ICC Champions Trophy 2009

[Sureshot]

Oho, I'm naive am I?

Please tell me how often do you see a positive story about Pakistan and Afghanistan in the international news?

And its nice to see you've avoided my point above. I see you're standing down, and finally using common sense in your posts.

Let me give you an example of a positive news story - Afghanistan cricket.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLuI9546l3Q

Did you ever hear about this? I doubt it.

Afghanistan Cricket has been reported by the ECB and BBC. Newsnight is good at reporting the good stories out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. For example, the amount of Afghani schoolgirls who can now have an education. You may have never seen Newsnight (a BBC programme), but it is excellent at reporting outside of mainstream news.

 

[Themer]

And are sportsmen targetted in there?

Does it matter if sportsmen are targetted? Come on if theres a risk of an attack it could be anyone who is attacked. Not necessarily sportsmen but as seen in the New Zealand tour a few years ago they became caught up in a bomb blast that was most likely nothing to do with their presence but they were there at that time and If i remember correctly one of there physios was injured slightly.
To say that its okay aslong as they aren't targetting cricketers and sportsmen would be the same as condoning bomb attacks in civillian areas during wars "Hey its not like we were aiming for you we were after the soldiers in that area so it doesn't matter".

 

[Insomniac]

Themer, your posts are looking incredibly foolish for 2 reasons now

A) You refuse to talk about the point that the security company who stayed in Pakistan for 1 month said it was safe, while one guy stays for 2 days, and says its unsafe, and the only reason in his report was "Cricket is a western sport and therefore may be targetted"

First of all, did he need to go to Pakistan to even make that report and that analysis?

B) Look at Sri Lanka - fighting has occured for how many years?

And life goes on.

Guess what Themer - you have more likelihood of getting *****, killed, or assaulted in South Africa than dieing in a bomb blast in Pakistan.

And do people go to South Africa? Yep.

Point is, there is danger everywhere, and it cannot be avoided. What if Australian players were on the Tube on 7/7? You cannot avoid danger, unless you plan to live at the bottom of the ocean or something of the sort.

Another racist attack at Test
02/09/2008 22:43 - (SA)


Herman Scholtz

Johannesburg - Yet another racial incident took place during the Tri-Nations match between the Springboks and the Wallabies on Saturday.

On Monday SA Rugby offered a reward of R10 000 for the identification of three white afrikaner men who have brutally assaulted a black woman.

No one has yet been identified in the incident, during which three men apparently twisted Ms Ziningi Shibambo's (30) arm behind her back and made racist remarks.

But Steven Parker (31) of Fourways, Johannesburg, said on Tuesday this was not the only incident during Saturday's game.

Two white afrikaner men brutally attacked a black man in the beer garden outside Coca-Cola Park.

"At about 19:30 I saw two men hitting a helpless black man while hundreds of white people were laughing. I asked them what their problem was and they said the black man had stolen their beer.

I offered to buy them some more beer so that they would relax, but they weren't interested," Parker said.

The two white men, allegedly a father and his son-in-law, confronted Parker. According to Parker they said: "We are all whites here and now you're taking the kaffir's side."

Parker then hit the older man and a fight broke out.

Two members of the police broke up the fight a few minutes later, but by then four men were already lying on the ground.


"I didn't hit them to hurt them. But we must get rid of these people. They hit him because he was black," Parker said.

After the emotions had subsided, the son-in-law apparently told Parker in tears that a black man had ***** his fianc?e.

"I told him he should go for counselling. That black man was not the one that ***** his fianc?e."

Ricky Meyer, the operational manager of the stadium, said they are aware of the incidents and are also trying to identify the offenders.

Parker took some cell phone photos of the incident, and these will now be used in the investigation.

Meyer said claims that the stadium did not provide enough security guards for the match were unfounded.

"There were about 800 regular guards. Then there were another 175 metro police members and 260 police."

Saturday's match served as a trial run for contingency plans for the 2010 soccer world cup tournament.

Several people contacted Beeld to say that these types of incidents are "normal" and are unnecessarily attributed to racism.


SA Rugby spokesperson Andy Colquhoun said they are not making an exception with the latest incident.

"We would have been just as upset if the woman was white. Unfortunately there is a culture where people just keep quiet about these incidents."

I'm glad this stuff doesn't happen during Cricket Games in Pakistan.

So, Pakistan is a more dangerous country although it has less crime rate, less rape per capita, less murders, etc.

But South Africa, despite one of the most dangerous countries of the world, especially in crime, can be safely toured?

Shall I bring out the statistics on the odds of you dieing in a bomb blast in Pakistan vs you dieing in South Africa?

Also :

Four in court in case of man 'fed to lion'


A white South African farmer accused of feeding a man to a lion have appeared in court in a case that has stirred racial tensions just weeks before a general election.

Mark Scott-Crossley has been charged with murder after allegedly beating a sacked employee and tossing him into an enclosure at a breeding project for rare white lions. It is unclear if he was alive when he was allegedly thrown over the fence.


Police expect DNA tests to prove a skull and part of a human leg found in the lion's enclosure are indeed the remains of the farmer's former employee, Nelson Chisale.


Placards outside court echoed that, suggesting reprisals if farmers refused to enter into the spirit of reconciliation on which the future of South Africa is meant to rest.

"Enough is enough - reconciliation or ***-for-tat" read one placard held up amid dancing, chanting black protesters.

Dressed in a short-sleeved shirt and shorts, Scott-Crossley looked relaxed, smiling and smoking a cigarette with his bound hands as he walked into the holding cells at a court in Phalaborwa on the edge of the Kruger National Park.

White farmers are often accused of mistreating black workers,
"Many farmers still treat their workers as badly as under apartheid," the trade union COSATU said in a statement on Chisale's death.

 

[Sureshot]

As horrible as it may be, there is far more predictability about racist attacks then terrorist attacks are.

I'm not denying anything you've put btw, but there is a difference.

 

[Insomniac]

As horrible as it may be, there is far more predictability about racist attacks then terrorist attacks are.

I'm not denying anything you've put btw, but there is a difference.

What do you mean by predictability Sureshot?

As in, a racist attack can be preempted (sp?) while a terrorist attack can be really anytime anywhere?

I await Themer's response to the above by the way

 

[Sureshot]

Suicide attacks are far more random, thus less predictable. Racist attacks? Well, the advice given would be for x colour to not travel to x area.

 

[Insomniac]

Suicide attacks are far more random, thus less predictable. Racist attacks? Well, the advice given would be for x colour to not travel to x area.

But would a tourist know which bars or places not to go to?

 

[Sureshot]

They would receive advice from touring organisers and/or tourist boards. Or, if you are like me, you'd do the research yourself.

 

[smssia0112]

Hold up.

You are telling me that a professional company's opinion and analysis is worth less than one guy then there is seriously something wrong.

And if 2 days told him it wasn't safe, why was the only excuse he could muster up was that "cricket is a western sport and therefore could be targetted"

Is it worth the risk to play a cricket tournament? Interesting, but let me ask you this. With presidential security, exactly what risk is there?

What more can you ask for, with security guards outside the hotel, outside the players room, everywhere.

If the players were going out on the streets into the government areas prehaps you have a point, but guess what - they're not.

I live in the country don't I? I go to where every citizen goes (market, etc.) I'm not dead yet, am I? And I don't have presidential security either

With all that's going on there, there is a definite risk, and pretending that there's zero risk is ridiculous. Western anger is another factor to add to the political instability and constant attacks. Whether they're confined to particular areas or not, the risk is there, and even if it was passed reasonably safe, that 2% risk would still be more important than the tournament.

 

[usy]

who cares, we all know it isn't going to take place there.

Bangladesh is more safer then Pakistan.

 

[Insomniac]

With all that's going on there, there is a definite risk, and pretending that there's zero risk is ridiculous. Western anger is another factor to add to the political instability and constant attacks. Whether they're confined to particular areas or not, the risk is there, and even if it was passed reasonably safe, that 2% risk would still be more important than the tournament.

Nice to know you have ignored the fact that a security company with so much experience spent a month in Pakistan and got the real picture, while one guy who is almost nothing comes in for 2 days, eats food, and determines only one idiotic excuse

Cricket is a western sport, and therefore may be targetted. Can you please defend that? The people of Pakistan love cricket, and don't give a hoots about where it came from.

Secondly, how about we talk about my point of the dangers in South Africa? Especially since Australian players like Symonds like to go to bars where some horrible incidents have occured.

 

[sohum]

Secondly, how about we talk about my point of the dangers in South Africa? Especially since Australian players like Symonds like to go to bars where some horrible incidents have occured.

I believe Sureshot already dealt with that point?

 

[Insomniac]

I believe Sureshot already dealt with that point?

I wanted Dean's opinion

 

[smssia0112]

Nice to know you have ignored the fact that a security company with so much experience spent a month in Pakistan and got the real picture, while one guy who is almost nothing comes in for 2 days, eats food, and determines only one idiotic excuse

So you think it's worth the risk then? That's my question - you still haven't answered it. There is a risk, and conflicting arguments proves that. The risk is higher than 0% and that's a fact. So is it worth it, regardless of how likely the risk is?

Cricket is a western sport, and therefore may be targetted. Can you please defend that? The people of Pakistan love cricket, and don't give a hoots about where it came from.

Not even close to what I said - Australian cricketers are westerners, and therefore may be targeted if what I said, not that cricket itself would be targeted.

Secondly, how about we talk about my point of the dangers in South Africa? Especially since Australian players like Symonds like to go to bars where some horrible incidents have occured.

It's much easier to avoid being mugged by local criminals than it is to avoid being killed in an organised terrorist attack. Security would be adequate to avoid the crime in South Africa, as opposed to in Pakistan where the risk is getting bombed, for which security is much more difficult to come by.

Often the only way to stop terrorism is by counter-intelligence, and I wouldn't be trusting the Pakistani government at the moment to do this properly.

 

[Insomniac]

So you think it's worth the risk then? That's my question - you still haven't answered it. There is a risk, and conflicting arguments proves that. The risk is higher than 0% and that's a fact. So is it worth it, regardless of how likely the risk is?

There is a risk everywhere. London, Paris, Los Angeles, Islamabad, Tokyo, Sydney, Johannesburg. So is it worth going there?

Now, you ask the question "Is it worth the risk". My question to you now is, how much of a risk is there when you are surrounded by presidential bodyguards, the type of security George Bush would receive if he was to come to Pakistan. Many US diplomats have come and gone by Pakistan without even being harmed.

I'm sure I still not have answered the question in your opinion. Let me directly answer that. Yes, it is worth the risk, because the odds (as random or unrandom) are more in favor of you getting mugged in South Africa than dieing in a bomb blast in Pakistan. Also, the other thing is, life goes on. Yes Dean, I said that. Life goes on. As a Muslim (and I believe Christianity has the slightly same take although I am not completely sure), it is written when you will die. That is to say, that Allah / God knows and it is written down when you will die. Now, atheists will probably say they don't believe in that. Fair enough, but this probably causes our difference of opinion. Many people die, unfortunately thanks to these idiots who were brainwashed. Do I hide in my house? No. Life goes on.

Take your pick on how you want to die, ***** and shot to the head, or shrapanel to your body (if we're speaking in extreme)

Yes, Pakistan is not the safest country by any means. But it is safe enough for cricket, as the Asia Cup showed, and as India's tour of Pakistan will show. And believe me, these terrorist monkeys would rather attack Indians than the Australians / Westerners (how is Australia a western country to begin with, but whatever). Top enemy of Pakistan, yet they cannot even touch Team India when they come to Pakistan.

Not even close to what I said - Australian cricketers are westerners, and therefore may be targeted if what I said, not that cricket itself would be targeted.

I wasn't talking about you saying that. That is a decently valid excuse (better than the one CA's security expert came up with). However the only point that Mr. Dickson (was that his name?) of the CA came up with is cricket is a western game and therefore may be targetted. I don't see how that is even a reasonable excuse.

It's much easier to avoid being mugged by local criminals than it is to avoid being killed in an organised terrorist attack. Security would be adequate to avoid the crime in South Africa, as opposed to in Pakistan where the risk is getting bombed, for which security is much more difficult to come by.

Do the security forces follow people like Andrew Symonds around to their bars and nightclubs? If they do, you have a point, but I didn't think they came with them. Probably dance with them too, right?

Often the only way to stop terrorism is by counter-intelligence, and I wouldn't be trusting the Pakistani government at the moment to do this properly.

Well, lets wait and see what happens in 2009. I can almost predict some of the same crap going on again, and in the end it will end the ICC Champions Trophy and make way for the Twenty20 WC as a permanent fixture in the international calendar.