The continuing politicization of cricket in Sri Lanka

The separation of cricket from politics has always been a fanciful notion. This is despite the British imperial attempt in the late 19th and early 20th centuries to consider the sport as being above politics.

Under British imperialist noses, the Australian, South African and West Indian cricket teams, which played against England during those years, reinforced nationalist sentiments. Hence, cricket played a key role in the movements which led to the creation of those independent nation states. It is difficult to argue that cricket and politics were not already intertwined.

In his 2008 “Spirit of Cricket” lecture in 2008, South Africa’s Archbishop Desmond Tutu said that “politics impinges on sport as much as on any other aspect of life.” Cricket’s historic core values of fair play and respect for others have provided a universal framework within which the game has been played. Tutu acknowledged that the sporting boycott of apartheid South Africa, sparked by cricket, “played a crucial part in our liberation.”

Those core values, however, are constantly under strain. The ill-feeling generated by the “bodyline” series between Australia and England in 1932-33 still resonates. It adversely affected relations between the two governments and was a clear example of a collision between cricket and politics. Since that time, cricket has been continually exposed to political interference and machination. This is clearly evident in relations between India and Pakistan but, sadly, it has become an ever-present feature in their smaller, near neighbor, Sri Lanka.

In 1996, the Sri Lanka men’s cricket team won the ODI World Cup for the first time, beating Australia in Lahore. A decade of high achievement followed. The team was