GIVEN the national cricket team's problems on and off the field during recent months, one might have thought Bermuda Cricket Board of Control would have had more pressing matters to deal with other than attempting to muzzle their players.

That certainly seemed to be the Board's intention earlier this week when they summoned two of their senior squad members, Clay Smith and Janeiro Tucker, to a disciplinary hearing reportedly for committing the sin of all sins - talking to the press, in particular this newspaper.

Now we understand, absurd as though it was at the time, that players on the national team were required to sign a contract before last summer's ICC Trophy which prevented them from talking to the media without express permission from the hierarchy.

But did that agreement really stretch through to this year and could the Board really expect to silence those who weren't even members of the team that travelled to the recent Americas Cup in Argentina?

Apparently so.

Similar contracts in sport, of course, are not unheard of elsewhere.

Shaun Goater, for instance, has to be careful what he says to the press because of the deal he signed with Manchester City, and indeed almost got into hot water earlier this season for some fairly innocuous comments made in his weekly column in The Gazette. But Goater's a professional, and City his employers.

Bermuda's cricketers, as far as we're aware, remain amateurs, most if not all holding down jobs which help support their involvement in the game and the hours spent training, playing and representing their country.

Prominent players such as Smith and Tucker often but not always command respect for the manner in which they play the game, but as influential as they are, their thoughts and opinions are sought by those who both play and follow cricket.

The governing body's attempt to suppress a basic human right - freedom of speech - constitutes a huge disservice to the game. Indeed, their action this week might even make a case for the Human Rights Commission.

One could be slightly sympathetic to their stance had the two players in question actually been critical of the national squad set-up, the administration or even the coach. After all, harmony and team spirit can play an important role in any squad's success.

But nothing that either Smith or Tucker said during their interviews with this paper were vaguely controversial. If anything, they were supportive of the team's efforts overseas.

None of their fellow players nor the coach were attacked personally.

It's therefore difficult to understand on what basis the BCBC laid their charges particularly, as mentioned, when the sport has so many other issues that require attention.

Healthy dialogue between players and the public, which is what in effect the media encourages, will do far more to help resolve some of the sport's problems than the blanket of silence which so many of Bermuda's governing bodies resort to at the slightest hint of controversy.

On a related note, a RoyalGazette reporter was informed by national coach Mark Harper this week that he would no longer talk to this newspaper because he considered too many of our reports "negative".

As misguided as it is, that's his opinion.

If he wants a public relations officer, he can always turn to a certain anchor on one of our local radio and TV stations.

But if he wants a fair, informed account of the sport's fluctuating fortunes, he'd do better to read the paper - with or without his own contribution.