Rod Lyall 20/09/24
‘I saw it on TV!’ is a phrase which is likely to go down in history as a monument to the unreliability of what we see in these days of AI, and the growing body of ‘alternative facts’ with which we are increasingly surrounded.
Not everything we see on the screen, whether on television or a computer, can necessarily be taken at face value, and journalists have an obligation to try to distinguish the apparent from the real, and to tell their story as accurately as they can.
So this is by way of being a ‘mea culpa’, an acknowledgement that my first reaction to the regrettable if brief events which followed the Topklasse grand final between Punjab-Ghausia and VRA Amsterdam last Saturday did not do sufficient justice to the complexity of what took place, in those moments and in the hours which preceded them.
As I write this, I am conscious not only of the fact that what I have to go on is mostly images from a live stream, a single camera situated at some distance from the events, but also that the whole issue is in a certain sense sub judice, in that the KNCB has disciplinary procedures which need to be allowed to run their course.
Not to mention the laws of defamation, which require one to be extremely careful in what one says about any individual.
Like the semi-final between the same two teams two weeks earlier, the grand final was a hard-fought, tense battle which went all the way down to the wire.
Unlike the semi-final, however, this was something of a gala event, with VIP tents, music, and a relatively large crowd of supporters.
It was also a game of fluctuating fortunes, VRA fighting back towards the end of their innings with a fine knock from Shariz Ahmad, and Punjab needing nearly eight an over from the last seven with six wickets down.
The hosts’ sensational victory with two deliveries to spare was a tribute to their resilience, and it came as a huge relief to their supporters and as an equally great disappointment to the visitors.
Which doubtless goes a long way towards explaining what happened afterwards, although it cannot be said to justify it.
The Spirit of Cricket preamble to the Laws and the Code of Conduct are there to ensure a fair and respectful contest, and it is the task of the onfield umpires to ensure that that is how the game is played.
And the match referee and the KNCB’s disciplinary procedures are there to take appropriate action should further measures prove necessary, as I remain convinced they are following those regrettable scenes.
What I do feel obliged to do, however, is to acknowledge that by initially focusing on one side of the case I gave too much emphasis to the crowd’s invasion of the ground immediately following the conclusion of the game, and too little to the tensions which had built up in the course of the day.
TKcricket 