“The match should be a symbol of peace,”

June 5, 2017 5:31 PM

India, Pakistan and Something Deeper Than Cricket [The New York Times] “The Indian government’s stance illustrates how India-Pakistan cricket games have long been fraught with geopolitical tensions, stemming from the splitting of British India in 1947 into India and Pakistan and from ongoing conflict over disputed regions. The cricket rivalry is often regarded as the fiercest in any sport. When India and Pakistan have met on the cricket field, it has been fashionable to speak of “cricket diplomacy.” And on occasion — notably during India’s trip to Pakistan in 2004, its first in 14 years — the sport has helped thaw relations.”

• A brief history of India v Pakistan cricket matches [ESPN]

• Pakistan to meet India amid political unrest [Aljazeera]

“Sunday's One-Day International (ODI) in England, part of the 2017 Champions Trophy tournament, will come a day after clashes along the Line of Control (LoC), the de factor border in the Kashmir valley, claimed the lives of five Indian soldiers, according to the Pakistan army. Pakistan and India have fought three wars since gaining independence from British rule in 1947. Two of those have been over Kashmir, a region both sides claim in its entirety. On the cricket field, the two sides have played a total of 194 matches. But matches have been limited following the 2008 Mumbai attack, which India says was orchestrated from inside Pakistan. Pakistan and India last met on a cricket pitch in March 2016. But the Pakistani team has not toured India for a bilateral series since January 2013 and has not hosted the Indian team for a series since 2006. Relations at the government level are dented, as the nations remain divided by history. Records and memories are created each time the teams meet on a cricket field. They add yet another chapter to the nations' shared history, one that is scripted by a white ball.”

• Terror notwithstanding, government should give India-Pakistan cricket a chance [Hindustani Times]

“The Indian government’s constant refusal to let the national team play a bilateral series against Pakistan could hurt the BCCI’s standing in world cricket. At a time when the BCCI has found itself totally cornered over the International Cricket Council’s new global revenue share model, the government’s decision to stop bilateral ties could turn out to be a tactical blunder. Earlier this week, sports minister Vijay Goel questioned the wisdom of BCCI officials to engage in a meeting with Pakistan Cricket Board officials in Dubai over the future of bilateral cricket between the arch-rivals. In the wake of the happenings in Jammu and Kashmir, Goel ruled out any cricket between India and Pakistan saying “terror and sport can’t go hand in hand.” Given the rich legacy of warmth and understanding among officials, players and more importantly, fans across the world, it is time to review this rigid standpoint that is doing more harm than good. Cricket, or sports for that matter, can be used to open better political dialogues and soothe frayed tempers.”

• India and Pakistan fans put aside their rivalry and pay their respects [The Guardian]

“Lately they have played only when they have been drawn together in ICC tournaments, something which, luckily enough for the fans, sponsors and TV networks, seems to happen with uncanny regularity. But despite all that, or perhaps because of it, the fixture does not seem to generate as much heat as it once did. [...] At twenty past ten, almost exactly 12 hours after the attack in London, Edgbaston fell quiet in a minute’s silence. It was the only moment between dawn and dusk in which the streets around the ground were not loud with the sound of screams, shouts, whistles, horns and drums. There was succour to be found in the crowd, in their determination to go on with the frivolous business of singing, dancing and cheering to celebrate sixes and wickets. It was the largest attendance they have ever had for a one-day game at Edgbaston, just under 25,000 people altogether, a 50-50 mix, part Pakistani, part Indian, all proudly British. The fixture, which in the past has often split supporters apart, served to bring everyone a little closer together.”

• The Need to Know: Cricket Diplomacy [The Daily]

“India and Pakistan have been playing cricket against each other since 1952, and the game has become a metaphor of sorts for the countries’ relationship. In fact, the politics between the two nations and the games on the field are so intertwined that a phrase was coined: Cricket Diplomacy. In 1971, a series of matches coincided with the orders of the leader of India’s ruling Janata Party, Morarji Desai, to cease its spying activities. In 2004, as a sign of renewed peace and trust, the Indian government allowed its national team to go on a tour of Pakistan for the first time in 15 years, and granted thousands of special visas to its citizens to go watch the team play. But just as cricket can act as an olive branch, too often the sport devolves into what George Orwell called “war minus the shooting.” It’s easy to forget about the bats and balls and just see the match as 11 Pakistanis against 11 Indians, with thousands of screaming supporters in the stands and millions watching at home. ”

posted by Fizz (3 comments total)

I don't know much about the sport of cricket. Our family is Indian and my dad cares about this a lot. I don't really have a vested interest. I know enough to casually watch the games.

But with him, it's religion. It's definitely a point of pride for him when he talks about the various games, the rivalry, the diplomacy and politics that are bound up in these games. There's no joking about this sport or this rivalry. It runs deep.
posted by Fizz at 5:39 PM on June 5, 2017

Jarrod Kimber gives us a pithy review of Pakistan's performance against India at Edgbaston:

So, let us review.

Pakistan came into the game with a silly theory that even when it worked as planned, it didn't work. They dropped simple catches, bowled tripe, mis-fielded simple balls, and tried poor strategies on the fly. Their big bad fast bowler was just bad, their in-form bowler hobbled off the park because he's unfit, they dented the confidence of their frugal spinner, their selections didn't make cricket sense, two key players were missing because of corruption, they couldn't run between the wickets, their batting's only consistency was slowness of running and scoring, when they played an attacking shot it was inevitably stupid and risky, the batting line-up lacked pretty much everything a semi-competent XI would have, and the highlight of their match was the bits where they got lucky wickets or the ball was lost.

And with the retirement of MisYou, their last two batsmen of true world quality, the future looks even more bleak.
posted by Sonny Jim at 12:57 AM on June 6, 2017 [3 favorites]

I am from India and its filled with emotions. Cricket is like religion for Indians but our national game is hockey. Sounds strange. But the match with Pakistan is the issue of pride for Indians.

Players are competitors on the field and are friends off the field. Matches are played in so friendly manners. Politics are kept aside from sports.

As this match was also getting into the political issue of that it should not be played but it never happened.

And everybody was knowing the winner from starting so not much to discuss the match.

Anything going at borders but sports is played with spirit and everyone should play with it.
posted by anshuldudeja at 4:19 AM on June 7, 2017