OPINION: More than meets the eye in Ochanâ€"Okello episode
UGANDA’S cricketers returned from a triumphant foray in the Division Three World Cricket League in Australia without two players, Patrick Ochan and Jimmy Okello, who disappeared before the team proper departed.
By Paul Mbuga
UGANDA’S cricketers returned from a triumphant foray in the Division Three World Cricket League in Australia without two players, Patrick Ochan and Jimmy Okello, who disappeared before the team proper departed.
The Uganda Cricket Association (UCA) has unhelpfully offered that there will be cause for worry only when the two players fail to return in three months, when their visas expire. But that is, at best, a moot point.
It beggars belief that two key players can so wantonly disregard professional ethos in the way that Ochan and Okello have done, and the UCA’s response is to display an attitude that borders dangerously on nonchalance.
It must be asked why the duo refused to have their dubious “holiday†officially sanctioned by the UCA.
A foul motive is definitely afoot. We must note that Australia allows foreigners to obtain bridging visas to permit applicants eventually apply for long-term visas.
Thus, the impending expiry of the duo’s visas is inconsequential and messrs Ochan and Okello could well have permanently absconded.
The UCA must earn their keep by investigating the two players’ “holiday†and providing the concerned public with convincing answers.
And should Ochan and Okello eventually return, UCA must ensure they are robustly chastised for their behaviour.
UGANDA’S cricketers returned from a triumphant foray in the Division Three World Cricket League in Australia without two players, Patrick Ochan and Jimmy Okello, who disappeared before the team proper departed.
The Uganda Cricket Association (UCA) has unhelpfully offered that there will be cause for worry only when the two players fail to return in three months, when their visas expire. But that is, at best, a moot point.
It beggars belief that two key players can so wantonly disregard professional ethos in the way that Ochan and Okello have done, and the UCA’s response is to display an attitude that borders dangerously on nonchalance.
It must be asked why the duo refused to have their dubious “holiday†officially sanctioned by the UCA.
A foul motive is definitely afoot. We must note that Australia allows foreigners to obtain bridging visas to permit applicants eventually apply for long-term visas.
Thus, the impending expiry of the duo’s visas is inconsequential and messrs Ochan and Okello could well have permanently absconded.
The UCA must earn their keep by investigating the two players’ “holiday†and providing the concerned public with convincing answers.
And should Ochan and Okello eventually return, UCA must ensure they are robustly chastised for their behaviour.