England and Australia are preparing to refuse to play in Zimbabwe and New Zealand have pulled out of the Kenya game. I don’t have any problem with that if it’s a political decision but they should have the points deducted as per rules. This issue is threatening to wreck the World Cup.
too bad but I think Pak ki Aus aur Eng key sath game Zimbabwe mey nahi hey 
I hope 2007 World Cup be held in Afghanistan.
On a serious note yes the points should be deducted as per rule. As for this thingy threatening to reck the world cup well jissey nea khelna na khaley "wich pasoori paney" ki koi zaroorat nea :p
The 'morality' of the Zimbabwe situation lies in the eviction of the white farmers, most of them of British origin, and handing over their lands to landless black Zimbabweans. Indeed, if there is anything particularly 'moral' about a visibly foreign two per cent owning 74 per cent of the choicest farmlands in a country, I must say it has missed me by a country mile. I wonder what would happen if the Asian population in the UK, which stands at almost five per cent, would take over three-quarters of the best farmlands; the mind boggles at the prospect!
The moral argument against Zimbabwe is also pretty thin. There are any number of other governments whose human rights records are no better than Zimbabwe's and some who make Mugabe look like an amateur. Compared to the whirlwind century Ariel Sharon [Israel's defence minister in 1982] knocked up in Chatilla [a Palestinian refugee camp in Lebanon], poor Mugabe has not yet got into double figures! Yet an Israeli under-21 football team was welcomed and played in England last year without even a murmur from the government or Football Association -- the same FA which ruled out a football tour of Zimbabwe.
In any case, morality is by no means the exclusive ruling domain of England and Australia, both countries heavily supporting the impending mayhem in Iraq, while the obvious inference that countries like Pakistan, India, Holland and Namibia, who will be playing in Zimbabwe, are somehow devoid of such high moral values.
{Excerpts from a column written by Asif Iqbal}
aren't they getting free points if they don't play in Zim/Ken? If this happens, this WC won't be that interesting.
Mugabe is simply returning the lands to its rightful owners.
I think Zimbabwe should ban England team to enter their country.
As far as I know, the players themselves originally wanted to play (don't all players want to win the world cup?)
but a big media campaign has swung things and they are now under pressure not to play citing safety reasons. Pakistan toured India after receiving threats from GOVERNMENT ministers (Bal Thackeray) so I think it's a bit lame to cop out like this. Cricket is heading for a racial split with these attitudes.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Mr Xtreme: *Pakistan toured India after receiving threats from GOVERNMENT ministers (Bal Thackeray)
[/QUOTE]
What is this Crap ?? Xtreme, Please tell me which Government Minister threatened Pakistani team during that India Tour ??
Coming back to the topic :- Whichever team decides to boycott Zimbabwe should not only have its point docked but should also have some % of their share of money (they are going to get after WC)deducted. After all they all signed a contract to participate in the world cup match.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Mr Xtreme: *
Pakistan toured India after receiving threats from GOVERNMENT ministers (Bal Thackeray) .
[/QUOTE]
somebody needs to improve his General Knowledge.
Zimbabwe refuse to play in South Africa
This is getting innntresting… I tend to agree with ZIM though…
JOHANNESBURG, Feb 5 (Reuters) - Zimbabwe will refuse to play any of their World Cup matches if they are switched to South Africa, the Zimbabwe Cricket Union (ZCU) said on Wednesday.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) is set to decide on Thursday whether to agree to England’s request to move their February 13 match in Zimbabwe because of mounting concerns about the security situation in the strife-torn country.
“Certainly we will not be playing any of our six group matches outside the country,” ZCU chairman Peter Chingoka was quoted as saying by the BBC.
“We will only go to South Africa for the Super Six stage, and if there is to be any other directive then we will use every channel until justice prevails.”
Australia have expressed some concerns but are still planning to play their match against Zimbabwe in Bulawayo on February 24, while India and Pakistan, the Netherlands and Namibia have said they are happy to go ahead with their games as scheduled.
“Zimbabwe was given the rights to host six group matches, and all the teams must honour contractual obligations of the tournament by fulfilling those matches,” Chingoka added.
"We have steered away from political and moral issues to stick to the issue of safety and security for the players and officials.
“There have been security delegations from the ICC, who have expressed satisfaction at our security modalities for the World Cup.”
This was expected and rightly so.
Good decision by Zimbabwe, they should stand for their rights. Either give them the points or tour the country.
The point AQ and asif are trying to make is that Bal Thackeray is a political leader and not a minister.
Well the point I am making is that despite threats made by leading figures in India Pakistan still fulfilled their fixtures - so this hue and cry about safety is a load of BS.
Xtreme - Bal Thackeray is hardly a leading figure in India and Once the govt got him and his other associates by their balls and - they gave in. Pakistan fulfilled its fixture because of the assurances given by Indian govt.
About Pakistan fulfilling its fixtures despite the security concerns - Did you even know that Pakistan had cancelled three tours to India (91,93,94) citing security reasons ?
Aussies,England,NZ are free to boycott their matches like they did in 96 -But they must forfeit their points and Zimbabwe/Kenya boards must be compensated financially for those matches.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Mr Xtreme: *
Well the point I am making is that despite threats made by leading figures in India Pakistan still fulfilled their fixtures - so this hue and cry about safety is a load of BS.
[/QUOTE]
He is not a evena leading figure. no one cares about his BS outside Bombay.
So situations are not comparable and your reasoning doesnt hold good.
Though I agree to your conclusion.
ICC refuse to move England’s Harare match
England’s hopes of switching their World Cup match away from strife-torn Zimbabwe were hanging by a thread on Thursday after tournament organisers rejected their request.
The World Cup technical committee, meeting just two days before the start of the event, refused to move the February 13 game from Harare despite England’s concerns over political and social unrest in the country.
The England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), who made a submission to the committee before the Zimbabwe Cricket Union (ZCU) put the counter argument, immediately lodged a final appeal which is set to go before an ICC-appointed judge on Friday.
International Cricket Council (ICC) chief executive Malcolm Speed told a press conference after the five-hour meeting: "It was a unanimous decision.
"The technical committee does not agree with the ECB… We have tried to make the right decision in the circumstances.
“We believe we have done the best we can and made a fair and honest decision.”
The controversy-plagued World Cup is due to start with an Olympic-style opening ceremony on Saturday, followed by main hosts South Africa playing West Indies on Sunday.
CHAOS THREAT
The 54-match fixture list, however, has been threatened with chaos for weeks.
The long-running row between England and Zimbabwe has been echoed by New Zealand’s continuing refusal to play in Nairobi against co-hosts Kenya and Australia’s worries over travelling to Bulawayo.
ECB chief executive Tim Lamb told Reuters within an hour of the decision: "We are very disappointed. We have lodged our appeal.
“We hope to convince them (the ICC and the judge) of the strength of our argument.”
England could end up forfeiting the Harare match – as well as facing demands for millions of dollars of compensation – and thus face a huge task in reaching the second round.
Speed said England’s argument was based in part on “hearsay, radio reports, newspaper reports”, adding that police security for the match in Zimbabwe had been increased in the last week. “It’s a very comprehensive security plan around the players and officials,” he said.
Lamb represented the ECB on Thursday, with ZCU president Peter Chingoka in the opposite camp. Both were flanked by lawyers.
The witnesses included Patrick Ronan, head of World Cup security, and Peter Richer from international security company Kroll, who produced an independent report for the ICC on Zimbabwe.
SIMMERING ISSUE
The Zimbabwe issue has simmered since December when British ministers urged the England team to boycott the match.
Britain accuses Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe of rigging his re-election last year and compounding a food crisis by seizing white-owned farms.
Similar boycott calls have been made in Australia by Prime Minister John Howard and in New Zealand.
Australia’s squad said on Tuesday they were still ready to play their Group A game in Bulawayo on February 24.
New Zealand, also worried about security, have yet to put in an official request for a venue switch – they are due to play in Nairobi on February 21 – but have already warned they could appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne.
Speed said the rejection of the England appeal “has no impact” on the New Zealand match, adding: “That’s a completely separate matter.”
Thursday’s decision always seemed likely.
World Cup director Ali Bacher and Speed, both on the five-man technical committee, rubber-stamped Zimbabwe’s venues last week following a security visit.
STAKES RAISED
The stakes had been raised to the limit on Wednesday when the ZCU, in a tit-for-tat boycott threat, said it would refuse to play if the England game was moved to South Africa.
Lamb and England’s cricket board had initially backed the ICC stance over Zimbabwe, arguing they were not in a position to make political judgements.
But they did an about-face after skipper Nasser Hussain and his players grew increasingly worried about the fixture.
Britain and Australia’s leaders have led a campaign for sanctions against Mugabe in a row that has split the Commonwealth on roughly racial lines.
South Africa advocates a less confrontational approach to its northern neighbour, and fellow Commonwealth members India and Pakistan – whose teams are also in Group A – say they are happy to play in Zimbabwe.
Sri Lanka, in New Zealand’s group, have also said they have no problems playing in Kenya’s second fixture.
South Africa are scheduled to stage 46 of the World Cup’s 54 games, with six in Zimbabwe.