Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Risk, danger and cricket: the death of Phillip Hughes

By Binoy Kampmark - posted Monday, 17 October 2016


Greg Melick SC, representing the Hughes family, countered that the short-pitched bowling deployed on the field that day "increased the risk of injury to Phillip" in being sustained and unruly. Adding to that sin was a belief that sledging had, in fact, occurred, a fact which "must cast serious doubts over other evidence."

The problem in such cases of crisis is that eliminating every fundamental risk eliminates the flavour, and essence, of challenging sport. Nine balls in a row, or eight, or less, might well be disproportionate, and riles the guardians of good code conducts. But as to whether any such impediment might have prevented the death is impossible, and even futile, to say.

Instead, the regime of grief becomes the regime of control, imposing impediments on combative behaviour, trimming the gladiators by placing flowers on their weapons. Even worse, the weapons are removed altogether. The element of chance can never be eliminated.

Advertisement

Regulators off the pitch, and the participants on it, perennially feature traditional battles of control and resistance. Rarely do regulators strike the balance on risk and challenge. But the issue of Hughes' death, while truly tragic, cannot dispense with the sense that he played, as all at the highest level do, with risk. No regulation, or state of equipment, could have dispensed with it in its entirety.

Those who were accused of enhancing that risk played the predictable foil. Deeming them guilty in any sense would necessitate not so much a curbed form of cricket as an essentially defanged one. They, at the very least, should also be entitled to grieve with regret.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

6 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne and blogs at Oz Moses.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Binoy Kampmark

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 6 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy