THE EDITOR, Sir:
RE: GAYLE'S Non-Selection - Becca 1 vs. Becca 2:
I am grateful to you for the diversity of views that you always reflect in the pages of The Gleaner and The Sunday Gleaner.
In the context of the ongoing issue of Chris Gayle's non-selection for the West Indies team in the first Test against Australia, I commend to your readers the diverse views of your two columnists, Becca 1 (Gayle and Jamaica, Tit for Tat - April 6, 2003) and Becca 2 (Wrong Move by W.I. Selectors - April 10, 2003).
Those who support the WICB's non-selection of Gayle will find support in Becca 1's statement:
"Gayle should pay for his choice and the Jamaica Board and the West Indies Board should instruct their selectors accordingly".
On the other hand, those who share my view that the WICB's act was illegal, discriminatory and a counter-productive exercise of arbitrary power, will find support in Becca 2's statement:
"There is a right way and a wrong way of doing things, however, and even if they believed that Gayle was wrong to do what he did and that he should pay a price, the selectors certainly went about it the wrong way.
Gayle may have simply made a mistake, if that is so, he deserves to be forgiven...."
I prefer the writing of Becca 1, even though I disagree with his position on the Gayle issue. When reading Becca 1, I feel as if I am getting to know the real person and his authoritarian views. Becca 1 stated his wish and the WICB granted it.
Becca 2's writing often disappoints me as he seems to look over his shoulder and is affected or influenced by the popularity (or lack of it) of his position. This personal weakness that I discern in Becca 2 leaves me wondering if I believe that he believes what he has written.
I am etc.,
JEFFREY MORDECAI
jmordecai@cwjamaica.com
7 Pawsey Place,
Kingston 5.
