Compared with most of my esteemed cricketing Lifer pals, I know nothing.
But my initial question is why would Rafiq name 3 other colleagues as witnesses to the alleged remark, one of which was a current England player, if he wasn't 100% confident that they would confirm what Vaughan said.
Is anyone else querying why the former England captain has gone to such lengths to protest his innocence, name names & seemingly bare his soul to the press at such an early stage in this issue ?
Does it have a whiff of " methinks he doth protest too much " ?
Isn't it usual practise in such circumstances when an accusation has been made public, for the accused to put out a statement to indicate their denial and that the matter is in the hand of their solicitor?
OK. Cards on the table.
I have never been a huge fan of Vaughan & consider him a rather arrogant figure, mainly based on his demeanour & the way he can seem to talk down to others when commentating.
And, on reflection, I might even hazard a guess that he COULD have certain tendencies often described as "intimidating" - a somewhat kinder word than those used in Public Schoolboys' fiction stories in the 50's.
But, then I'm sure others will be quick to defend this upstanding man and tell me I'm talking out of my ar*e....
Fanny, whilst it's wrong to speculate I agree with you and guessed it was Vaughan before he was named. Mind you every time I've been to Yorkshire it always comes across as the most racist/bigoted place in England. Apologies to all the decent Yorkshire folk on here.
Compared with most of my esteemed cricketing Lifer pals, I know nothing.
But my initial question is why would Rafiq name 3 other colleagues as witnesses to the alleged remark, one of which was a current England player, if he wasn't 100% confident that they would confirm what Vaughan said.
Is anyone else querying why the former England captain has gone to such lengths to protest his innocence, name names & seemingly bare his soul to the press at such an early stage in this issue ?
Does it have a whiff of " methinks he doth protest too much " ?
Isn't it usual practise in such circumstances when an accusation has been made public, for the accused to put out a statement to indicate their denial and that the matter is in the hand of their solicitor?
OK. Cards on the table.
I have never been a huge fan of Vaughan & consider him a rather arrogant figure, mainly based on his demeanour & the way he can seem to talk down to others when commentating.
And, on reflection, I might even hazard a guess that he COULD have certain tendencies often described as "intimidating" - a somewhat kinder word than those used in Public Schoolboys' fiction stories in the 50's.
But, then I'm sure others will be quick to defend this upstanding man and tell me I'm talking out of my ar*e....
Tin hat firmly secured, lads ....
Vaughan's denial is pretty robust and suggests to me that nobody has come out to collaborate the allegation, and therefore it is basically one word against another's. Had other people confirmed it you would imagine he would be dishing out an apology or that his statement would have been more open to interpretation, 'I don't remember saying that but apologise if I did' etc. His statement flat out denies ever saying it and he would clearly be in a difficult position if other people had confirmed the allegations, and I suspect they haven't which is why he has been so robust in his denial. When you compare that to Ballance's statement it seems pretty clear to me that other people have substantiated the allegations about Ballance which is why he has had to front up and basically admit to what was alleged.
I am sure we all have our views on Vaughan and he is not my cup of tea personally, but I suspect nobody will ever truly know the truth about what he said or didn't say.
Within his statement there is also reference to something he is alleged to have said to Rafiq in relation to Kane Williamson which he provides his explanation for. I assume given that he has put this out in the open that there are no further allegations made against him, if there were surely he'd address them all at the same time as they are bound to come out eventually.
Unfortunately I suspect there is much worse to come in the coming days or weeks and these alleged comments by Vaughan will probably pale in comparison to what is going to come out. I imagine there are a lot of people associated with Yorkshire Cricket feeling very twitchy at the moment.
Vaughan isn't a racist. He's all of the horrible things that @Fanny Fanackapan said in her post - and more. But he's not a racist.
So, I hope this doesn't come down to 'Vaughan isn't a racist, therefore all the accusations must have been made up and we should now just forget it all and carry on'.
Instead it should be 'Vaughan said some regrettable things in the past and should carefully consider how he addresses the issues that arise from that. But Yorkshire CCC should remain under an international match ban until they complete a root and branch re-evaluation of culture, performance and diversity in all age groups and genders in cricket in the county'.
(For clarity, I am not referring to Yorkshire batsman Joe Root and British Guiana all-rounder Joel Branch)
Compared with most of my esteemed cricketing Lifer pals, I know nothing.
But my initial question is why would Rafiq name 3 other colleagues as witnesses to the alleged remark, one of which was a current England player, if he wasn't 100% confident that they would confirm what Vaughan said.
Is anyone else querying why the former England captain has gone to such lengths to protest his innocence, name names & seemingly bare his soul to the press at such an early stage in this issue ?
Does it have a whiff of " methinks he doth protest too much " ?
Isn't it usual practise in such circumstances when an accusation has been made public, for the accused to put out a statement to indicate their denial and that the matter is in the hand of their solicitor?
OK. Cards on the table.
I have never been a huge fan of Vaughan & consider him a rather arrogant figure, mainly based on his demeanour & the way he can seem to talk down to others when commentating.
And, on reflection, I might even hazard a guess that he COULD have certain tendencies often described as "intimidating" - a somewhat kinder word than those used in Public Schoolboys' fiction stories in the 50's.
But, then I'm sure others will be quick to defend this upstanding man and tell me I'm talking out of my ar*e....
Tin hat firmly secured, lads ....
Vaughan's denial is pretty robust and suggests to me that nobody has come out to collaborate the allegation, and therefore it is basically one word against another's. Had other people confirmed it you would imagine he would be dishing out an apology or that his statement would have been more open to interpretation, 'I don't remember saying that but apologise if I did' etc. His statement flat out denies ever saying it and he would clearly be in a difficult position if other people had confirmed the allegations, and I suspect they haven't which is why he has been so robust in his denial. When you compare that to Ballance's statement it seems pretty clear to me that other people have substantiated the allegations about Ballance which is why he has had to front up and basically admit to what was alleged.
I am sure we all have our views on Vaughan and he is not my cup of tea personally, but I suspect nobody will ever truly know the truth about what he said or didn't say.
Within his statement there is also reference to something he is alleged to have said to Rafiq in relation to Kane Williamson which he provides his explanation for. I assume given that he has put this out in the open that there are no further allegations made against him, if there were surely he'd address them all at the same time as they are bound to come out eventually.
Unfortunately I suspect there is much worse to come in the coming days or weeks and these alleged comments by Vaughan will probably pale in comparison to what is going to come out. I imagine there are a lot of people associated with Yorkshire Cricket feeling very twitchy at the moment.
Suspect Vaughan can see the upsides of being ‘cancelled’
Vaughan likes to be controversial. His twitter is littered with posts designed to get a rise out of someone. He's a caricature of the "no nonsense Yorkshireman", and seems oddly proud of making contentious statements aimed purely at getting a reaction instead of forming part of an adult conversation.
Vaughan strikes me as a difficult single minded bloke who’s yorkshireness disarms that part of his personality somewhat - probably why he was able to control all the crazy characters he had in his England team. I can see if you were a foreign player and he gave you some stick it would be difficult not to take it badly.
Not sure stopping Yorkshire hosting test matches really solves anything to be honest, just unfair on fans that would be attending those games. Just make the fine bigger and throw the book at the club.
Fanny, whilst it's wrong to speculate I agree with you and guessed it was Vaughan before he was named. Mind you every time I've been to Yorkshire it always comes across as the most racist/bigoted place in England. Apologies to all the decent Yorkshire folk on here.
I've seen 10 times more racism in London/Kent than I have in Yorkshire.
Fanny, whilst it's wrong to speculate I agree with you and guessed it was Vaughan before he was named. Mind you every time I've been to Yorkshire it always comes across as the most racist/bigoted place in England. Apologies to all the decent Yorkshire folk on here.
I've seen 10 times more racism in London/Kent than I have in Yorkshire.
Yorkshire ccc have had a racism problem for a while on and off, remember they were the last county to have a non white and non British (overseas) player. To think over 30 years all those people connected to the club and membership have disappeared is really naive tbh.
Always struck me as odd that Yorkshire, a county with a large south Asian population don’t have more young players of south Asian background coming through. I thought Rashid would be the first, but seems like he was the exception. I suppose a similar point can be made towards Surrey and Middlesex not bringing people of Afro-Caribbean background through either.
Always struck me as odd that Yorkshire, a county with a large south Asian population don’t have more young players of south Asian background coming through. I thought Rashid would be the first, but seems like he was the exception. I suppose a similar point can be made towards Surrey and Middlesex not bringing people of Afro-Caribbean background through either.
Is this partly due to cricket being a rich kids game? I think it’s been discussed on here how a large number of pros in the current game did not go to state schools
Fanny, whilst it's wrong to speculate I agree with you and guessed it was Vaughan before he was named. Mind you every time I've been to Yorkshire it always comes across as the most racist/bigoted place in England. Apologies to all the decent Yorkshire folk on here.
I've seen 10 times more racism in London/Kent than I have in Yorkshire.
Always struck me as odd that Yorkshire, a county with a large south Asian population don’t have more young players of south Asian background coming through. I thought Rashid would be the first, but seems like he was the exception. I suppose a similar point can be made towards Surrey and Middlesex not bringing people of Afro-Caribbean background through either.
Is this partly due to cricket being a rich kids game? I think it’s been discussed on here how a large number of pros in the current game did not go to state schools
I would agree to some extent, how many state schools are about that have a cricket team? But, particularly south Asian communities in this country are still cricket mad (look at the following Pakistan and Indian teams get when they tour here), they’re playing cricket in leagues around Yorkshire. So why isn’t that translating to their academy?
Always struck me as odd that Yorkshire, a county with a large south Asian population don’t have more young players of south Asian background coming through. I thought Rashid would be the first, but seems like he was the exception. I suppose a similar point can be made towards Surrey and Middlesex not bringing people of Afro-Caribbean background through either.
It's not that comparable though as Asian communities are massively more interested in cricket than black ones. And play masses of cricket too, often in their own leagues
Always struck me as odd that Yorkshire, a county with a large south Asian population don’t have more young players of south Asian background coming through. I thought Rashid would be the first, but seems like he was the exception. I suppose a similar point can be made towards Surrey and Middlesex not bringing people of Afro-Caribbean background through either.
Is this partly due to cricket being a rich kids game? I think it’s been discussed on here how a large number of pros in the current game did not go to state schools
I've spoken about this before but, as an example, of the 26 at the DLCA in Australia, 20 went to private schools with Jas and Seb in the half a dozen that didn't. Schools such as Repton, Millfield, Eton, Marlborough College and Tonbridge are heavily represented. Some will argue that these boys aren't necessarily from a wealthy, affluent and influential background but are there as a result of scholarships. That is true of a few but the bottom line is that if you don't go to those schools, be it as a result of a scholarship or otherwise, then your chances of making it in the game are severely diminished.
Take a look at what has happened at Sussex. Virtually every single one of their contracted 17-20 year olds were privately educated. Schools sponsor county age group cricket. They have their own in house former pro as coach who has the ear of the county coaches. The school or county coach might also be the one that is used for 1-2-1s. All of that, in turn, means that it is easier to monitor the progress of any given player and everyone from the school to the county to the school coach to the county coach have a vested interest in the success of that player.
Prejudice takes many different forms. In the case of cricket, at some counties, out of sight really is out of mind.
Michael Vaughan has been named in the report as the person that made the comment "there’s too many of you lot, it’s something we need to have a word about”. He has completely denied ever doing so.
Rana Naved-ul-Hasan has corroborated Azeem Rafiq's claim that Michael Vaughan made a racist comment to a group of Asian players - a claim which Vaughan "totally denies".
Always struck me as odd that Yorkshire, a county with a large south Asian population don’t have more young players of south Asian background coming through. I thought Rashid would be the first, but seems like he was the exception. I suppose a similar point can be made towards Surrey and Middlesex not bringing people of Afro-Caribbean background through either.
It's not that comparable though as Asian communities are massively more interested in cricket than black ones. And play masses of cricket too, often in their own leagues
I agree. I’d also say the decline in success of the West Indian team since the 90s has also had an impact in black communities. But there are cricket mad south Asian communities in Yorkshire that don’t have any representation at county level. You have to be extraordinarily talented like Rashid to get through.
There was an interesting documentary on TV several years ago about West Indian cricket. Basically it stated that young kids growing up in the West Indies and in England instead of wanting to become the next Viv Richards or Joel Gardner they wanted to become the next Michael Jordan or whatever. Sky TV in the Windies has opened up an interest in American sports that seems to be putting cricket on the back foot.
There was an interesting documentary on TV several years ago about West Indian cricket. Basically it stated that young kids growing up in the West Indies and in England instead of wanting to become the next Viv Richards or Joel Gardner they wanted to become the next Michael Jordan or whatever. Sky TV in the Windies has opened up an interest in American sports that seems to be putting cricket on the back foot.
That’s exactly it, the carribean is firmly under the US cultural influence. Add to that the success of the Jamaican Olympic team, most young athletes there don’t want to be cricketers.
There was an interesting documentary on TV several years ago about West Indian cricket. Basically it stated that young kids growing up in the West Indies and in England instead of wanting to become the next Viv Richards or Joel Gardner they wanted to become the next Michael Jordan or whatever. Sky TV in the Windies has opened up an interest in American sports that seems to be putting cricket on the back foot.
That’s exactly it, the carribean is firmly under the US cultural influence. Add to that the success of the Jamaican Olympic team, most young athletes there don’t want to be cricketers.
Quite sad in a way as I think international cricket is far better with a strong Windies side.
There was an interesting documentary on TV several years ago about West Indian cricket. Basically it stated that young kids growing up in the West Indies and in England instead of wanting to become the next Viv Richards or Joel Gardner they wanted to become the next Michael Jordan or whatever. Sky TV in the Windies has opened up an interest in American sports that seems to be putting cricket on the back foot.
I think basketball has definitely taken over. A lot of the kids that used to play club cricket here were the sons of the Windrush generation and grew up watching their dads playing for clubs. That generation would embrace all aspects of the game, on and off the pitch but, over the years, they appear to have been lost - the two other factors in them preferring to play basketball is the duration of a game of cricket and the cost of equipment. There is no comparison between the two sports in the case of the latter. Football and even rugby have taken over from cricket.
The joy of cricket in the Asian community is again being driven by the dads. I've seen many a six or seven year old being drilled for ball after ball after ball in the nets - and that goes for privately hired indoor winter nets as it does during the summer - there is very little interest, by comparison in basketball, football or rugby.
In all the years that Seb played for Kent from the age of 11 through to 18, I can only recall two players being selected for Kent from an Afro-Caribbean background - one plays basketball (and always has done) and is currently in the England age group team and the other was selected for the first time last year for a Kent squad but he only made one appearance because he plays rugby for Saracens and that is his first love.
Comments
Compared with most of my esteemed cricketing Lifer pals, I know nothing.
But my initial question is why would Rafiq name 3 other colleagues as witnesses to the alleged remark, one of which was a current England player, if he wasn't 100% confident that they would confirm what Vaughan said.
Is anyone else querying why the former England captain has gone to such lengths to protest his innocence, name names & seemingly bare his soul to the press at such an early stage in this issue ?
Does it have a whiff of " methinks he doth protest too much " ?
Isn't it usual practise in such circumstances when an accusation has been made public, for the accused to put out a statement to indicate their denial and that the matter is in the hand of their solicitor?
OK. Cards on the table.
I have never been a huge fan of Vaughan & consider him a rather arrogant figure, mainly based on his demeanour & the way he can seem to talk down to others when commentating.
And, on reflection, I might even hazard a guess that he COULD have certain tendencies often described as "intimidating" - a somewhat kinder word than those used in Public Schoolboys' fiction stories in the 50's.
But, then I'm sure others will be quick to defend this upstanding man and tell me I'm talking out of my ar*e....
Tin hat firmly secured, lads ....
Mind you every time I've been to Yorkshire it always comes across as the most racist/bigoted place in England.
Apologies to all the decent Yorkshire folk on here.
I am sure we all have our views on Vaughan and he is not my cup of tea personally, but I suspect nobody will ever truly know the truth about what he said or didn't say.
Within his statement there is also reference to something he is alleged to have said to Rafiq in relation to Kane Williamson which he provides his explanation for. I assume given that he has put this out in the open that there are no further allegations made against him, if there were surely he'd address them all at the same time as they are bound to come out eventually.
Unfortunately I suspect there is much worse to come in the coming days or weeks and these alleged comments by Vaughan will probably pale in comparison to what is going to come out. I imagine there are a lot of people associated with Yorkshire Cricket feeling very twitchy at the moment.
So, I hope this doesn't come down to 'Vaughan isn't a racist, therefore all the accusations must have been made up and we should now just forget it all and carry on'.
Instead it should be 'Vaughan said some regrettable things in the past and should carefully consider how he addresses the issues that arise from that. But Yorkshire CCC should remain under an international match ban until they complete a root and branch re-evaluation of culture, performance and diversity in all age groups and genders in cricket in the county'.
(For clarity, I am not referring to Yorkshire batsman Joe Root and British Guiana all-rounder Joel Branch)
The Raducanu Effect.
I've spoken about this before but, as an example, of the 26 at the DLCA in Australia, 20 went to private schools with Jas and Seb in the half a dozen that didn't. Schools such as Repton, Millfield, Eton, Marlborough College and Tonbridge are heavily represented. Some will argue that these boys aren't necessarily from a wealthy, affluent and influential background but are there as a result of scholarships. That is true of a few but the bottom line is that if you don't go to those schools, be it as a result of a scholarship or otherwise, then your chances of making it in the game are severely diminished.
Take a look at what has happened at Sussex. Virtually every single one of their contracted 17-20 year olds were privately educated. Schools sponsor county age group cricket. They have their own in house former pro as coach who has the ear of the county coaches. The school or county coach might also be the one that is used for 1-2-1s. All of that, in turn, means that it is easier to monitor the progress of any given player and everyone from the school to the county to the school coach to the county coach have a vested interest in the success of that player.
Prejudice takes many different forms. In the case of cricket, at some counties, out of sight really is out of mind.
Rana Naved-ul-Hasan has corroborated Azeem Rafiq's claim that Michael Vaughan made a racist comment to a group of Asian players - a claim which Vaughan "totally denies".
Basically it stated that young kids growing up in the West Indies and in England instead of wanting to become the next Viv Richards or Joel Gardner they wanted to become the next Michael Jordan or whatever.
Sky TV in the Windies has opened up an interest in American sports that seems to be putting cricket on the back foot.
The joy of cricket in the Asian community is again being driven by the dads. I've seen many a six or seven year old being drilled for ball after ball after ball in the nets - and that goes for privately hired indoor winter nets as it does during the summer - there is very little interest, by comparison in basketball, football or rugby.
In all the years that Seb played for Kent from the age of 11 through to 18, I can only recall two players being selected for Kent from an Afro-Caribbean background - one plays basketball (and always has done) and is currently in the England age group team and the other was selected for the first time last year for a Kent squad but he only made one appearance because he plays rugby for Saracens and that is his first love.