroes describes itself as “a UK military charity… formed to help those wounded in Britain’s current conflicts.”
**
George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo
[QUOTE]
*Andy Flower and Henry Olonga were both widely praised for their black armband demonstration during the 2003 World Cup, which was designed to turn a spotlight on the political situation in Zimbabwe and neither faced ICC sanction.
Both sides observed a minute's silence ahead of the third day's play to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War. The England team are also wearing shirts bearing the Help for Heroes logo. Help for Heroes describes itself as "a UK military charity… formed to help those wounded in Britain's current conflicts."
*
[/QUOTE]
Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. Treacherous display of hypocrisy and cowardice by the ICC. The message on the band 'Save Gaza' represents a humanitarian cause. He could have opted for 'Free Palestine' band which would have appeared as a political statement, and rightly so.
Moeen being banned from wearing the band and Malaysian cyclist being warned over his pro Palestinian glove all reminds of 1968 Olympics and American Civil Rights Movement - the black panther salute to be precise.
But I'm pretty sure Moeen was well aware that hundreds of cameras will capture the message on his band, the images will be published and there will be controversy, but he was still brave and successfully in spreading the message to millions. The actual aim of raising awareness was accomplished at the end of the day.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under an impression that ICC also prohibits endorsement of causes as well. So I'd imagine wearing the pink ribbon for breast cancer also falls under that restriction?
^ Why bring gay marriage into the equation? Are you implying that is not worth supporting? If you are, don't you see the contradiction. If you don't have empathy towards a discriminated against group, how do you have the moral ground to expect fair treatment for your cause. Wouldn't it be fair to support BOTH?
How about Wristband with slogans of "Stop Drone Attack", "Kashmir Key Azadi tak Jang Rahay gi", "Stop Killing in Syria", "Stop Muslims Killing in Myanmar", "Stop Killing in Bangladesh" etc.
Wow you can support other causes while playing how many times SA team wore pink kit n then wht about those red ribbons on chest for creating awareness.
^ Why bring gay marriage into the equation? Are you implying that is not worth supporting? If you are, don't you see the contradiction. If you don't have empathy towards a discriminated against group, how do you have the moral ground to expect fair treatment for your cause. Wouldn't it be fair to support BOTH?
Yes for me gay marriages are not worth supporting but when ppl can openly support tht then a simple wrist band should not be a problem.
