Shame on WI cricket
First it was Jamaica, where for the first time in history a Test match was abandoned last year because of a badly prepared pitch. Next was Guyana in April where an unruly crowd rushed onto the field of a One-Day International and forced a premature end to the game that the West Indies might have won. Just last Sunday, it was Barbados’ turn to embarrass the West Indies sporting public. In a scene that has happened in India and in various Caribbean nations during the past 45 years, Barbadians began throwing bottles onto the cricket field, forcing Australian fielders and West Indies batsmen to run for their lives during the final One-Day game. What happened at Sabina Park, Bourda and Kensington were disgraceful and unforgivable events because a relatively small band of people contrived to make the Caribbean look bad. The behavior of the Barbadians during the seventh One-Day International was particularly offensive because it was illegal and dangerous. Throwing bottles in a public place is against the law. In addition, West Indies and Australian players could have been injured. Sports fans are within their rights to express their dissatisfaction in acceptable ways, booing, singing and shouting. But throwing bottles is out of the question. Owen Arthur, the Barbados Prime Minister, did the right thing by apologising for the conduct at Kensington Oval. But the Bajans weren’t the only ones to blame for what happened at Kensington Oval. First, the umpires. They made the initial error of giving out Campbell when an Australian obstructed him. During the series some of the umpires made too many dubious decisions and many of them went against the West Indies. Hence, part of the pent-up frustration. Some of the analysts and commentators served us poorly by failing to provide listeners and viewers with fair and accurate descriptions of the event which triggered the bottle throwing. Those at Kensington or who watched the match on television saw when the Australian crossed into Campbell’s path, but commentators apparently didn’t see that or preferred not to report it.There wasn’t an attempt to put the incident in proper perspective. Yet, some of the commentators insisted on citing a piece of fiction, meaning that Campbell was the perpetrator and not the victim. Thank goodness for the good sense of the authorities who decided that the Australian was at fault and in the interest of fair play decided that Campbell should continue his innings. The Australians don’t deserve the praise which some of the commentators showered on them for agreeing to Campbell’s return to the crease. Blaming Campbell, as one commentator did, for the incident, was galling to say the least. It’s a player’s right to appeal to the umpire. The opener didn’t defy the umpire or show any displeasure with his decision. A commentator, a former West Indies fast bowler, who once kicked down the stumps in a Test match when an umpire’s decision went against him, knows about frustration. Yet, he pointed a finger at Campbell. Too many West Indies commentators try to be more neutral than United Nations mediators. Australian, English, Indian, Pakistani, South African and New Zealander commentators and writers aren’t afraid to support their teams. Newspaper sports editors don’t suffer from that affliction. The essence of sports commentary and analysis is expressing a point of view. •Tony Best is The NATION’s North American Editor. 
|