Pollard wrong

THE EDITOR: WKS Hosein is entitled to his opinion (“Pollard did nothing wrong,” Newsday, September 6), like I am entitled to mine but saying Kieron Pollard did no wrong is reasoning I cannot understand.

Hosein points to the use of strategy in cricket, which would mean doings things in a way to help achieve victory. There was no way the Barbados Tridents could have won that match, so where did strategy enter into it?

True, in Test cricket captains “close their fields” to try to prevent a batsman, through a form of psychology, from scoring a century-making run. We are dealing here with a T20 match.

Why are people making excuses for Pollard? He was wrong. And he knew it. What could the Tridents have gained from what Pollard did? What could cricket gain from what Pollard did with one run needed for victory at the start of the eighth over? His team could not win.

Hosein wrote that the Patriots had nothing to lose. So even if the Tridents had won that match it would still have ended the preliminary round second to last and with no hope of going into the next phase.

Whatever happened to sportsmanship? Cricket is supposed to be a gentleman’s game. Pollard was not sportsmanlike and definitely not gentlemanly.

As an aside, did anybody else notice that the only team with no players born in TT is the one that ended at the bottom of the table? Coincidence? I think not.

GLEN

PROVIDENCE

via email