17 March 2007
What a game!
No, I am not talking of the farce, that was the Netherlands-South Africa match, even with Gibbs' six sixes in an over. Instead, I am talking about the Pro20 semi final between the Warriors and the Cape Cobras.
Initially, the Warriors did not impress, with only 139 runs on the board at the end of their innings, and with minimal excitement in that innings, I was thinking I should have rather watched the SA-Netherlands game. With the Cobras in fine form this season, and having scored 221 (yes 11 runs an over!) recently, the match seemed decided, especially as Adam Bacher hit a six and a four in the first over.
But then the Warriors struck back, with regular wickets, and the run scoring from the Cobras was pedestrian at best. After 15 overs, they were scoring about 5.5 runs and over, with the asking rate reaching 13 runs per over, and with only 5 wickets in hand. But then the fight back began, and slowly the match was tussled out of the Warriors' hands with some massive sixes doing good damage. With 5 balls remaining, only 4 runs were required; and victory seemed assured. And then, the Warriors took two wickets in two balls, and the scenario changed drastically - the Warriors were almost back in command.
3 balls, 4 runs, and a hat trick ball to negotiate. Alan Dawson managed to get a single off, but then Kleinveld at the other end only managed a single instead of the two he needed to get to assure the tie. So with the entire crowd at its feet cheering him on, Dawson managed to somehow get the ball past mid wicket, and scramble for two ... it was close, but safe.
Certainly one of the best matches I have seen, and definitely the best live sports event I have attended ... now I wonder if the final is also at Newlands ...
14 March 2007
Zimbabwe ...
So it has finally come to this - the opposition and the police state; the inevitable clash, and a farcical trial. It has happened countless times before, and I don't think this will be the last time. And, apparently it's all South Africa's fault.
The question that comes to my mind - what is South Africa or any other African state or any other world power to do? And this question applies, not only to Zimbabwe, but to Darfur, Somalia, Iraq etc etc. So as a neighbouring country (or a world power), what do we do?
Do we go guns blazing to depose the offending dictator? If so, what then? Do we get another Iraq, where the invading country (the liberators) gets saddled with the reconstruction bill, a population that doesn't want them and our own citizens that don't support our presence in a foreign country?
Or do we send in a team of special ops, that will assassinate the offending dictator? And then what? Are there people who will take charge, and lead the country? And who do you kill - just the dictator? What about his supporters? And how do you identify all of them, and what is the criteria we use to judge them?
Or do we go to the UN or a AU where, some members don't care; while other members have vested interests (because they own a mine or two) and thus don't want to interfere. And off course there is plain apathy, and some don't even bother voting, because, they frankly don't give a damn.
Or we could do nothing; and hope that some one else does something.
In the end, every one of these alternatives are problematic. Most of the successful, long term democracies, who have thrown off the yoke of dictators have done it themselves. Zimbabwe did it themselves 20 odd years ago. In the end, that is possibly the best solution .... but they do require support; and this is where South Africa has failed. In the end, the people of Zimbabwe who are tired of Bob Mugabe (remember, as in all dictatorships, not every one hates the dictator) need to stand up and be counted; and those who stand up must be helped. Doing nothing, achieves nothing.
The question that comes to my mind - what is South Africa or any other African state or any other world power to do? And this question applies, not only to Zimbabwe, but to Darfur, Somalia, Iraq etc etc. So as a neighbouring country (or a world power), what do we do?
Do we go guns blazing to depose the offending dictator? If so, what then? Do we get another Iraq, where the invading country (the liberators) gets saddled with the reconstruction bill, a population that doesn't want them and our own citizens that don't support our presence in a foreign country?
Or do we send in a team of special ops, that will assassinate the offending dictator? And then what? Are there people who will take charge, and lead the country? And who do you kill - just the dictator? What about his supporters? And how do you identify all of them, and what is the criteria we use to judge them?
Or do we go to the UN or a AU where, some members don't care; while other members have vested interests (because they own a mine or two) and thus don't want to interfere. And off course there is plain apathy, and some don't even bother voting, because, they frankly don't give a damn.
Or we could do nothing; and hope that some one else does something.
In the end, every one of these alternatives are problematic. Most of the successful, long term democracies, who have thrown off the yoke of dictators have done it themselves. Zimbabwe did it themselves 20 odd years ago. In the end, that is possibly the best solution .... but they do require support; and this is where South Africa has failed. In the end, the people of Zimbabwe who are tired of Bob Mugabe (remember, as in all dictatorships, not every one hates the dictator) need to stand up and be counted; and those who stand up must be helped. Doing nothing, achieves nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)