Nominated by Cricket Australia for the post of ICC vice-president, former Australian prime minister John Howard has come in for widespread criticism here because of his record on issues such as apartheid, immigration and India's nuclear testing
Nominated by Cricket Australia for the post of ICC vice-president, former Australian prime minister John Howard has come in for widespread criticism here because of his record on issues such as apartheid, immigration and India's nuclear testing
ADVERTISEMENT
The New Zealand media, too, has slammed Howard's nomination, with columnist David Leggat accusing him of having a "churlish attitude".
Leggat says the former PM has only become a leading figure in world cricket administration because Australia couldn't find anyone better in their own ranks.
Howard will succeed Sharad Pawar, who takes over as ICC president in July, for a two-year term.
The former prime minister, described by a Sydney newspaper as a man "often credited with Machiavellian political skills and ruthlessness," was chosen ahead of the respected and experienced New Zealander Sir John Anderson by a committee of the Antipodean neighbours.
Sharad Pawar |
Neil Gillespie, chief executive officer of the Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement is calling on the ICC to reconsider its decision, and has written to the boards of every Test-playing nation to condemn Howard's appointment.
In his letter, Gillespie has said, "this person is not an appropriate choice to head an organisation that comprises a majority of black nations because of his stance against Aboriginal people".
The Sydney Morning Herald noted in an editorial yesterday that the "weight of influence (in cricket) is shifting eastwardsu00a0... partly in recognition that the game's following is around the Indian Ocean, especially in India.
Former Aussie PM John Howard |
Describing the BCCI as a body "whose politics are a Byzantine microcosm of those in India itself", the Herald says, "Howard will have much to learn as understudy to Pawar".
"His best strategy", continues the editorial with self-appointed pious intent, "if he is to fulfill Cricket Australia's hopes of building up the ICC's authority, is to start by forming a strong team with Pawar."
Indeed! The inveterate politicians will surely constitute an awesome twosome. But, what about cricket, for Heaven's sake?
I, for one, cannot wait to see the sparks fly when irresistible object clashes with immoveable force.
My only concern is that, in all the political chess games, the interests of cricket will be relegated to the boondocks.