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 do you envision the BCCI balancing the influence of public sentiment with the principles of sportsmanship in international cricket?
**Interview: Vinod Roy, Chairman of the BCCI Committee of Administrators**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Mr. Roy. You recently made headlines regarding India’s stance on isolating Pakistan in the cricketing world. Can you explain what led to your statement?
**Vinod Roy:** Thank you for having me. The statement about isolating Pakistan was not a position I personally support, but rather a response to public sentiment. After incidents like Pulwama, there was significant pressure and outcry against playing with Pakistan. It was perceived widely in the media and public discourse that the BCCI was only interested in financial gain from matches against Pakistan, especially with the World Cup approaching.
**Interviewer:** That raises an important point. Was your demand to treat Pakistan as South Africa was treated during the apartheid era against the Olympic Charter, which promotes sports as a human right?
**Vinod Roy:** I understand the concern. My comments were made in a climate of heightened emotions. I reflected the sentiments surrounding those events, rather than advocating for a true sports boycott. It’s crucial to differentiate between public opinion and official policy. I emphasized the importance of playing under the right conditions, but I do not wish to see Pakistan entirely isolated from international cricket.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned that refusing to play would mean forfeiting points, especially if it affected crucial matches. Was there any internal debate on this issue within the BCCI?
**Vinod Roy:** Absolutely. There was a lot of discussion about the logistics and implications of our decisions. If we had refused to play, the practical consequences could have had significant ramifications on our standing in tournaments. The key was to navigate this complex situation without causing self-harm to our own team’s prospects.
**Interviewer:** You’ve mentioned that while matches cannot be played in India, you’re open to competing with Pakistan at neutral venues. Do you believe this would help ease some of the tensions?
**Vinod Roy:** Yes, I think so. Competing at neutral venues allows for the sport to continue without escalating political tensions. Cricket has always been a unifying factor, and I believe we should maintain that spirit wherever possible.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Mr. Roy. Before we end, I would like to pose a question for our readers: Given the complexities of politics intertwined with sports, do you think it is ethical for cricket boards to prioritize public sentiment over sporting principles? How should cricket navigate these turbulent waters while still promoting the spirit of the game?
**Vinod Roy:** That’s a profound question. It’s crucial we find a balance between the values of sportsmanship and the realities of the world we live in. I look forward to hearing what the readers think.
