Osman Samiuddin, writing at Cricinfo, feels that safety is a “very personal concept”:

Many will also insist that no place in the world is really safe anymore, from any kind of violence. Can foolproof security be offered anywhere? Johannesburg is a dangerous city, as Saqlain Mushtaq and Mohammad Wasim found out on the 1997-98 tour when they were attacked and mugged, putting the tour briefly in doubt and delaying the first Test. Pakistan are playing a Test in London days after a major terrorist plot at the country’s leading airport, in a country which is still on a high level of alert. How safe are they?

But any criticism of South Africa’s decision should also be tempered, to an extent, by the understanding that safety is a very personal concept. A Pakistani player’s notion of safety is likely to be different to that of a South African. If he is a resident of Karachi, he will have few qualms in traveling to Delhi, Mumbai or Colombo because he is likely to be more immune to such incidents. Tragic as they are, because they happen regularly enough in his city, they build up a certain resistance. The same can be said of a player from Colombo, Delhi or Mumbai; unsurprisingly, since 9/11 the only countries to play a Test in Karachi are the three teams from the subcontinent.

What the good man is suggesting is that a Pakistani player is “okay” with being “attacked and mugged” but a South African is not. Dilliwallahs, Mumbaikars or the people of Colombo are “okay” with being bombed every now and then but a South African tends to take it very seriously. So, Indians, Sri Lankans and Pakistanis are used to being killed, attacked and mugged. They lack self respect and lack any notions of personal safety and so, they shouldnt be expected to take such stuff seriously while their South African counterparts have the luxury and privelege of getting shit scared.

The man, being a Pakistani himself, should be ashamed of himself for putting his country men in such poor light. The reasoning that people from the subcontinent, since they are used to being bombed around and killed every now and then, shouldnt be expected to value their lives is utterly flawed. No normal human being, be it an Afghan or an American, will ever be comfortable with bombs going off every now and then. If a person becomes “immune” or whatever, it’s mere helplessness but definitely not apathy or “thickskinnedness”. Every person from the subcontinent values his/her life as much as a South African or an Australian does. To suggest otherwise is to imply that people from the subcontinent lack self respect. If personal safety is a problem here, it’s not because the people like it that way.

An article in a Sri Lankan English newspaper, reportedly angered some South African players. It was written by Elmo Rodrigopulle in the Daily News, carrying the headline, “South African cricketers chicken out”. The man naively suggests that

The South Africans in citing the bomb blast were only making a flimsy excuse to skip the tournament. Obviously they would not have wanted to be beaten again after losing the Test series 2-nil.

Maybe true or maybe not. But he makes a very good point, bringing out all the hypocrisy:

The South Africans are used to playing under threatening conditions. In Protealand, too, there are security concerns.

 

There one has to be careful when even taking a stroll on their streets.

 

I have been to South African a few times and can vouch for the fact that it is not safe to be on the roads alone even in broad daylight for the chances of being, manhandled and mugged are great.

 

One incident that remains vivid in my mind was when Sri Lanka toured South Africa in March 1998. Lionel Ranasinghe who kept cheer leader Lionel Nawaragodagedera company was badly manhandled and mugged and robbed of all his belongings. He had to be hospitalised for several weeks.

 

Ranasinghe had gone to purchase his bus ticket and was on his way back in Johannesburg when he suffered this life threatening attack.

Also add that one in every three South African women is raped at some or the other point in her life (link):

The survey was released at the same time as the government’s latest crime statistics, which reveal that the rates of murder and rape in South Africa had declined slightly during 1998.

The murder rate nevertheless remains at 52 per 100,000 – eight times as high as in the United States.

Car hijackings last year were up by nearly 9% on the previous year’s figure, and the statistics also show an increase in the rate of burglary and mugging.

A Human Rights Watch report says:

South African women’s organizations estimate that perhaps as many as one in every three South African women will be raped and one in six South African women is in an abusive domestic relationship.

The South Africans were clearly not amused at the article in The Daily News:

Having fielded calls all day regarding the alleged split within the ranks, Gordon Templeton, the team’s media manager, also didn’t mince words when asked his opinion about the stories called by the Daily News and the Daily Mirror. “Those with anything between their ears, and who understand cricket, would find such stories utterly laughable.”

Nothing… I repeat nothing is new about this attack. Attacks like these are commonplace in Sri Lanka. They happen all the time. They are covered by all major newspapers around the world. So anyone who is literate with two eyes, a brain which works and a bit of common sense would either:

1. Go to Sri Lanka or

2. Completely avoid it.

But here we have an amusing situation wherein, they come, play cricket, sip Cola in their hotel lobby, and once a bomb goes off, run away like kids.

One should also ask why South Africa had no problem whatsoever during the Test series. Threat levels were always high, ever since the ceasefire was violated by the LTTE. Even so, South Africa were cleared and allowed to play by their cricket board and played the two Test matches completely safe, without as much a problem as a mosquito bite. A bomb goes off and suddenly, everything changes. It’s as if there’s a foreign invasion and Sri Lanka is going to be wiped off in the following days by incessant bombing.

Even a South African schoolboys’ team was called back from Sri Lanka. Richard Venter, the team’s coach, was quite upset with the pullout and feels the threat has been amplified many times over:

… the issue has been blown out of proportion by the South African media. It was made to appear that there were bombs dropping in Colombo every moment which is simply not true.

[...]

I don’t think we were under any great threat or danger here, except perhaps, when we went to crowded places and we could so easily have avoided going to those areas. The boys were happy here. I think the people back home have over-reacted.

One can write that off as personal opinion but it’s a good opinion nevertheless, in my view.

 

More distressing is the fact that this pull out was based on the security assessment done by a company sitting in Dubai within 24 hours!:

 

“I am amazed at their decision to return home,” Mendis told AFP. “The government put in place presidential-level security for the team, yet they were not convinced. They took advice from a Dubai firm which is even more surprising. I did not see anyone from this firm in Colombo, yet they prepared a security report within 24 hours sitting in Dubai.” (link: 1, 2.)

 

I wonder how people residing in Dubai know the ground situation in Colombo better than even the Sri Lankan Army.

 

These guys were given presidential security, the sort of security that an ordinary Sri Lankan citizen would never dream of or get. Yet, it was not enough. Maybe they wanted the United States Marine Corps with them.

Neil Mantrop, a South African radio commentator, writing in SuperCricket, puts forward some flawed reasoning:

 

But the problem with an ‘upgrade’ of security for the team to ‘presidential’ level is that presidential security is reliant on the military which is, of course, not just a target for the Tamils, but the primary target. So does surrounding the South African team with high numbers of primary Tamil targets constitute an increase in their safety, or a significant decrease?

 

Tell me, who provides security? The military, the police or belly dancers, huh? By the way, the Sri Lankan military is not the sole “primary Tamil target”. Every Sinhalese Sri Lankan is one. So are all those Sinhalese Sri Lankans who serve the South African team in their hotel. So should we avoid surrounding the South African team with them? Should Sri Lanka ban any Sinhalese Sri Lankan from going too close to the South African team?

I’ve been told “It’s just cricket. Leave it.”

It’s not just cricket here. This is a very serious issue. It involves national honour. The moment South Africa asked for security certification, they spat on Sri Lanka’s face, saying even their best soldiers cant protect them. What a gesture from a country which fails to protect onethird of its own women from getting raped!

The next time Sri Lanka tours South Africa, their cricket board should ask the same Dubai based firm to provide security certification for the South African armed forces, that too within 24 hours, that too sitting in Dubai. Of course, they’d say “This is not Sri Lanka. We’re much safer.” Yes, women getting raped, people getting murdered every damn day and foreign cricketers getting mugged is very safe, I’m sure.