Player freedom in cricket

Today's topic: Read an article about something in which you have little interest. See if the article might make you rethink your position on the subject. Write about whether it succeeded.

I think cricket is boring. Honestly, it's probably because I've never watched a game in my life. The few times I've seen it played on TV or in a movie, it just didn't seem like a game that would be very engaging. So, to see if an article could sway me, I set out for Google looking for cricket news.


I found cricinfo which appears to be a pretty bustling site. Lots of information going on with too many places to focus on, but stop Travis - this isn't a review of web site usability, it's about cricket. Not knowing where to jump into the site, I selected the top story, One small leap for player freedom. Turns out, cricket players in Australia have not have freedom of speech. Their contracts specify that they can not say anything detrimental to the league, other teams, other players, or anything related to the sport. A contractual "If you can't say something nice, but say anything at all...", just like your mom used to tell you.

The idea of a sports league imposing a gag order of sorts on its players seems rather odd to me. America is home of the Neon Dion's of the world, the Kobe Bryant's who fly their private jets from the game to their court appearances and back. Our "superstar's" value seem to go up with each arrest, each charge, and each new antic that they pull. How antiquated is a contract saying you can't even speak your mind?

Or is that just the American coming out in me? Maybe we need a bit more self-restraint. Maybe the Bryant's of the world would think twice before gallivanting with who knows who night after night if he thought his millions might be in jeopardy. Maybe cricketers do have something right. Who knows, maybe this antiquated sport might just have something to offer us Westerners. Maybe I'll check out a game the next time I see one on TV.