Rebel warriors

Ami bidrohi, I the rebel warrior
I have risen alone with my head held high
-- Asian Dub Foundation

IF there was any doubt as to what motivated the 13 Bangladeshi cricketers to sign with the ICL and whether they were justified in doing so, such doubt was removed by the draconian punishment handed down to them by the Bangladesh Cricket Board on Wednesday.
The ten year ban is totally disproportionate to any offence the players might have committed, and as one-time captain of the national team, Habibul Bashar, points out, this is the kind of action one would expect against someone involved in match fixing or some other kind of egregious practice, and that the players who have chosen to join the ICL have committed no crime that merits such punishment.
But in a sense, the BCB did the players a favour by demonstrating in clear terms the contempt the board has for the players under its control (to say nothing of their contempt for the wishes of the cricket-watching public) and the arrogance they have when dealing with the players.
The attitude of the board is perhaps best summed up the words of another ex-national team captain who is now on the board: "I am optimistic that they can [now] understand their mistakes and beg mercy to the board."
In fairness, this is a malady that is unique neither to cricket nor to Bangladesh. Professional (and amateur for that matter) sports the world over is marred by officious and arrogant bureaucrats who like to throw their weight around and think that the players, who are really the heart and soul of the game, are nothing more than chattel, and should do as they are told and be happy.
Sports governing authorities always act is this manner in order to protect their monopoly power as though they own the sport and it belongs to them.
That the ICC (cricket's governing body) has refused to recognise the ICL and then encouraged the member nations to take action against players who do join is nothing short of the worst kind of bullying.
Let's look at the situation with the Bangladeshi cricketers for a moment.
So they have chosen to play in the ICL. At the most basic level, the question is: Why shouldn't they? Why should they not be able to play for whomever and wherever they please? What gives the ICC or the BCB or anyone else the right to tell them where and how they can ply their trade (and to deny Bangladeshi cricket fans of the pleasure of watching them compete at the national level)?
The problem begins with the fact that the ICL is not recognised by the ICC. There is no reason on earth why the ICL and the ICC cannot co-exist. The only reason the ICC does not recognise the ICL is to protect the monopoly interest of the BCCI, the governing body of Indian cricket, and, indirectly, its own monopoly interest. Why anyone would support such a thing is beyond me.
As for the BCB and its response, again, there is no reason why the players cannot play for both ICL and the national team. There was no compulsion on the part of the BCB to ban or even sanction the Bangladeshis who joined ICL, and certainly the harshness of the punishment handed down by the BCB was entirely the board's own decision.
Now that they have been put in this unfair situation by the board, where they have to choose between playing in the ICL and playing for the national team, it is a bit much to criticise the players for lack of patriotism and commitment for choosing the ICL over a board that treats them with contempt.
By no means can playing for the BCB be equated with patriotism. Many athletes do not represent their country due to conflict with coaches or governing bodies. It is not a question of patriotism and to suggest that it is would be to equate the BCB and its management with Bangladesh -- a self-evident absurdity.
It is a question of personal and professional relations, how the players feel they are treated and valued. If they feel that they were undervalued or not treated with the respect they merited (and the board's subsequent actions strongly suggest that the players had a point), they have every right to leave.
It is not even as though the players adhere to the stereotype of the arrogant, swaggering prima donnas one finds in sports in other countries.
Anyone who has spent any time with our cricketers can readily confirm that they are, almost to a man, down-to-earth, humble, and respectful, nothing like the caricature of the spoilt professional athlete.
All they ask in return is to be treated with respect. Is that asking too much?
I would like to conclude by making one last point about the ICL. The fact that it includes a team from Pakistan and now one from Bangladesh is to be commended and stands in stark contrast to the ICC-sponsored IPL which has no Bangladeshi side and deigned to sign a grand total of one Bangladeshi cricketer.
You tell me: Between the ICL and the IPL, who is treating Bangladeshi cricket better, and why should the players not sign up for this league which at least includes them, and, more importantly, is willing to include Bangladesh in its ambit?
The ICL has at least brought the game to Bangladesh and included us in its calculations. Let me ask you this: What has the IPL done for Bangladeshi cricket and the country's cricket-watching public?
I really hope that the players stick to their guns. I fear that they might not due to the outcry and the severity of the punishment. But if the feedback of Daily Star readers is any guide, they have support of enough people who understand that it is the board that is being unreasonable, not the players, and are excited about the prospect of an ICL team playing out of Dhaka.
I won't blame the players if they back down. The board has raised the stakes dramatically, and no one likes to be called names or have their motives called into question. But I hope they don't back down.
They would be bringing cricket to Bangladesh in a way that the ICC-sponsored IPL never saw fit to, and in doing so would be showing us that they can stand up to bullying bureaucratic officialdom.
The players should be an inspiration to us all. They don't want to be called rebels (I don't understand why: in this country such an appellation should be a badge of pride), but if they stick to their guns, they certainly will deserve to be called warriors.

Zafar Sobhan is Assistant Editor, The Daily Star.