Calls for England's cricket team to scrap next year's planned Zimbabwe tour are neither unexpected nor controversial.
However, when those calls come from Vodafone, the team's main sponsor, supporters across the country have every right to feel uneasy and alarmed that big business is sticking its nose into sporting matters.
But why should sponsors keep quiet?
Martin Cannon, spokesman for the Institute of Sports Sponsorship, says business has every right to make its feelings known.
"I think it's perfectly reasonable for a sponsor to take a view on any situation, - not just a tour to Zimbabwe - because they have an investment," he told the BBC.
"If they see a situation threatening that sponsorship, or perhaps bringing their name into disrepute, then it's perfectly valid for them to say 'we have a view on this'."
The voice of marketing in sport has increased considerably in volume in recent years.
Real Madrid's summer purchase of David Beckham was undoubtedly motivated by his tremendous appeal to markets in the Far East.
The Spanish giants recognised his qualities as a footballer but they also wanted hordes of people queuing to buy their shirts thousands of miles away.
Vodafone have also made their concerns clear over the Jockey Club's controversial ban on mobile phones, saying: "The negative publicity this issue has generated could be a concern to us."
Of course, sponsors are more concerned with protecting their brand than helping the sport, but Cannon says there is a limit to how much influence they should bring to bear.
"I think if a sponsor attempted to involve itself in team selection, it would be going too far," he said.
"But the relationship is usually because team and sponsor feel they can have a mutually beneficial relationship - and that is generally what happens.
"If you look at Beckham, for instance, I don't see a problem with that.
"Madrid were promoting a brand, the transfer was promoting sport, it's in the interest of the club to grow.
Positive impact
"Madrid saw a gap in their marketing geography and David Beckham was a way of meeting both football and marketing objectives.
"Research has shown that a solid majority of people realise that without sponsorship, there is no event."
Sponsorship can have a positive influence on sport, as was the case during the 1998 Tour de France, an event hit by a spate of doping allegations.
"The sponsors didn't want their brands linked with drug taking because it was destroying the sporting values in which they had invested," he said.
Formula One relies heavily on tobacco advertising
|
"Two or three pulled out, and others said they would only continue if the sport put in testing and got itself back together."
Needless to say, cycling quickly began to clean up its act.
Yet sports fans could still be justified in feeling nervous, their voice increasingly drowned out by the volume at which money talks.
Formula One proves the point, as many European Grands Prix face the axe if, as expected, tobacco advertising is banned across the continent in 2006.
"F1 are masters of their own destiny and tobacco sponsorship in Europe has a finite period," said Cannon.
"If the sport decides that to be financially viable it needs tobacco sponsorship, I'm sure it will move to markets where it can get it."
And as long as sponsors bring in more money than fans, they are the ones who will have the final say.
E-mail this to a friend
Printable version
A solid majority of people realise that without sponsorship, there is no event
