ECB set to stand firm against Government pressure

English cricket did not go looking for trouble over the proposed World Cup match in Harare, and the Government stumbled on the problem almost by accident. Nevertheless, a major conflict has blown up and, in such circumstances, it is difficult to see how cricket can emerge with credit.

Politicians claim that it would give a major boost to an abhorrent regime if England's cricketers take the field against Zimbabwe. Some members of the public, who might or might not have any more interest in cricket than some in Government, side with them.

Others, including the England and Wales Cricket Board and most in the game, ask why cricket should be singled out to make a political point when there is no hindrance to business activities, Zimbabwe were welcomed to the Commonwealth Games, the country is allowed to remain in the Commonwealth and the Prime Minister did not back away from sharing a platform with Mr. Mugabe at the Johannesburg summit.

The position for English cricket is that they can go to Zimbabwe and incur the wrath of the Government, or they can miss the match and suffer huge financial penalties that will be imposed by the International Cricket Council for breach of the contract they signed in good faith.

The expression about being between a rock and a hard place could have been coined especially to describe the position in which the ECB finds itself, as chief executive Tim Lamb admits.

"We're in a very difficult position because if we're in breach of our contract with ICC and their commercial partners we could be sued for unlimited damages. Yet we're coming under huge pressure from the Government and certain sections of the media to withdraw from the match in Harare next month."

One thing Lamb wants to make absolutely clear is that whether the cricketers appear in Harare or not, they do not condone what is happening in Zimbabwe under the Mugabe regime.

"We're not remotely condoning what's happening in Zimbabwe. What's happening there is utterly reprehensible and we're not apologists for the Harare regime. What we're saying is that we find it inequitable that somehow cricket is meant to make a sacrifice in the national interest which could cause ruinous damages financially to the ECB when no other organisation, no other company and no other body is expected to do the same. That seems to us to be illogical and very unfair."

As expected, the ECB came away from their meeting with Tessa Jowell, minister in the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, minister for sport Richard Caborn and Baroness Amos, a Foreign Office minister, without any hope of financial compensation for the loss that would be incurred by pulling out of this one contentious fixture.

Lamb said after the meeting, "We pressed very hard for compensation as we feel that if we're making a gesture in the national interest we should be compensated out of the national purse. Tessa Jowell made it quite clear that as things stand at the moment the Government isn't prepared to entertain that idea."

The Government have made claims that they have been expressing opposition to the match since last July. However, the ECB have come back strongly to refute that suggestion, and they have documentary evidence to support their position. Lamb remembers the train of events very clearly and rejects the suggestion that the Government made its stance known last summer.

"We dispute that," said Lamb. "I had a meeting with a very senior official on the southern Africa desk of the Foreign Office (Andrew Pocock) back in July. A briefing note of that meeting, which we hadn't seen until today, makes it clear that ministers hadn't been consulted. Well, if ministers hadn't been consulted, how do we know what their view is?"

Furthermore, it was the ECB that initiated a dialogue with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. They were keen to guidance on the security situation and hence the approach.

"We were asked to confirm by the 8th July 2002 to ICC whether there was any reason why we could not participate in the match in Zimbabwe and on the advice of the Foreign Office we wrote back to say that there was no absolute impediment to us playing even though there were security and other concerns.

"But I don't accept that is tantamount to the Government telling us at that stage that they were unhappy about us going. The first we knew officially that the Government were against this, apart from some rather personal, off-the-cuff views expressed by Clare Short and Mike O'Brien, was between Christmas and the New Year - six weeks before the event.

"Of course, we played a one-day series in Zimbabwe in October 2001 and apart from some back-bench MPs who expressed concern about our going the Government certainly didn't seek to prevent us going and we didn't think they would take any different stance on this occasion."

Having found themselves in an awkward position and with the tournament, and the Harare fixture looming ever closer, where does the ECB go from here?

"It will be up to the management board of the ECB to make a decision as to whether we should vary our position at all but I can't recommend at this stage they take that decision without the prospect of compensation being paid. We could be in a position where we face enormous financial losses which could actually damage the fabric of cricket in England and Wales."

It does not do for any sporting body to upset the Government. Valuable funds for development can flow from that source. On the other hand, cricket cannot afford to lose the millions that would undoubtedly result from boycotting a World Cup match. It appears they the England team will play in Harare as scheduled with perhaps the ECB going out of its way to say how much it disapproves of the political situation in Zimbabwe.

The irony of all this is that Robert Mugabe himself has taken some persuading that the England side should be allowed into his country anyway. He is fearful of British security agents entering Zimbabwe under cover as cricket enthusiasts with the intent of assassinating him. Had he insisted on a policy of no entry, the ICC would have had to take matches away from Zimbabwe and all England's problems would have disappeared. At least, those problems of a diplomatic nature.