The threat of employment ban...

The chief executive of CSA, Gerald Majola, told Afrikaans-language newspaper Beeld at the weekend that South Africans who played in the planned 20-over competition, which has not been sanctioned by the International Cricket Council, will be banned from the game in their country.

"... once they have played even one game in the ICL tournament, it's over and they will never be allowed to play in South Africa again," the paper quoted Majola as saying.

"We view them as rebels. They have joined a breakaway organisation."
There has been similar threats from the boards in India, Pakistan, New Zealand etc... Now that they have threatened, and even gone on record - all it takes is for one player to file a case.

All the countries mentioned, including Pakistan, are democracies - and has a judicial system.

When it comes to cricket, no board can claim intellectual property rights to further their monopoly. Whether it is ICL or IPL, a cricketer - as a citizen of the state - has a right to earn. A professional cricketer cannot be banned from making a living.

By the threat of a life ban, what these boards are doing is to strengthen their feudal grip over the game of cricket.

ICL and IPL are competitors in the same business. Any contract, which forbids a player from joining the competitor will not be found legal by any court. It is a human rights violation to deny a person a better job.

Loots Bosman should file a case against Gerald Majola and CSA for contempt of human rights. The grand Patriarch of South Africa, Nelson Mandela, will be ashamed of what Majola said. Mandela and ANC did not necessarily fight to grab power from the white apartheid regime; their struggle was to ensure every South African citizen - black, white or coloured - lives as a free man in the Rainbow Nation.


The ICC could very well be looking down the barrel of the Employment Tribunal gun. Darrell Hair has taken his employers, the ICC, to the employment tribunal.

Doosra did ask, where the hell is the ball? [Cricket's Big Cover Up Act] [Cricket's Hair Controversy]

The Telegraph reveals,

The adjudicator, Ranjan Madugalle, favoured the opinion of Pakistan's expert witnesses: Geoff Boycott, Simon Hughes and former international umpire John Hampshire.

Hair claimed the ball's deterioration was not due to natural wear and tear, but his request to the ICC to have video evidence of the four-over passage of play was refused.

That the ICC tried to cover up the matter is not a secret. Let us see what the tribunal comes up with.

No comments :

Post a Comment