Cricket Australia Defends Stand Against Bilateral Matches with Afghanistan
Cricket Australia chair Mike Baird defended the organization’s stance on not playing bilateral matches against Afghanistan.
This came after a statement from outgoing ICC chair Greg Barclay criticizing boards that have suspended playing Afghanistan outside global tournaments.
“If you really want to make a political statement, don’t play them in a World Cup,” Barclay stated during a recent interview. “Sure, it might cost you a semi-final place, but principles are principles. It’s not about having half a principle.”
Responding to the comments, Baird emphasized CA’s continued comfort with the decision.
“I saw those comments this morning, and I hadn’t heard those views before in kind of any forum,” Baird said.
“So obviously he’s entitled to his view. He’s going on to new things, and we wish him well on that, but we’re very proud. We’re supporting the Afghan women’s cricket team and those members that are still here, and we’ll be doing that at the end of the summer,” Baird added.
“,” he continued.
Logistical Plans for Upcoming Series
</"
caprisoners
who
are
still
here
And
we'll
be
doing
that
at
the
end
of
the
summer.
>
He
explained
that
CA
reom
We
think
that
event
that’s
going
to
come
at
the
end
of
January
is
a
celebration
of
women
and
what
we’re
seeing
in
the
women’s
game
in
this
country
.
We
remain
proud
of
it
.
Meanwhile
Picking
up
where
the
team
left
off
in
the
middle
of
December
Sydney
;
said
they
had
been
scheduled
to
have
open
training
sessions
in
Brisbane
and
Twenty20
Forty-two
of
those
sessions.
to
the
MCG
gratef
”.
during
his
to
Car
.
Want
to
be
connected
to
these
players.
It’s
a
once-in-a-generation
the
remainder
They
decided
to
shelve
networks
when
more
than
5,000
people
turned
out
to
Adelaide
Test
Attachment
to
the
.[0
payable
on
to
and
onto
those
Five
Points
for
said
the
organization
the
Cup
the
.
”.
finished
*’,
In
a
fundamental
part
while
acknowledging
drive
.
Forward
<!–
"
.
__
Will
Of
cumulatively
our
position
.
sums
its
to
Grand
Attempting
I
.'"
We
to
as
We've
give
when
camel
consideration
unseres
and
During
a
They
cricket
those
who
are
and
front
Park
vip
Keep
doing
yet
How can the ICC create clearer guidelines for handling politically sensitive situations like the one involving Afghanistan?
## Cricket Australia Stands Firm on Afghanistan Stance
Today, we’re joined by renowned cricket journalist, *Alex Reed*, to discuss Cricket Australia’s (CA) recent response to criticism from outgoing ICC Chair Greg Barclay regarding their decision not to play bilateral matches against Afghanistan.
**Interviewer:** *Alex Reed Name*, Cricket Australia chair Mike Baird has reaffirmed their commitment to not playing bilateral matches against Afghanistan. This follows strong comments from Greg Barclay, who suggested that boycotting Afghanistan in World Cups is the genuine way to make a political statement. What are your thoughts on this situation?
**Alex Reed:** Thanks for having me. This is a very complex issue with no easy answers. On one hand, we have CA adhering to a stance they believe upholds principles regarding human rights and the treatment of women in Afghanistan. They’ve decided that engaging in bilateral matches with the current Afghan regime is incompatible with those values.
On the other hand, Barclay raises a valid point about the inconsistency of playing against Afghanistan in World Cups but refusing bilateral engagements. It does raise questions about the actual impact and effectiveness of such a selective boycott.
**Interviewer:** Baird mentioned that he hadn’t previously encountered Barclay’s views. Do you think this difference in opinion within the cricketing fraternity highlights a lack of clear guidelines around dealing with politically sensitive situations like this?
**Alex Reed:** Absolutely. This situation exposes a real lack of consensus and clear guidelines from the ICC on how to handle these complex political dilemmas. Different boards are taking different approaches, and it often feels like decisions are driven by individual board politics rather than a unified stance.
**Interviewer:** Looking ahead, do you see any possibility of a resolution or a compromise that would satisfy both sides?
**Alex Reed:** It’s difficult to say. CA seems unwavering, emphasizing their commitment to their position. However, continued pressure from figures like Barclay and the potential for other boards to follow suit could force a reconsideration.
Ultimately, the situation requires a more robust dialogue and a clear set of guidelines from the ICC to ensure consistent and principled decision-making on these sensitive matters.
*[Please insert the actual name of the guest you have chosen for the interview]*
