The hypocrisy of the modern cricket world
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3f958/3f95839c62fc5187d4f84c0b039f01d27882d419" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1e59c/1e59ce2d0c47dbc18d152f0b72a14046b33e399d" alt="promotional_ad"
And suddenly, a car razed a group of people in what was
dubbed as a “deliberate act” by the police. Around 15 people were injured and
the ICC were furious by the country’s lack of security. How on earth could such
an act happen during a Test series of such a gargantuan magnitude?
As a result, that country was banned from hosting
international game until further notice, which probably means close to a
hundred years.
But that’s not what happen, at least not all of it.
Yes, a car ran over a horde of people in Melbourne and yes it was labeled
as an act with full malicious intent. And yes, around 15 people did get injured.
However, what didn’t happen is the ICC getting upset part. They are actually not furious because the
country where this incident took place wasn’t one of the third-world countries
like Pakistan or Bangladesh.
This happened in Australia—a supposed safe haven.
No player got inflicted with injuries—and we can thank the
skies for that—but there is a sense of gripping hypocrisy that could be found
behind the nebulous fog, hidden somewhere deep inside a crevice, that shrouds
the bitter and harsh truth: no country is 100% safe from a potential disaster.
When then president of India, Pranab Mukherjee, visited
Bangladesh, he was welcomed with a crude bomb that went off near his hotel in
2013. A lot of things were said about the country’s apparent lack of security
back then.
And it hurt the cricket, too.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2f2e8/2f2e8a554ac4b1d474132197616dc92f0f48cee1" alt="scdry_ads"
Then came the 2016 terrorist attack at the Holy Artisan
Bakery in Gulshan, Dhaka, that shook the entire country. The Australia cricket
team were reluctant to come to Bangladesh and play cricket with the host
nation because they were worried about potential attacks.
As if.
But no-one is worried now, is it?
No-one will claim that Australia have a lack of proper
security. No-one will claim the same for England despite the fact that there
have been at least two separate terror attacks in the country this year. No-one will
claim that—and no-one should either.
No country is safe from such events. None. Be it America—where
a person has more chances to die from the bullets of a deranged white man than
any other country in the world—or Australia.
And today’s incident only further proves that. So it is absurd to entire label a country for some isolated incidents and defame them for it
There is a subtle racism going on in here. I know it, you
know it—everyone knows it. If a bomb goes off in a third-world country, then
the media backlash will ensure that the country is forever stained with the tag
of being unsafe for visit.
Heck, if what happened today in Melbourne happened anywhere
near the streets of Mirpur in Dhaka, all the international cricketing activities
would have been stopped and England would have flown back to the country the
very same night
But now England won’t do that—even if they want to after being
thrashed by the Aussies thus far—simply because the incident happened in
Australia.
And Australia is a country that can never be unsafe.
Never.