England's Summer of Cricket 2021

First topic message reminder :

That's the important wicket. Deserved for Robinson and England.

Now into that brittle middle order.

As far as I can see there are three possible outcomes:

1) If the ICC decide the game was called off due to a Covid outbreak in India's camp the game will be classed as 'abandoned'. Series ends 2-1 India. ECB massively out of pocket (about £30 million!) because they haven't insured for this outcome. Probable steep decline in relations between the ECB and BCCI.

2) If the ICC decide that India called it off due to fears of a Covid outbreak, rather than an actual one, that will be classed as an Indian 'forfeit' and the game will be awarded to England. Series finishes 2-2. ECB covered on the insurance and not out of pocket.

3) The test gets rescheduled and played, presumably, next summer. There is a small gap in England's calendar to play the test in early August 2022 just before the South African series. BCCI may not be happy with this as it could present logistical problems for India, and England will (probably) be a lot stronger for that game with the possibility of Stokes/Broad and a lot of other seamers returning.

In my view the best solution would be that the test gets played next summer. If that is not possible for whatever reason, or not allowed by the ICC, the test should be awarded to England and the ECB get the insurance money.

The ECB should not be left out of pocket because Shastri decided to attend a book launch; and England should not lose out on the opportunity to gain more WTC points just because India wanted to prioritise the IPL.

VTR wrote:I have a feeling both sides are going to come out of this not looking great. I don't really care much for the outcome now, but will be interested to see what it is

Seems like it, unfortunately. Hope the ICC would decide soon.

Duty281 wrote:As far as I can see there are three possible outcomes:

1) If the ICC decide the game was called off due to a Covid outbreak in India's camp the game will be classed as 'abandoned'. Series ends 2-1 India. ECB massively out of pocket (about £30 million!) because they haven't insured for this outcome. Probable steep decline in relations between the ECB and BCCI.

2) If the ICC decide that India called it off due to fears of a Covid outbreak, rather than an actual one, that will be classed as an Indian 'forfeit' and the game will be awarded to England. Series finishes 2-2. ECB covered on the insurance and not out of pocket.

3) The test gets rescheduled and played, presumably, next summer. There is a small gap in England's calendar to play the test in early August 2022 just before the South African series. BCCI may not be happy with this as it could present logistical problems for India, and England will (probably) be a lot stronger for that game with the possibility of Stokes/Broad and a lot of other seamers returning.

In my view the best solution would be that the test gets played next summer. If that is not possible for whatever reason, or not allowed by the ICC, the test should be awarded to England and the ECB get the insurance money.

The ECB should not be left out of pocket because Shastri decided to attend a book launch; and England should not lose out on the opportunity to gain more WTC points just because India wanted to prioritise the IPL.

Hi Duty - do you know why 1) isn't covered by insurance? Was it that insurance couldn't be obtained or was it overlooked by the ECB? I hope not the latter. Regardless of who and how covid was brought into India's camp, that must always have been a possibility given the national and international pandemic.

Getting business insurance to cover covid enforced closures has been absolute carnage, bordering on farce, at times guildford so I'd guess it'd be that they couldn't get cover rather than didn't to save some money. I criticise the ECB for many things but their work in getting cricket back on during covid has overall be pretty impressive so I'd be very surprised if they'd c***ed up to the extent of trying to scrimp a few pennies on insurance premiums if it were possible to get the cover.

guildfordbat wrote:

Duty281 wrote:As far as I can see there are three possible outcomes:

1) If the ICC decide the game was called off due to a Covid outbreak in India's camp the game will be classed as 'abandoned'. Series ends 2-1 India. ECB massively out of pocket (about £30 million!) because they haven't insured for this outcome. Probable steep decline in relations between the ECB and BCCI.

2) If the ICC decide that India called it off due to fears of a Covid outbreak, rather than an actual one, that will be classed as an Indian 'forfeit' and the game will be awarded to England. Series finishes 2-2. ECB covered on the insurance and not out of pocket.

3) The test gets rescheduled and played, presumably, next summer. There is a small gap in England's calendar to play the test in early August 2022 just before the South African series. BCCI may not be happy with this as it could present logistical problems for India, and England will (probably) be a lot stronger for that game with the possibility of Stokes/Broad and a lot of other seamers returning.

In my view the best solution would be that the test gets played next summer. If that is not possible for whatever reason, or not allowed by the ICC, the test should be awarded to England and the ECB get the insurance money.

The ECB should not be left out of pocket because Shastri decided to attend a book launch; and England should not lose out on the opportunity to gain more WTC points just because India wanted to prioritise the IPL.

Hi Duty - do you know why 1) isn't covered by insurance? Was it that insurance couldn't be obtained or was it overlooked by the ECB? I hope not the latter. Regardless of who and how covid was brought into India's camp, that must always have been a possibility given the national and international pandemic.

Unfortunately, I don't know the reason why it isn't covered. I only know what has been put on Cricinfo:

"The ECB is not covered for Covid-impacted cancellation by insurance. While Harrison did originally seem to imply it was in an interview on Sky Sports, he later clarified to confirm it was not."

king_carlos wrote:Getting business insurance to cover covid enforced closures has been absolute carnage, bordering on farce, at times guildford so I'd guess it'd be that they couldn't get cover rather than didn't to save some money. I criticise the ECB for many things but their work in getting cricket back on during covid has overall be pretty impressive so I'd be very surprised if they'd c***ed up to the extent of trying to scrimp a few pennies on insurance premiums if it were possible to get the cover.

Yeah, I'm hoping that's the answer.

PS Duty - just seen your response now, thanks for that.

Was there anything specific in the ECB/British Government guidelines against Shastri attending the book launch? Is there absolute clarity that the infection came to the camp through that specific event, or could it be that Shastri had already got the infection from elsewhere? Perhaps Jarvo brought it? Having let someone like him invade the pitch multiple times, how can the ECB blame Shastri or the book launch...
Either they play the game later, or the series goes to India 2-1. Having won a world cup through hitting more boundaries, and reached another final by finding the other team reduced to scoring 22 of 1 ball after rain ate up 10 more deliveries that they otherwise would have, English historical sense of entitlement might have reached a new level, but it will be a travesty if they get lucky here for nothing.

How did the World Cup final win and that semi final win from decades ago have anything to do with English sense of entitlement, they were just the rules that applied at the time

msp83 wrote:Was there anything specific in the ECB/British Government  guidelines  against Shastri attending the book launch? Is there absolute clarity that the infection came to the camp through that specific event, or could it be that Shastri had already got the infection from elsewhere? Perhaps Jarvo brought it? Having let someone like him invade the pitch multiple times, how can the ECB blame Shastri or the book launch...
Either they play the game later, or the series goes to India 2-1. Having won a world cup through hitting more boundaries, and reached another final by finding the other team reduced to scoring 22 of 1 ball after rain ate up 10 more deliveries that they otherwise would have, English historical sense of entitlement might have reached a new level, but it will be a travesty if they get lucky here for nothing.

Why would it be a travesty? India have refused to play despite recording a full sweep of negative tests. There may be consequences to that decision.

South Africa making the wrong decision at the toss, and then bowling their overs very slowly which meant the game was reduced to 45 overs a side (actually depriving England of scoring more runs and leaving them unable to plan their final assault with the bat), in a game that was nearly thirty years ago has nothing to do with it!

msp83 wrote:Was there anything specific in the ECB/British Government  guidelines  against Shastri attending the book launch? Is there absolute clarity that the infection came to the camp through that specific event, or could it be that Shastri had already got the infection from elsewhere? Perhaps Jarvo brought it? Having let someone like him invade the pitch multiple times, how can the ECB blame Shastri or the book launch...
Either they play the game later, or the series goes to India 2-1. Having won a world cup through hitting more boundaries, and reached another final by finding the other team reduced to scoring 22 of 1 ball after rain ate up 10 more deliveries that they otherwise would have, English historical sense of entitlement might have reached a new level, but it will be a travesty if they get lucky here for nothing.

Where were India during the world cup final in 2019?

VTR wrote:How did the World Cup final win and that semi final win from decades ago have anything to do with English sense of entitlement, they were just the rules that applied at the time

I think msp is just being a little mischievous there in bringing up a couple of times where some luck has gone England's way in the past...of course they have no relevance to the current issue. I am sure he is conscious of this and having a bit of fun poking at the (over-touchy ?) sensibilities of some England fans.

I tend to agree however with his point that it would be something of a travesty were England to be awarded a match in these unfortunate circumstances ; particularly if the main reason for this outcome were the desire of the ECB to avoid financial loss due to possibly inadequate insurance cover , rather than any real disagreement as to the need for the game to be cancelled. If on the other hand it were clear that the Indian team wilfully chose to pull out purely from a desire to prioritize the looming IPL and not from any Covid-related fears then of course it would be a very different matter : not sure there is any real evidence to substantiate that suggestion - just the usual Michael Vaughan sniping.

The matter of how the wretched virus entered the team environs seems to me a lot less relevant. Whether anyone in the Indian camp "slipped up" or they were just unlucky , I think we ought to recognize that perfect infection control in the world we currently occupy is impossible. And unnecessarily penalizing sporting teams for the misfortune of suffering an ill-timed breach surely only harms the commendable co-operative efforts of all national bodies in trying to keep tours going in spite of all the obstacles in their way ?

In any case I hope there is some way in which financial disaster can be avoided. The idea of a rescheduled match has a lot of appeal but obviously may present crowded programme problems. Reckon we should let this play out without overdoing the blame game .

Yes, without speaking for him, I am sure msp is very angry his team have possibly been denied a chance of a well earned series victory, which would not come around too often

Think the perspective needed on this is this is now ECB vs BCCI with the ICC in there. Nothing to do with the teams any of us support. There's a lot of cases where I disagree with what the ECB does, that does not make me any less a supporter of the actual team. So this now has very little to do with cricket and a lot to do with finances

The question is about the very reliability of the ECB. Why would anyone want to organise tours to England when the ECB would not hesitate to cash in on calamity like a covid infection in the opposition camp

msp83 wrote:The question is about the very reliability of the ECB. Why would anyone want to organise tours to England when the ECB  would not hesitate to cash in on calamity like a covid infection in the opposition camp

Hi msp - I'm no fan of the ECB or Harrison in particular so you should be pushing at an open door with me but I don't follow your ''cash in'' comment. Could you explain please.

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:The question is about the very reliability of the ECB. Why would anyone want to organise tours to England when the ECB  would not hesitate to cash in on calamity like a covid infection in the opposition camp

Hi msp - I'm no fan of the ECB or Harrison in particular so you should be pushing at an open door with me but I don't follow your ''cash in'' comment. Could you explain please.

Hi Guildford, don't think cricket fans in general, aren't the greatest supporters of their boards, more often than not.
The ECB, in this particular instance, is viewing the serious issue of a Covid outbreak from an exclusive financial point of view. From the information available in the public domain so far, it is clear as to who has been pushing for the forfeiture, and it was not based on cricketing reasons, but only financial one. So calamity or no calamity, its just the finances that the ECB is interested in. The BCCI, usually on the same page,, the ECB has made them look much better, and let me tell you, that is a much greater achievement than what ever that Joe Root may have managed this summer as a batter.

The ECB is not pushing for forfeiture, the ECB is pushing for the fifth test to be played next summer.

And of course the ECB has financial concerns - they've lost tens of millions due to Covid; they've lost further millions to the stupidity that was the Hundred; now they may be set to lose tens of millions more, even though none of India's players had Covid.

Sadly, I don't think we can have a world where the finances aren't a large consideration. The ECB is like any business, and can't afford to lose that sort of money without it having consequences.

The ECB were praised for getting matches on last year, but they weren't doing it for the good of providing entertainment, there was a big financial driver to do that

I think a debate worth having is around how much the ECB, BCCI, and CA in particular are over filling the schedules. Again, all financially driven but increasingly to the detriment of the players

Duty281 wrote:The ECB is not pushing for forfeiture, the ECB is pushing for the fifth test to be played next summer.

And of course the ECB has financial concerns - they've lost tens of millions due to Covid; they've lost further millions to the stupidity that was the Hundred; now they may be set to lose tens of millions more, even though none of India's players had Covid.

Not quite, the ECB Chief was suggesting, that even if a game is arranged next summer, that would be a stand-alone test.
If the ECB push that line, and approach the ICC demanding forfeiture, don't think the BCCI should bother organizing a test next summer.
The players having or not having Covid is the decisive factor. The thing is that 4 people, including the head coach, and far more importantly the assistant physio, who treated at least 8 players in days leading up to his positive results were Covid positive. England players, it should be remembered, left the South Africa tour incomplete on the basis of false positives and didn't reconsider the call even after it was established the reports were false-positive. Only some people in the hotel in which they stayed, had actual infection. So let the ECB first compensate CSA, give away ODI League points, and then talk!

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The ECB is not pushing for forfeiture, the ECB is pushing for the fifth test to be played next summer.

And of course the ECB has financial concerns - they've lost tens of millions due to Covid; they've lost further millions to the stupidity that was the Hundred; now they may be set to lose tens of millions more, even though none of India's players had Covid.

Not quite, the ECB Chief was suggesting, that even if a game is arranged next summer, that would be a stand-alone test.
If the ECB push that line, and approach the ICC demanding forfeiture, don't think the BCCI should bother organizing a test next summer.
The players having or not having Covid is the decisive factor. The thing is that 4 people, including the head coach, and far more importantly the assistant physio, who treated at least 8 players in days leading up to his positive results were Covid positive. England players, it should be remembered, left the South Africa tour incomplete on the basis of false positives and didn't reconsider the call even after it was established the reports were false-positive. Only some people in the hotel in which they stayed, had actual infection. So let the ECB first compensate CSA, give away ODI League points, and then talk!

That isn't the case. The stand-alone test idea is one designed to placate the BCCI in negotiations, it's not one in England's favour. It's effectively saying - 'we'll let you have the series win, but in return let's have a stand-alone test next summer.' That would be the ECB ceding ground in negotiations and it's unsure how far along that idea is advanced.

Yes, the players having or not having Covid is a decisive factor. If the Indian players didn't have Covid and only pulled out because of fear of contracting Covid, then that is grounds for forfeiture according to ICC rules and awarding the test to England. I repeat the ECB do not desire this as their primary option because insurance only recoups some of their costs. The ideal option for the ECB is the test being played next summer.

Your comparison to the South Africa ODI series is false. It was a South Africa player who initially tested positive for Covid causing the first game to be postponed. Then members of the England camp tested positive causing the second game to be postponed. Both boards then agreed to postpone the series to a later date. This hasn't happened here because India pulled out of the test before reaching an agreement with the ECB (and ICC) as to what the future course of the series will be, hence why everything is in a state of confusion.

It's also worth remembering, in addition, that the South Africa ODI series took place before vaccinations were available, and I don't believe there is any suggestion that England left their bio-secure venues during that tour; the same cannot be said of India on this tour of England.

Duty281 wrote:

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The ECB is not pushing for forfeiture, the ECB is pushing for the fifth test to be played next summer.

And of course the ECB has financial concerns - they've lost tens of millions due to Covid; they've lost further millions to the stupidity that was the Hundred; now they may be set to lose tens of millions more, even though none of India's players had Covid.

Not quite, the ECB Chief was suggesting, that even if a game is arranged next summer, that would be a stand-alone test.
If the ECB push that line, and approach the ICC demanding forfeiture, don't think the BCCI should bother organizing a test next summer.
The players having or not having Covid is the decisive factor. The thing is that 4 people, including the head coach, and far more importantly the assistant physio, who treated at least 8 players in days leading up to his positive results were Covid positive. England players, it should be remembered, left the South Africa tour incomplete on the basis of false positives and didn't reconsider the call even after it was established the reports were false-positive. Only some people in the hotel in which they stayed, had actual infection. So let the ECB first compensate CSA, give away ODI League points, and then talk!

That isn't the case. The stand-alone test idea is one designed to placate the BCCI in negotiations, it's not one in England's favour. It's effectively saying - 'we'll let you have the series win, but in return let's have a stand-alone test next summer.' That would be the ECB ceding ground in negotiations and it's unsure how far along that idea is advanced.

Yes, the players having or not having Covid is a decisive factor. If the Indian players didn't have Covid and only pulled out because of fear of contracting Covid, then that is grounds for forfeiture according to ICC rules and awarding the test to England. I repeat the ECB do not desire this as their primary option because insurance only recoups some of their costs. The ideal option for the ECB is the test being played next summer.

Your comparison to the South Africa ODI series is false. It was a South Africa player who initially tested positive for Covid causing the first game to be postponed. Then members of the England camp tested positive causing the second game to be postponed. Both boards then agreed to postpone the series to a later date. This hasn't happened here because India pulled out of the test before reaching an agreement with the ECB (and ICC) as to what the future course of the series will be, hence why everything is in a state of confusion.

It's also worth remembering, in addition, that the South Africa ODI series took place before vaccinations were available, and I don't believe there is any suggestion that England left their bio-secure venues during that tour; the same cannot be said of India on this tour of England.

Don't think the ICC rules specifically insist that players should be infected for cancelation of the series. The Indian players refused to take the chance considering at least 1 of the 4 confirmed cases, no less than the physio, the only available one for that matter as the first physio has already been in isolation being a close contact of the primary coaching staff was unavailable, had treated at least 8 players. forcing them to play under those circumstances, would have been a seriously risky thing to do, not only could one of those 8 could have been tested positive, but by the time the results would be out, they would have spread the infections to others as well. This doesn't need anything more than basic common sense to understand!
Although there have been repeated suggestive posts about the book launch event, noone managed to clarify what aspect of the ECB/British Government guidelines have Shastri and others violated in attending the event? And how on earth can the ECB attempt to take the high moral ground on that in any case, when they couldn't even prevent repeated pitch-invasions by a loony who could very well, have been the cause of the infections?
And BCCI chief Sourav Ganguly has clarified, that the postponed test, if it can be played on a later date, should be considered the 5th test of the series, is his view on the matter.
So the ECB chief isn't set grounds for negotiations really...

England women in action against NZ in the ODI series, Heather Knight got them up to what looks a good 241 off 50 overs with an 80 odd

Charlie Dean on debut bowling ok, bit leg side. Quite the rise, was only playing semi-pro club cricket earlier this summer, now for England!
Freya Davies bowled nicely earlier too. 

Bit disappointed no Mady Villiers in the ODI stuff, she was great in the t20s

Also Amy Jones is an absolute phenom behind the stumps with the gloves

England cruising here despite the best efforts of Satterthwaite - Brunt has been economical and the rest sharing wickets round, one on debut for Dean now (here’s one to make you feel old, believe she is the first player to play for an England senior cricket side born after 2000…!)

Well they were less cruising by the end - a run out to end it, but why is Kasparek batting at 11 for NZ?? She has a ODI hundred!

Interesting article on Wisden about Steve Dean, who is Charlie Dean's dad, who Dagnall was going on about.

https://wisden.com/stories/your-game/club-cricket/the-wisden-club-cricket-hall-of-fame-no-2-steve-dean

He does sound a hell of a player!

I would have liked to see Lauren Bell get a go for England this summer - think she offers something different to all the other seamers tried and had an outstanding Hundred comp.

I am pleased Bouchier, Dunkley and Lamb (fleetingly!) made their debuts as batsmen this summer though. For years they've trotted out the same old faces (Fran Wilson has played 63 internationals only averaging 22) but it was good to see some new talent and Dunkley looked exceptional and Bouchier showed promise - another one who struck it well in the Hundred, striking at 144, which is something England have missed.

It's inevitable Alice Capsey will play for England by this time next year IMO (makes Charlie Dean look old!) so England's future batting reserves in Lamb, Capsey, Dunkley, Bouchier looks a lot healthier that it has for a while.

Also, Ecclestone needs to really focus on her batting. She hits it so, so powerfully and is built like a brick outhouse. She could be a real weapon, especially in T20s. Not many batsmen have her power.

Seems the ECB, following the NZC's lead, is planning a pull-out of their next month tour of Pakistan.
the ECB leadership must be thinking hard of finding a way to make Pakistan Forfeit the games!
This is the best way for England to win an Ashes downunder, Don't go if the protocols are too strict, and claim forfeiture, celebrate 5-0!!!

It must be noted that the Nzc's actual pull-out, and England's seeming consideration of the same, is based on 'Fear' of security breach rather than any actual security breach involving their players, or for that matter, even any support staff!

msp83 wrote:Seems the ECB, following the NZC's lead, is planning a pull-out of their next month tour of Pakistan.
the ECB leadership must be  thinking hard of finding a way to make Pakistan Forfeit the games!
This is the best way for England to win an Ashes downunder, Don't go if the protocols are too strict, and claim forfeiture, celebrate 5-0!!!

My guy, we get it even if it is a bizarre line of attack

msp83 wrote:It must be noted that the Nzc's actual pull-out, and England's seeming consideration of the same, is based on 'Fear' of security breach rather than any actual security breach involving their players, or for that matter, even any support staff!

Yes clearly the NZ and England cricket boards should be sending players to Pakistan to play a few games of cricket, despite intelligence communities saying there is a serious and imminent threat of attack, in a place where cricketers have been attacked before. Definitely is something they should be whimsical about…

Gonna win the wtc without playing a game

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

msp83 wrote:It must be noted that the Nzc's actual pull-out, and England's seeming consideration of the same, is based on 'Fear' of security breach rather than any actual security breach involving their players, or for that matter, even any support staff!

Yes clearly the NZ and England cricket boards should be sending players to Pakistan to play a few games of cricket, despite intelligence communities saying there is a serious and imminent threat of attack, in a place where cricketers have been attacked before. Definitely is something they should be whimsical about…

Hi Olly,
The point I made, is not too difficult to comprehend, no need to do a great deal of head-scratching.
Sensible call from NZ, , just like what the BCCI did. Flimsy, pathetic little excuses like only the support staff got infected and not the players are just that, pathetic. Remember it was the ECB chief who took that 'Fear' and not actual line. And also it will be interesting as to what kind of spin the ECB would be trying, after what they have attempted with their insistence on demanding forfeiture earlier...

I see someone's still wound up about India forfeiting a test.

Duty281 wrote:I see someone's still wound up about India forfeiting a test.

I see someone is yet to get off the delusional world!

I am pretty surprised this is such an issue on here. Don't think anyone in this country particularly cares whether it goes down as 2-1 or 2-2

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I see someone's still wound up about India forfeiting a test.

I see someone is yet to get off the delusional world!

You'll get over it one day, just a shame India lacked the confidence to actually try and win the series.

Soul Requiem wrote:

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I see someone's still wound up about India forfeiting a test.

I see someone is yet to get off the delusional world!

You'll get over it one day, just a shame India lacked the confidence to actually try and win the series.

If that thought gives you some consolation, who am I to deny that! Keep giving company to our friend...

Unsurprisingly, England withdraw from the Pakistan tour (men and women) citing security concerns.

Duty281 wrote:Unsurprisingly, England withdraw from the Pakistan tour (men and women) citing security concerns.

ECB wrote:

"The mental and physical well-being of our players and support staff remains our highest priority and this is even more critical given the times we are currently living in. We know there are increasing concerns about travelling to the region and believe that going ahead will add further pressure to a playing group who have already coped with a long period of operating in restricted Covid environments.

"There is the added complexity for our Men's T20 squad. We believe that touring under these conditions will not be ideal preparation for the ICC Men's T20 World Cup, where performing well remains a top priority for 2021.

They don’t actually cite security concerns bar the vague ‘increasing concerns’ - which seems a bit odd…

Duty281 wrote:Unsurprisingly, England withdraw from the Pakistan tour (men and women) citing security concerns.

You mean they've forfeited the entire series? What a shock!

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Unsurprisingly, England withdraw from the Pakistan tour (men and women) citing security concerns.

You mean they've forfeited the entire series? What a shock!

I'm starting to think you might need some new hobbies mate?

Quite a few of my friends watched the Queen's Gambit over lockdown and got really into chess. Apparently it can be quite engrossing. I personally put one night a week aside when I take a walk up a nearby hill to a lovely, sheltered bench there with a nice view and read at least 100 pages of whatever book I'm currently indulging in.

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Unsurprisingly, England withdraw from the Pakistan tour (men and women) citing security concerns.

You mean they've forfeited the entire series? What a shock!

No, they've not toured due to legitimate security concerns, which you may have heard about on the news.

This differs from India who left for no legitimate reason and, as a result, forfeited the fifth test.

Genuine question, have India now actually forfeited the Test, I thought the outcome was still TBC

Yet to be confirmed from what I understand, VTR.

Seeing the Pakistan tours cancelled is such a shame. It would have been the men's first time there since 2005 and the women's first ever trip. It's especially a shame after how much the Pakistan players and management did when touring in 2020 to help the ECB get international cricket back on at a time when English crickets finances were in dire need of that happening. I hope the tours can be rescheduled at some point, even if touring elsewhere, to allow the PCB to recoup lost revenue even if that can only really happen through broadcast deals.

I do feel that English cricket owes something back to Pakistan cricket for what they did to get that 2020 series underway. Coming to England in the midst of what was a covid s*** show at the time, 2 weeks in a travel lodge unable to leave their rooms other than one individual training session a day, food served to them on the floor, etc. All that to play games with no crowds, with little to no preparation.

If it was security reasons, which seems the reason why it is off given the NZ tour, then I have sympathy with the ECB and cancelling the tour was the only option. But if that was the reason, just say it?

Obviously the reasons cited (Covid and bubble fatigue etc) are legitimate reasons for people not wanting to tour. But we saw England’s white ball depth this summer, I am sure they could have cobbled together a squad. And I can’t think the women would have had the same issues given they’ve spent less time in bubbles.

Like you Carlos, they PCB did them a massive favour last summer and they should be doing everything they can to pay them back.

The romantic (who is also an idiot) in me wants to tip Pakistan for the T20 World Cup after the two cancellations. They'll have very little preparation, they really don't have the squad for it, they have a nearly 41-years old Mohammad Hafeez in there for frak sake, Shadab Khan shouldn't be batting nearly as high as he likely will be, etc etc. In other words there is no reason to suggest they have any hope of winning other than it being a potentially fun story. Which is precisely when Pakistan cricket has a tendency to do something ludicrous yet entertaining. Get ready fellow 606ers. Babar Azam and Shaheen Afridi are going to drag Pakistan to a title between the two of them.

The only thing missing from the story is Usman Qadir, the late great Abdul Qadir's son, being in the squad to clean bowl a confused looking Kohli with a gargantuan googly in the final.

I have considerable sympathy for Pakistan and really wish we could get back to a situation where international teams feel comfortable in making tours ; and I also agree England "owes them" for the visit they made last year in the midst of the Covid crisis.

But : given security concerns (debate it all we like , in the absence of public knowledge : I am sure the NZ officials didn't invent them out of thin air!) as well as the extra strains of bubble life ; and the cumulative effects on the players' mental well being are surely a legitimate concern.

With a World t20 imminent I would suggest deferring a tour (a tour of no particular importance other than as a gesture of goodwill) to Pakistan isn't an unreasonable decision.
Regrettable , certainly. But - provided there remains an intention to replace the visit when practical - I don't see this as an affront to Pakistan Cricket ; or a cause to vilify the often quite fairly criticized ECB.

Do hope this is a temporary setback and progress towards restoring visits to Pakistan will resume sooner rather than later.

VTR wrote:Genuine question, have India now actually forfeited the Test, I thought the outcome was still TBC

No way, other than in some delusional little worlds. There is is an offer of a couple of additional T-20s next year, and they still seem to be working out the details. ECB still seem to be asking for a forfeiture, but the BCCI surely not going to give in, particularly after the happenings across the border.
Although Duty has flagged security concerns, the ECB hasn't really done so, they are talking Fear, Covid and T-20 WC...

Its unfortunate for Pakistan, that the cancelations have come at a point when it seemed the game was getting back on its feet with more countries touring. But with the experience of Sri Lanka always in the backdrop, one can't take a chance. The situation in Afghanistan making perceptions of the situation worse than they probably are.

Duty281 wrote:

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Unsurprisingly, England withdraw from the Pakistan tour (men and women) citing security concerns.

You mean they've forfeited the entire series? What a shock!

No, they've not toured due to legitimate security concerns, which you may have heard about on the news.

This differs from India who left for no legitimate reason and, as a result, forfeited the fifth test.

I have gone through the ECB statement that is there in the news, and they really don't talk about security concerns, nothing concrete. They talk about fear and Covid. Guess when the English talk about it, that alone should qualify it as 'Legitimate'?

I searched but couldn't find if I'm allowed to link to other sites, so please delete this post if I'm not.

Apparently what is good for the goose is not good for the gander