India’s statement of isolating Pakistan in the world of cricket turned out to be political, BCCI Committee of Administrators Chairman Vinod Roy said that the announcement was made keeping in view the public opinion.
Vinod Roy, the head of the Committee of Administrators appointed by the Supreme Court in the Indian Cricket Board, clarified in an interview that he was not a supporter of isolating Pakistan in the world of cricket, but made such a statement considering the public opinion. When asked that after the Pulwama incident, he demanded Pakistan to treat South Africa like the apartheid era, but was this demand not against the Olympic Charter, which includes sports as a human right?
Vinod Roy said that Pakistani players are not allowed to play in IPL, while we had a match against them in the World Cup on June 16, the general idea was that the competition should be refused, newspapers were also giving the same news, a TV. It was even said on the channel that BCCI only wants to play with Pakistan for the sake of revenue. What should have been my reaction in such a situation? I said that if we refuse to play, we will lose 2 points and if the competition is in the semi-final, then what will we do. Instead of shooting myself in the foot, I made a statement to isolate Pakistan. gave
According to the report, when he was asked if he really wanted to isolate Pakistan in world cricket, he bluntly said that he did not want to do so. Can’t go and play but can compete with any country at a neutral venue.
#sports #field #escape #Indian #attacks #conspiracy #isolate #Pakistan #exposed
How does Vinod Roy reconcile the need for sportsmanship with the prevailing public sentiment towards geopolitical issues in cricket, particularly concerning Pakistan?
**Interview with Vinod Roy, Chairman of the BCCI Committee of Administrators**
*Interviewer:* Thank you for joining us today, Vinod. In recent statements, you’ve mentioned that your call for the isolation of Pakistan in cricket was influenced by public sentiment following the Pulwama incident. Can you elaborate on that?
*Vinod Roy:* Absolutely. It was a challenging time for everyone, and I recognized that public sentiment was overwhelmingly against continuing sporting ties with Pakistan. My comments weren’t about a personal desire to isolate them but rather a reflection of what I felt was the mood of the nation.
*Interviewer:* You famously compared the situation to South Africa during the apartheid era. Some critics argue that this stance contradicts the Olympic Charter, which advocates for universal sports as a human right. How do you respond to that?
*Vinod Roy:* That’s a fair point, and it’s crucial to differentiate between personal sentiments and the complexities of international relations. While I understand the importance of sports as a unifying force, my comments were made with a focus on how the BCCI ought to navigate the tense atmosphere created by these geopolitical issues.
*Interviewer:* When faced with the prospect of a crucial World Cup match against Pakistan, it sounds like you were caught between losing points and taking a strong stand. Could you clarify your rationale?
*Vinod Roy:* Indeed, if we had refused to play, we could have faced significant consequences in terms of points, especially during a knockout stage. My priority was to ensure we remained competitively viable while also addressing the prevailing public outcry. I opted for a measured approach in a politically charged environment.
*Interviewer:* In light of that, would you say your comments about isolating Pakistan were more politically motivated than a genuine desire for sportsmanship?
*Vinod Roy:* I would say they were a response to political realities and public expectations. While I don’t support long-term isolation, it was pragmatic at that moment to echo what many were feeling. I believe cricket should be a bridge, and I would prefer to compete with Pakistan at neutral venues rather than completely cutting ties.
*Interviewer:* This raises a significant question: Should sports continue to serve as a platform for broader geopolitical issues, or should they remain separate? What do you think our readers might feel about this balance?
*Vinod Roy:* That’s a critical point for discussion. Sports inevitably intertwine with national pride and politics, but the question of how much influence those factors should wield in sporting arenas is debatable. I invite your readers to share their thoughts: Should sports be a sanctuary free of political influence, or is it realistic to expect that politics will always find a way into the game?