Cricket And Politics Dbq

Cricket’s relations to politics in South Asia from 1880 to 2005 was a way to create unification between the groups residing among the place – it was the event of freeing tensions between them during the time on the field as well as the typical social systems. With its popularity with the South Asian peoples, it was a way to also show their power. However, within the minor unification of the peoples playing the sport, it did spark some religious tensions.

There were many cases in which cricket showed as a mend between the peoples who participated in the sport – said by Shaharyar Khan “cricket has a place in bringing people together” and also “one sport in India and Pakistan” (Doc. 10). Khan believes that India and Pakistan share a culture

in which unifies them and their unification is shown throughout the other states. The unifications between the groups was seen by a significant number of people. Seen by an English cricketer and historian, Cecil Headlan being quoted, saying “cricket unites the rulers and the ruled” (Doc.3). Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Indian Muslim League said that cricket holds “the brotherly feeling that prevailed throughout the play” (Doc. 5). Jinnah also said “I hope that our Hindu brethren… would be no less please but also rejoice at the Muslims winning the championships” (Doc. 5). Jinnah, as the leader of the Indian Muslim League, he believes that cricket is about the connection it has created with those who play on the field. Jinnah was commenting on a tournament that had the “sides of Europeans, Hindus, Muslims, and Parsis” (Doc. 5). This cricket tournament shows the unification that it has held between South Asia and the countries around it. It is able to create a sportsman with the rules of sportsmanship hanging above his head – sincerity towards those he plays against. This shows the ease of tensions between the groups. With cricket, it has also overlooked the use of the caste system of Indian. In an Indian newspaper in Bombay, India, it talks about the champion pitcher that served the Indian Cricket Club was in the low caste system (Doc. 4). The Indian caste system was very influential within India. In the Indian Newspaper, it says “the upper-caste Hindus of an Indian cricket club found that although he was low-caste, his inclusion in the Hindu team would improve… his pluck and spirit” (Doc. 4). The newspaper, is praising the sport, and they believe that if the social standings were able to be overlooked over, then surely, the problem about the system would be gone. The caste system in India greatly dived the peoples – they knew which of them was in what place, however, in one field – it all looks like they are united – and the “champion bowler” proved that.
After its introduction to Bombay, the sport swelled – “more than five hundred young men of all ages and of all castes pursue this” (Doc.1). To the players of South Asia, cricket was a way to train them in “self-restraint” (Doc. 3) and to steam off their anger – the show of power. Throughout the documents, it seems the South Asia did thrive with victories in their competitions. In a London newspaper, it talked of a young Indian cricketer named Prince Ranjitsinhji and about how he plans to join the Sussex team “who are doubles very glad to know this” (Doc. 2). The importance of this was that it was a London newspaper, talking about a foreigner. It shows not only the power that the one person had, but what the power his country had to raise such man that would be gladly accepted as “the head of a team of English players” (Doc.2). This goes hand in hand with what Prabhat Kumar Mukhopadhyay said: “The English have always ridiculed us as “effete”. It is on the sporting field that we may counter such false allegations” (Doc. 6). Mukhopadhyay is an Indian and a supporter of cricket, he believes that on the field his country is able to show their power and that they are not superior or affect about how the British see them as “effete” (Doc 6.) or weak. Specifically, a political show of power is seen in an interview of a chairman Pakistan Cricket Board, Shaharyar Khan as he says “we expect 20,000 Indian fans. An Indian diplomat said ‘you can make 20,000 ambassadors for Pakistan” (Doc. 10). They are using the fans of cricket to be use as a representative of the state and as a way to show their strength with Pakistan. Cricket is their strength because it is what they know, what they focus on, having it be the only sport while there are many diversities in England. To Khan, he thinks that being devoted to one thing can help them with their relationships with those around them.
In reply to a crickets club letter asking Mohandas Gandhi to continue to support religious based cricket competitions, Gandhi said, “my sympathies are wholly with those would like to see the Quadrangular Tournament matches stopped” (Doc.

8). He is implying that he does not support the religious competitions – he understands cricket but not the divisions. To him, cricket was not helpful with political tensions in South Asia. Bal Thackeray, Indian founder of a Hindu nationalist organization shares the same view as Gandhi with the tie of cricket and religion. He questions “when Pakistan wins a cricket match and my country is defeated, why should Indian Muslims celebrate?” (Doc. 9). Thackeray’s point of view is quite biased. As said, Thackeray is a founder of a Hindu nationalist organization, and here he is questioning a group of Muslims. After the partition the relationship between Hindus and Muslim grew apart as well. India’s leaders and their view of the separation of India and Pakistan was not taken well – and Thackeray’s disgust towards the fact that they have to rejoice to their country’s lost must have stemmed off from that. Cricket was first introduced to the people of Bombay, India by the British and many of its peoples reacted greatly to it. However, the sport and polo shared the same field. In a petition to Sir James Fergusson, Indian cricket players ask for the polo team to play on a separate field (Doc. 1). The Indian Cricket players’ plea seems to mimic that of how most native people would react if a foreigner would invade and take over their system. In this case, the Indian Cricket players, having the land to play cricket, believe that they should have the land to themselves because the white men have already taken their country. Religious conflicts are more focused in an editorial in an Indian Sports journal Indian Cricket. It says, “That is why Quadrangular cricket has degenerate into religious rivalry” (Doc. 7). The editorial’s tone

seemed to be disgusted with how they saw the “self-seeking leaders” (Doc. 7). Though, their point of view is biased, evident when they say, “even the sacred field of sport they would not leave unmolested” (Doc.7) referring to the places India went against in the Quadrangular Tournament. The editorial believes that the true reason why cricket has turned into religious competition because it wasn’t their choice. It was a way to protect themselves from holy passion.
In conclusion, cricket clearly etched itself into the history of South Asia after it was taught to the Bombay natives from the white men. As the sport increased in advertisement, the effect it had to the people playing was easing – it helped unify the players and the countries that showed strength on the field. On the field, the people were able to show their power. Though, that could have led to some negative complications with the existing political tensions. A missing document that would benefit me would be having a point of view from the Englishmen’s thoughts on the South Asian peoples beating them at a game they introduced. It could support whether or not cricket did ease the political tensions or contradicted that statement.