South Africa recently pulled out its cricket team from the tour of Srilanka, which also involved India because of a bomb blast very close to the hotel they were staying in.

To paraphrase one of their players – if they had not been scheduled to play on that day, they would precisely have been shopping in that exact same location where the bomb blast occurred that killed 17 people and wounded many more.

Before anybody attaches it to 9/11, let me remind you that these blasts are pretty common because of the ethnic violence in that part of the world. But only people familiar with the "inside" story can understand. Not the western world. 

Was their decision right or wrong?

India decided to stay, while South Africa "chickened" out. Does this fact provide any credence to the decision made by the Cricket board of South Africa. After all, the teams were promised "presidential" security. Shouldn't South Africa have felt happy at the arrangements put in place for them? 

We all know the sporting public wants the game to go ahead, because sports is one of the best entertainments you can get, and unlike watching a cinema, it does not have a prescribed ending. It is unpredictable and everybody loves that nature of the sports.

But, sport is also a profession, meaning it is a paid job. Why do sportspersons have to go to any extent to entertain the public even with the smallest innuendo that their life might be in danger? Is it worth it to risk their life at the cost of entertaining the public and making more bucks? Certainly NO!

Security is a very personal thing. It differs from person to person. Some people even would love to go through that risk so that their life is more adventurous, or even that they can share stories of their adventure.

Some people are conservative and always want to "play it safe." So, I think it is up to the individual to take the proper course of action based on the facts and his/her own logic.

Imagine being in a different profession (except a journalist/reporter) and you are suddenly asked to go to Israel or Lebanon to do some knowledge transfer or to learn a tool or to do some testing at this juncture.

Will anybody be willing to go? I doubt it. Life, family and personal security are of paramount importance at that moment than being in a troubled place. It is better to be safe than to be sorry.

Similarly, the sporting public should understand that sportspersons are "employees" too, and it is their choice to do their job when they feel that their life is at stake. Ultimately, cricket, or for that matter, any sport or any job, is trivial when compared to life.

In most cases, the whole point of working in different kinds of jobs is to make money and live happily. What is the point of making money and not living to enjoy all your hard work?

I do not think it is appropriate for the media and the public to chastise the cricketers for failing to "entertain" them and that would be tantamount to being insensitive to their concerns. Sanctions by the International Cricket Council for failing to honor the commitment would not only be ridiculous, but also laughable.

Sport is, after all, what it is. sport!

Nothing more, nothing less!