As usual, conservative commentators have damaged their own feet. They do not have any appreciation of the political stances adopted by people of conscience and their faux outrage provides the best publicity protestors can have. Latest to benefit from this narrow mindedness is the courageous Australian cricketer Usman Khawaja.
Mainstream news bulletins make it clear that humanitarian crises such as those currently occurring in Ukraine and Gaza must not be allowed to keep the important business of sport from newspapers, tv screens and online sites. I use the term ‘business’ quite deliberately, for media reporting and coverage have forced all sports to become professional and as a result have redefined elite sports as the only real version of these sacred Australian institutions.
There are numerous examples of this commercialisation of institutions which once were regarded as grass roots recreation. Netball Australia has suffered controversy and upset over salaries for players, leading to the resignation of its chief executive officer. The pattern is familiar. Netball was once played by dedicated amateurs. ABC tv was the only media outlet to cover the sport. Once the game was established as an attractive spectacle however, commercial tv began to bid for exclusive rights.
For this takeover to succeed it was necessary that there be a central administrative body ready to approve the contracts and to pocket the broadcast fees. The game became top heavy, players received media training and cosmetic makeovers to standardise their glamour. As in all sports, the players were dedicated to the game and so were slow to demand their share of the spoils.
Cricket has long been top heavy and driven by commercial considerations. Set aside the dreadful development of ‘Big Bash’ games and the proliferation of memorabilia. For decades now, players in Australia have been given contracts which take them out of the grass roots game. Who could today name the grade cricket clubs of the Australian stars?
Once, the legendary captain Richie Benaud would turn out for Central Cumberland in the Sydney grade competition and for a silver coin, the kids of Parramatta would be admitted to the local oval. We could rub shoulders with the cream of Australia’s cricketers, ask for autographs and even have conversations about the game we all loved.
Not only has local club cricket been impoverished but so too has the state competition for the Sheffield Shield. Top players no longer belong to a state. All such loyalties have gone by the board and sadly, so too has loyalty to the game in general. It might seem like a common complaint that sportsmanship has suffered, but it seems true enough. Media are fond of controversy. In fact they thrive on it. The damage to boys and girls starting out in the game is immeasurable.
The media needs and creates stars for their own purposes. They also need players to be involved in a heavy schedule to keep their ‘products’ before the public eye. Small wonder contracted players are then not available for local and state participation. The international scene is what matters. Players must turn out constantly to keep the tv mill churning and the betting agencies humming.
While there is turnover among major cricket sponsors, the trend towards commercialisation has been plain for half a century. When cricket Australia sent a team on an Ashes tour and allowed a beer company sponsorship rights, it felt as though the team was a brewery eleven. While the baggy cap remained with its national emblems, shirts became advertising opportunities. It was particularly cynical that the sponsor’s logo was prominent only on the leading shoulder of batsmen. This after all is the only shoulder visible as the batsman faces up to the bowling.
It has become plain over recent years that administrators, media and sponsors have decidedly narrow views about player responsibilities. They have been very sensitive about any political statement. Predictably perhaps, those players whose consciences have demanded they speak out on issues such as racism, sexism, the environment and genocide have incurred the wrath of administrators who do not want to offend current sponsors. Potential sponsors could also be scared off, and these include any big business.
Clearly, any international cricketer with a social conscience would realise that silence could be interpreted as complicity in the agendas of big business, oppressive politics and negative media imagery. Cricket administrators at national and international levels require players to wear sponsors’ logos. They should not interfere with Usman Khawaja’s conscientious decision to express support for suffering Palestinians by wearing the statement that ‘all lives are equal’ very unobtrusively and low on his cricket boots. Interference would amount to hypocrisy.
Dr Tony Smith is a former political science academic with interests in elections, parliament and political ethics.
Contributions to Pearls and Irritations
Your contribution will fund quality independent comment and analysis in Pearls and Irritations
Contribute
