39
Chopra’s Anti-Pakistan Views on Cricinfo
By Tabrez Janjua for Stani Army in Pakistan Cricket
77 ViewsI’m not sure many of you have read Samir Chopra’s latest article on Cricinfo’s Different Strokes blog, but it is simply outrageous. Filled with sarcasm, insult, hatred, ignorance and a bit of jealousy, Chopra gives us his views on the recent banning and fining of Pakistan players by the PCB. He starts of questioning whether any of what has gone on is “even mildly interesting?”, but seems to ignore the obvious that it was interesting enough for him to write about it.
It was Aldous Huxley that once said “The pleasures of ignorance are as great, in their way, as the pleasures of knowledge” and it is evident from the article that Chopra gained great pleasure in telling us what he ‘knows’ about Pakistan cricket. Certainly, from his photo on Cricinfo, it is clear he is someone quite fond of himself generally. Having taken exception to his piece, I decided to write the following as a comment: “A shameful article by someone who quite clearly has a chip on his shoulder. How long have you kept that pent up inside you?”. Who thinks my comment was allowed through? Wrong, it wasn’t, but can anyone tell me why?
Here’s a taste of his work:
“There is a way of describing Pakistani cricket, which used to be tiresome but which has now started to strike me as patently offensive. This is the insistence that Pakistani cricket is charmingly erratic, wonderfully unpredictable, beautifully inconsistent, sublimely indisciplined. Right, I’m making these up. But you see the pattern. Pair a couple of adjectives which span the spectrum from the sublime to the sordid and have a go at describing Pakistani cricket. And I suspect the world of Pakistani cricket revels in this description, because this sort of indulgent tolerance gives it a free pass.”
The basic theme of his article is that Pakistan is the troubled member of the cricketing family with it’s indiscipline and should not be helped all the time. “A common feature of the calls for a display of solidarity with the Pakistani cricket world in its “time of need” is the invocation of “family” and “fraternity”.” Utter garbage! Sri Lanka apart, when has the cricketing world shown us solidarity or come to our aid? Quite the opposite, the most powerful board in cricket, the one he supports, has done it’s very utmost to sideline Pakistan. How on earth could he describe solidarity with Pakistan as a common feature?
Whilst nitpicking, he even mentions Inzamam Ul-Haq’s clash with a spectator as proof of Pakistan crickets troubles. But he completely ignores the troubles of other teams; Harbhajan’s slapping of his own team mate and racial slur to Symonds (with threats of quitting the entire tour) come to mind. How about the problems the West Indies have had?
Whether he truly believes what he wrote, or whether it was a sad attempt at driving traffic to his other blog (which I won’t mention), it is very dangerous and careless to put out views like that. He should stay clear of things he does not know about. It is people like him and his holier-than-thou attitude that do Indo-Pak relations no good. The sad thing is that they are promoted by the site that calls itself the home of cricket. The interesting thing is that Cricinfo would give us all this rubbish about democracy and free-speech as the reason for allowing his views, but then they’d have to tell me why they didn’t publish my comment wouldn’t they? ESPN Cricinfo has lost it’s neutrality a very long time ago and you can let them know here.
Loading ...
March 15th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
Very well summed up, you have stuck two fingers up at the cretin in an eloquent manner.
A nobody who has no knowledge of Pakistan cricket voices his biased one-sided opinion. Lets take it as that and let keep talking rubbish on ‘Cricindia’.
His views have nothing to do with ‘cricket’. They insinuate a wider underlining divisive theme.
March 15th, 2010 at 8:18 pm
Essex
Thanks. I couldn’t believe it when I first read it. An editor at Cricinfo must have checked it through. Absolutely disgraceful. Sidharth Monga is another on on there. He’s give even more license to make snide comments within the main site articles and bulletins.
March 16th, 2010 at 2:56 am
Stani
How can we expect our rivals to spare us when we can’t keep our house in order. They don’t spare us when things are working smoothly and make their utmost effort to turn the positives into negatives then how can we expect them to not exaggerate things in times of trouble.
One major problem is that we the Pakistani fans are very critical of our team and management, that makes our team and management a constant and easy target in international media.
Teams like West Indies, NewZealand, and England also do not perform well in International tournaments and bilateral series but somehow do not get labelled as inconsistent and self imploding. The world for some odd reason expects more from our team may be because we lose a lot from winning situations.
I think the current disciplinary action taken by PCB will take care of a lot of problems and as regards the Indians we will take care of them on the field. The T20 Wc is not too far away.
March 16th, 2010 at 2:56 am
Cricinfo published a full-page response to Chopra’s article in its Inbox section. This, I believe, is what is known as an “exchange of views.” That is, you don’t ban people or censor articles; you let folks argue it out. But don’t let that get in the way of the usual paranoid Pakistani rant. I agree; the world is out to get you. Make sure you keep your guard up.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:05 am
It’s good that Cricinfo have published a response, labelling the post by Chopra “patently offensive”, but Stani’s quite fair comment was not allowed.
It’s not a full “exchange of views” then, is it?
Here’s the response, if anyone hasn’t seen it:
http://blogs.cricinfo.com/inbox/archives/2010/03/a_call_for_perspective.php
March 16th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Wasim
This is true but we should expect much better from Cricinfo. His article was not called for and was blatantly inflammatory.
nowayjosie
Exchange of views? Cricinfo published a response? Are you serious? The Inbox article was a reply to a blatantly offensive and inflammatory article that shouldn’t have been published. Don’t try and smooth it over with this ‘exchange of views’ nonsense. Chopra really intended to write that piece so he could exchange views right!? And Cricinfo were forced to publish a response to try and claw back some respectability because the alternative was an apology.
…and mine isn’t n exchange of views, it’s a rant right? Another example of you looking through your rose-tinted glasses. You keep changing the rules; it wouldn’t be so that it suits you would it?
By the way, do you have anything to say in regards to the points raised in either article? No? And you call mine a rant? But you carry on ignoring the blatantly obvious and defending the indefensible, if it makes you feel better.
Sid
Exactly. They will only publish what suits them and in doing so, merely add strength to my argument and that of others.
March 17th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
Nowaywhatever
Only give an opinion if it is constructive, otherwise stick to a blog that suits your lack of intellect.
TJ
You may have read the article about Swann, it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if a non English, SAfrican and Aussie celebrated like that.
“It all happened in the heat of the moment and it certainly wasn’t anything malicious,” said Swann. “I apologise unreservedly if I did swear – and I know I did”
WHAT!?
I wonder if the rest will be able to apologise for showing ‘emotion’ in the heat of the moment.
March 17th, 2010 at 11:48 pm
Essex
I first became aware of what happened when watching Sky Sports news and actually seeing the wicket fall and Swann giving Siddique a send off. His antics disturbed me then but I thought it would be just brushed under the carpet and we wouldn’t even hear of it. I am glad it has come out in the open.
It is this snobbish attitude as the reason why England are hated around Europe. Who does Swann think he is? What has he achieved in the game? He is in someone else’s country as a guest, and he behaves like that?! What vexed me further was captain Cook’s pathetic attempt at playing it down and making excuses for Swann’s behaviour….it was hot apparently!
I think since Flower has taken over, the English morals have taken a dive. They’ve just come from SA where they caused a stink over Broad and his ball tampering. I think English cricket is trying to follow the Aussie blueprint of trying to play rough and be successful…as if the former will lead to the latter! Unfortunately, they are nowhere near as good as the Aussies at sledging or cricket.
March 20th, 2010 at 9:40 pm
@Sid -
Exactly how does “A shameful article by someone who quite clearly has a chip on his shoulder. How long have you kept that pent up inside you?” add to the value of the conversation? What is quite so fair about an ad hominem attack, something this post also reeks of? Exactly wth is this supposed to mean “Certainly, from his photo on Cricinfo, it is clear he is someone quite fond of himself generally.”???
I hadn’t read Samir’s post before, but I have now and I can see the point he is making as well as the fair rebuttal posted by Ibrahim Moiz. This post is laughable, and actually did provide a few chuckles.
If this retard really wants to know why his petty, stupid comment wasn’t published perhaps he should take a look at Cricinfo’s posting guidelines, which quite clearly state:
Make sure your comments focus on the substance of arguments as opposed to their writers.
Try and add value to the discussion, and do always stay on topic.
Avoid insults, rudeness, and personal attacks against writers or fellow commenters. If you can’t say what you have to say politely, don’t say it at all.
Apologies for being so rude about it, but in my opinion an idiot who goes about on a nationalist rant trying to insinuate another has hatred because of his nationality, and tries to justify it all based on the fact that an even dafter comment wasn’t published (oh my, a cricinfo conspiracy!) deserves to be called out.
March 20th, 2010 at 11:26 pm
Did you come out with an apology when Sohail Tanvir came out with his ‘ Hindu’s are like this ‘ only comment on a talk show ?
Seemingly that was alright and what Samir wrote – not. Take your head out of the sand you’ve buried it in and then you MIGHT see the reality around you.
If no one wants to help PCB, you’ve got ask yourself – why ? If you think the PCB runs cricket fine, then I’d suggest a trip to the local Dr wouldn’t be out of place.
March 21st, 2010 at 9:22 am
Achettup
Your comment is a typical patriotic response by an Idiotic INDIAN who thinks it is his moral duty to defend every other Indian whether he is right or wrong.
Stani in his post didn’t attacked India or Indians he just responded to one Indian guy who wrote a baseless and poisnous article about Pakistan and Pakistan cricket , Stani had every right to respond to that article.
It’s a shame that you gave your approval to Chopra’s poisnous article and were totally insensitive about it’s offensive language and poisnous intent.
The title of Chopra’s article ” SHOULD A FAMILY BE THIS TOLERANT ?”
clearly shows his poisnous intent. With in the lines he is telling the cricket fraternity to take some kind of action against Pakistan which should further isolate Pakistan from international cricket.
On what grounds? How does the internal problems faced by Pakistan cricket effect fellow member states? Are the problems encountered by Pakistan cricket so unique that the fellow member states have never encountered?
Lets go in reverse order.
Afridi’s ball biting- The art was originally invented by Manoj Prabharkar. What about Stewart broad and Dravid.
Match Fixing- Remember Azhar, PraBharkar and several others. Name a country whose players have never indulged themselves in match fixing?
Internal politics- How does it affect others? English team recently had infighting. West Indies is constantly facing this problem.
Doping I wonder What are Chopra’s views about India’s reluctance to follow WADA’s whereabout clause.
Ground results. Which other team won a world cup and reached the semi finals of the other major tournament last year? So what if we got beaten comprehensively by Australia? Which country defeated them in a series last summer? Didn’t Australia thrashed India in their own backyard last summer?
If Pakistan is highly unpredicatble, Newzealand are prepetual bunnies, South Africa are eternal chokers, West Indies are totally crap, Indians are Flat track bullies.
Security Problems:
Is India safe? Is Sri Lanka Safe? Is there a guarantee that London won’t get attacked again or as a matter of fact can any country guarantee that it has fool proof security against terrorism.
The less we talk about professionalism is the better, People living in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones at others.
You guys think only you have the right to be judged as a victim, be it for terrorism, racism, discrimination, hatred or umpiring bias. No other nation can genuinely get affected by these vices because the title of victim is only reserved for poor and helpless Indians.
Chopra through his poisnous article only tried to push the current Indian agenda of further Isolating Pakistan cricket.
The problems faced by Pakistan cricket is their internal matter, the world should mind it’s own business.
Tifosiguy
You my friend are not only arrogant but also ignorant. Before making sweeping judgements do some research.
What makes you think that we are not aware of our own problems?
Which help the other member nations have extended to us?
They only exhibited double standards on security issues and exploited it for monetary gains. If you consider playing bilateral series according to the FTP schedule then India recieved the most help in the last two years.
March 21st, 2010 at 11:56 am
Wasim
Neatly side stepping the initial point I made – bravo on that !
Care to explain why ANY INDIAN shouldn’t defend Samir after what nonsense spewed from Sohail Tanvir’s mouth ? That one statement by Tanvir my friend encapsulates everything that is Pakistan and PCB.
Cheers !
March 21st, 2010 at 12:52 pm
TifosiGuy
No I didn”t side stepped anything, go in archives of this blog and my blog and find out a single statement where we defended or validated Tanvir’s statement. We never denied you the right to crucify Tanvir, he is responsible for his own statement.
Every individual is responsible for his own actions, I am for mine and you are for yours. Bottom line, even In the name of nationalism you can’t stand up for something which is totally wrong. You have to keep your conscience alive.
March 21st, 2010 at 2:20 pm
While Mr. Chopra’s article was clearly stupid and uncalled for especially considering it was being publishing in cricinfo, but to all Indians and Paksitanis – if you guys take offence to every article or blog/forum post made by both Indians and Pakistanis, you will go mad.
There are literally thousands of sites/blogs/forums where there is absolute nonsense written about the other side. But Luckily, in the past few years, almost an equal number sites/blogs/forums have come up where the users speak positively about each other. I personally visit these sites and ignore all others.
March 21st, 2010 at 2:23 pm
@Wasim – you keep saying – typical INDIAN response – everytime there is a post by some Indian trying to give another point of view. I would really appreciate it if you seached a bit in google or bing and check the way many Pakistanis repsond to each and every article posted on Indian portals – even when there is nothing about Pakistan in the article.
March 21st, 2010 at 2:27 pm
achettup
First of all, I didn’t personally insult you so do insult me. By doing so, you have lost already and are merely demonstrating to everyone who you are. Everyone, allow achettup to introduce him/herself to you! I am sure your mother did not bring you up to be so pathetic. You speak of attacks and adding value to conversations yet your contribution here was? Just couldn’t control your anger could you? No doubt it has landed you in trouble in the past, but I’m certain you know more about that than I do.
You can come back and argue on the points Chopra has made, but don’t come back if you’re going to use insulting words and bring shame on your nation. It is interesting that you have completely ignored Chopra’s outrageous claims. I take that as a sign that you agree with him.
Tifosiguy
This is the first time I have heard about the Sohail Tanvir incident. It thus follows that I couldn’t have come out with an apology since I hadn’t known it had occurred. Regardless, why should I apologise for him? Will I ask Arundhati Roy to apologise for achettup’s attack on me above? As Wasim has rightly suggested, I am innocent of what you do (and say) and you are innocent of what I do (and say). If Tanvir said that, then he was wrong.
Your last point at 1126 was quite pathetic. We are not asking why no one is helping Pakistan cricket. If you read carefully, we are saying that Chopra’s suggestion that everyone has been helping us is wrong. And you have inadvertently agreed with this by asking “If no one wants to help PCB, you’ve got ask yourself – why ?”. Thanks!
Wasim
Some excellent points as ever. It is interesting that the two above have both completely ignored Chopra’s points. Why? Because they are simply indefensible and made with an undercurrent of hatred and jealousy, and peppered with ignorance. They don’t have it in themselves to say Chopra was wrong.
The problem we have is that our media and ex-cricketers criticise everything out in the public domain. Other nations do not do this as much even though they have equal number of problems. IN fact, they have some problems (e.g. partners appearing naked in the media) that Pakistan cricketers don’t have. Our open self-criticism has given people like Chopra an excuse to say that only Pakistan has these problems. A complete simpleton’s opinion. Just because Pakistan hangs its dirty washing out for everyone to see, does not mean that everyone else doesn’t have any dirty washing.
I don’t want to make this into a debate of international security or make it India versus Pakistan but the security argument used against Pakistan is just plainly ignorant. This American ‘war on terror’ is not something Pakistan started. We are at the forefront of fighting it and no other nation has suffered more than Pakistan – fact. If the jingoists above think that India will be safer if Pakistan stops defending at the border of Afghanistan then they need to open their eyes. They also ignore the fact that India is not immune to home-grown terrorism itself. This is nothing against India or its people. These are simply facts to show that terrorism and security problems are not just a Pakistan issue like Chopra and his cronies think.
achettup/ Tifosiguy
You criticise me when I am trying to preserve the relationship between India and Pakistan in the face of people like Chopra that add fuel to the already raging fire. India and Pakistan have more in common than they have different, but you and your friend Chopra would rather concentrate and highlight the differences. You are a disease to this earth.
The sad thing is that you cannot see something wrong and say it is wrong. In your jingoistic opinion, if someone is Indian but wrong, they are still right.
March 21st, 2010 at 2:35 pm
Rayden
You have summed up everything in the first half of your first sentence. Intelligent, balanced and rational. It shows the difference between you and the likes of Chopra, achettup and Tifosiguy. We have people like them too, as does every other nation, sadly. We should not let them make us question our stand though, or let them persuade us to join them. Love is more powerful then hate.
March 21st, 2010 at 3:32 pm
Ah yes TJ, you are trying to maintain the India – Pakistan relationship.. But ofcourse while replying to achettup – you take a dig at his mother and the country. Very *mature* way to maintain the relationship indeed !
As to what I’ve said – why is my statement ‘ if no one wants to help PCB’ wrong ? Why should anyone try and help a board that is the epitome of dysfunctionality ? What assurance that another Lahore will not occur, considering what is happening there on a daily basis. Rightly or wrongly.
Put them together and you will see the point I’m making. Fine Chopra has exaggerated by saying all nations have tried to help PCB – my point merely is why should anyone try !
Lastly, if you take offence and roundly criticize what Samir has said, then please look around the internet and get the soundbyte of what Tanvir has said. Then ask yourself – which was worse, and which needs more ridicule !
Cheers
p.s : this is the last time I’m going to visit/post on this blog.
March 22nd, 2010 at 12:22 am
TJ, Samir’s points and the response from Ibrahim Moiz are on the whole fairly resasonable, if slightly heated comments. For the most part, they actually agree with each other, but the response does sensibly question the emphasis/try to provide a wider perspective. We might all be left wondering what to take out of it, but that’s hardly unusual.
In contrast, your post doesn’t deal with anything Samir has actually said. You put words into his mouth, get upset about them and attack him personally. Who is that helping?
March 22nd, 2010 at 1:59 am
Rayden
That’s your perception, which in my opinion is wrong.
I have reserved the “Typical Indian” remark only for people like Achettup who think they have to defend every thing right or wrong associated with Indians and India and that too in an uncivilzed manner which is often insulting and derogatory for others.
So in your opinion if another Pakistani said something stupid on any other blog it denies me the right to call a spade a spade.
Me and Stani, we don’t react to every other article on cricinfo or elsewhere and this is the first time I have seen Stani so upset, this article by Chopra was not just another article or a mere alternate view point it was malicious in its intent and had to be responded.
@ Jonathan
In contrast, your post doesn’t deal with anything Samir has actually said. You put words into his mouth, get upset about them and attack him personally. Who is that helping?
I think you have skim read Stani’s post and overlooked the clips he pasted from Chopra’s article and his counter arguments.
What was fair in Chopra’s article can you enlighten us.
March 22nd, 2010 at 7:38 am
Wasim, both Samir and Ibrahim Moiz agree on the unhelpfulness of the cliches which don’t stand up in any serious context, which is a lot more central to the Different Strokes post than some would allow. While a single paragraph listing problems is a natural opening both for point-by-point serious rebuttal and counter-attacks/accusations of venting, the post as a whole clearly focusses the notion of “amused” “winking” at “charming” “foibles”.
Stani’s response, both in the post, and to those who have commented above, has focussed rebutting on the idea that Samir is suggesting everyone has been helping Pakistan in a practical way. It’s very easy to argue against this, but Samir didn’t say such a thing! Stani replies to a quoted sentence in a way that displays a massive fail in comprehension even of that sentence in isolation. (What does Samir say is a “common feature” again?)
Even looking at the whole post, which does speak of existing “indulgence”, there isn’t any hint that anyone is going out of their way to help. The focus is definitely on the talking of these things as light-hearted. Once you see that, you see that the point isn’t really to compare “disasters” with any other country. You don’t need to agree with everything Samir mentions, or even accept his thesis that our reactions are important enough to make a difference, to see his point that it isn’t all just a joke.
March 22nd, 2010 at 12:07 pm
@Wasim – You are completely entitled to calling spade a spade and I never said its ok for people from either of the nations to insult the other just because there are people in forums/blogs etc who act stupid.
All I am saying is instead of writing “typical Indian” all the time, try to address that person who is making the counter argument. I dont respond to all Pakistanis with “typical Pakistani” because that would mean I am generalizing on all people of your nation.
March 22nd, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Rayden
First of all I didn’t used the term “typical Indian” in my comment’ these were my words.
“Your comment is a typical patriotic response by an Idiotic INDIAN who thinks it is his moral duty to defend every other Indian whether he is right or wrong.”
You have conveniently ignored the comments of those Indians for whom I have used this term.
In this case you need to notice that did the chicken came first or the egg.
March 22nd, 2010 at 3:33 pm
Tifosiguy
Actually, it was a compliment and not a ‘dig’. This is just another example of how you read something which is clear in meaning, and make it out to mean something entirely different.
Your statement implies that we have been asking for help and all the other nations have been providing it – as does the rest of that point you have made. And you know what is happening in Lahore on a daily basis do you? You have lost all credibility with that statement.
Jonathan
Samir’s points are ‘fairly reasonable’ on the whole? If you seriously believe that then that is a remarkably naive opinion. I’m not sure how Chopra’s and Moiz’s articles agree with each other on the whole, as Moiz’s opening paragraph, which sets the tone of the article states: “Cricinfo, as far as I can tell, isn’t the place to vent one’s frustrations. At the very least, one can outline valid reasons in an organized, mature manner. And that’s why Samir Chopra’s latest post “Should any ‘family’ be this tolerant?” strikes me as, in the author’s words, “patently offensive”.” Moiz has called Chopra’s article patently offensive and you’re saying they agree on the whole?
I think your point on the two writers largely agreeing is another example of your ‘babe in the woods’ view of the situation. Either it comes from the fact that you do not have a grasp of Pakistan cricket, do not understand the intent and possible consequences of Chopra’s views, or actually do see the world as utopian place. For your personal well-being, I hope it is one of the first two.
Which words did I put into his mouth? Didn’t deal with anything he actually said?! Are you serious? The whole post was on what he said. As Wasim has said, I think you have just skim read my post. If you had been a regular visitor to this blog then you would know that I am fairly open to people having their opinions on other sites. But what Chopra wrote and the fact that Cricinfo, ‘the Home of cricket’, actually cleared it was hurtful and quite shocking. But you can defend them if you like.
As for failing in comprehension; you said Chopra and Moiz agree with each other on the whole! Read Moiz’s opening paragraph again.
How you managed to assume I was talking of practical help I do not know. I did not even mention the word ‘practical’, you did. But you have to, to make your argument valid. And my article has NOT ‘focussed’ on rebutting Chopra’s suggestion that everyone is helping Pakistan. Read it again, and if you still believe that, show me where.
March 22nd, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Jonathan
I have no issue with what Chopra said in the opening paragraph and I don’t think Stani would have minded it either if Chopra had stopped right there.
Moiz in his opening paragraph declared Chopra’s article as “patently offensive” something which you completely missed.
When Moiz said that he agrees with Chopra that we should stop with the increasingly grating cliches of wonderfully unpredictable etc.
He very rightly added that the cliches are capable of spectacular blows both to itself and to its on-field opponents. It sounds entertaining enough, but it’s not helping Pakistan cricket.
Every team has it’s own character and gets labelled accordingly .
Pakistanis didn’t bestowed these titles upon themselves these were given to us by other’s which Mr Chopra didn’t find amusing and couldn’t tolerate and he insists that the Cricket fraternity should also not tolerate their talented nephew who can’t behave himself or should say enough is enough to their incapable-of-good-manners little sister?
You might consider all this as plain sarcasm but for Pakistanis it is patently offensive. How the internal problems of Pakistan cricket are affecting the rest of the cricket fraternity is something which Chopra didn’t bothered to explain in his article and just jumped on the gun by suggesting the Cricket family to say enough is enough to Pakistan.
Chopra didn’t explicitly said that Pakistan should not be shown any solidarity but within the lines he has said it repeatedly in his article and that is the main theme of his whole article.
A common feature of the calls for a display of solidarity with the Pakistani cricket world in its “time of need” is the invocation of “family” and “fraternity”. I find that a bit over the top, but let’s stay with it for a second. If we are going to invoke the family trope, then let’s go the whole hog. What kind of family member is Pakistan then?
What does it take for the family to say “Enough is enough”? (I don’t know what “enough is enough” amounts to in the cricket case but at the very least it should be an end of the amused indulgence of Pakistani dysfunction, whether it is within the team or between the board and the team).
The first step for outsiders (the Pakistanis have their own work to do) would be to ask themselves what role their constant indulgence of the foibles of Pakistani cricket has played in its random walk down Indiscipline Street.
After reading all this nonsense any Pakistani would naturally question what have we done so wrong, and would naturally point out the same mistakes done by players from other teams. They would also try to figure out what help have we recieved from the cricket fraternity, everybody in Pakistan now understands that after the Lahore attacks International cricket is not possible in Pakistan untill the situation gets better.
But to ask a fair share in the FTP and to ask the fellow members to play on neutral venues and not exploit the situation to their monetary advantage is it too much to ask, especially when this war on terror has been imposed on us, we didn’t asked Russia to invade Afghanistan and push 4 million refugees in Pakistan and we didn’t asked the west to leave behind their mess after the cold War.
What makes me really upset is Mr Chopra’s country never condemned Russian Invasion in Afghanistan and even today it is using Afghanistan to launch attacks in Pakistan and people like Chopra are using every opportunity to highlight the troublesome situation in Pakistan.
He couldn’t tolerate little messages of solidarity coming out of the west in support of Pakistan he just wants the world to give a cold shoulder to Pakistan, interestingly his article is totally inline with the foreign policy of his country toward Pakistan.
As regards Stani’s response I think you misunderstood, Stani also referred to the theme of Chopra’s article, what you read in the comments section only started when one of the Indian guy wrote “why the world should help Pakistan?
March 23rd, 2010 at 4:35 am
Stani, Ibrahim agreed with Samir’s main points, but also objects to the “vent[ing] a lifetime of misgivings”. His opening implies that he thinks this is the most significant part of Samir’s post, and that’s a valid opinion to put forward. I said myself that it was a natural opening for disagreement. However, it’s ridiculous to suggest that I must have misunderstood or ignored the “patently offensive” label in thinking that they largely agree. The world where everyone who agrees with someone does so without offending them, or even where agreement is always recognised by those in a conversation seems a lot closer to utopia than the one I live in.
Moiz bothers to acknowledge the points of agreement while making his complaint. Your whole post was on what he said? Even apart from the personal attacks, your post purports to rebut straw man summaries and misinterpretations. What Moiz describes as “this latest twist” being taken as an opportunity for something else, you describe as Samir writing about something he says is uninteresting. That’s just an opening dig which stands or falls on the rest of the post, so let’s get on to the substance of your objections.
Samir’s claim that references to family and fraternity are a common feature of calls for a display of solidarity is described as garbage because noone has shown solidarity or given practical help (what does “come to our aid” mean?). How does that make any sense? Even though your lack of comprehension is obvious when you put words in his mouth asking “How on earth could he describe solidarity with Pakistan as a common feature?”, it’s hard to see why you describe Samir’s basic theme as partly that “[Pakistan] should not be helped all the time”, but devote energy to the question of whether they are helped.
Next you say that he ignores the troubles of other teams. There are indeed plenty all around the world, and in some sense a list of Pakistani problems invites comparisons. However, the fact that he doesn’t mention anything else only hurts his argument if it is indeed, as you say, “that Pakistan is the troubled member of the cricketing family”. The closest he actually gets to such an argument is saying Pakistan cricket is “dysfunctional in the extreme”, which is hardly an exoneration of everyone else. Indeed, “We could all do with some tough love.”
You would have a more relevant point if you could say that indiscretions in other countries are given a similar sort of light-hearted international response. Samir’s point was this sort of response is a problem. He doesn’t ask whether Pakistan should be helped, but whether amused indulgence and simplistic displays of solidarity actually do provide any help. Isn’t that the obvious reason for running with the family analogy?
Wasim, I address above the idea that I “missed” Ibrahim taking offense, and make it clear how Stani’s post dealt with the “theme” by sidetracking onto the question of whether anyone has helped. (Yes, the same mistake occurred again in the comments.)
You are right to point out Moiz’s objections to the cliched descriptions. His agreement is one step in refutation of what in my opinion was actually one of Samir’s least fair statements: “I suspect the world of Pakistani cricket revels in this description”. Having said that, the idea that they are not self-bestowed and they don’t help Pakistani cricket is hardly an addition to Samir’s argument – it’s the point of it!
I’ve already said, as you do, that it is natural to point out the same mistakes in other teams. What I don’t understand is why it is natural to misrepresent what has been said, to think the question is “what have we done so wrong”, or bring historical actions of his government into it.
Yes, his comments are consistent with policies of his country and its cricket board as far as I can tell, but they are consistent with a range of approaches. They still need to be taken on their merits alone. It is usually more convincing to do so than to dismiss them on the basis of supposedly obvious conclusions.
I’m not sure what response Samir is advocating – it doesn’t appear that he is either. It is certainly unfair to assume that he would want any solution to be one-sided. I’ll admit that I haven’t given much thought to general consequences of his article – perhaps it is “dangerous and careless” to put those thoughts out, at least if those who agree with him read it as recklessly as some who disagree.
I’m all for neutral venues, and even home games as quickly as can be sorted out. I don’t think anyone is saying absolutely everything is in Pakistan’s control. Fair treatment is fair enough. But when it comes to the many cricketing issues, related or not, it is a fair question to ask whether amused indulgence (or perhaps indifference) is the best option.
You or I might not be convinced that it is as significant as Samir suggests. You or I might even think he could have asked it less offensively. We could disagree on points and say more to give perspective. There’s no reason, though, to argue with things he hasn’t said.
March 23rd, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Jonathan
Why are you so upset over Stani’s tone in his post? Did you even noticed Samir’s language in his post why don’t you first suggest him how he could have highlighted the problems faced by Pakistan cricket in a polite manner or to some of the Indians who commented on Stani’s blog.
you wrote
I’m not sure what response Samir is advocating “it doesn’t appear that he is either. It is certainly unfair to assume that he would want any solution to be one-sided. I’ll admit that I haven’t given much thought to general consequences of his article – perhaps it is “dangerous and careless” to put those thoughts out, at least if those who agree with him read it as recklessly as some who disagree.”
Your entire focus is on the words that he has written and not the message within the lines. What are the calls for Solidarity in material terms? How the world can implement ” enough is enough”? And how that “enough is enough” will affect Pakistan.
As an outsider you will naturally interpret the ambiguity of these statements on their face value since you are not aware of the persistent efforts of Indians to isolate Pakistan as much as Pakistani’s do.
I don’t think that we have been careless in interpreting his statements, the Indians who commented on this blog so far have also interpreted it in the same manner.
The main question I asked was how the mismanagement of PCB and the troubles within Pakistan team affect the rest of the cricket fraternity?
Are we sending our B team like West indies or Zimbabwe to play in other countries?
The love that the world has shown by hosting our home matches they charged heavily for it. So what exactly Chopra wants the world to stop doing?
Stop calling Pakistan unpredicatble? Be our guest. Do it.
But don’t you think Mr Chopra was trying to invoke disciplinary action against the talented but highly indisciplined nephew? He didn’t exactly suggested how but tried to invoke a reaction.
In material terms regarding the security issue except for the SriLankans the world has largely remained indifferent and insensitive.
The world look down on us as if we created this problem ourselves and the West had no role in creating those so called Mercenaries/ Mujahdeens and bringing all those foreigners in our tribal area to fight the Russians providing them training and finances, they thought they created remote controlled zombies which could be stopped with a press of a button when they leave.
After sacrificing so much all we deserve is indifference, what a shame.
Forget about material help people like Chopra can’t tolerate even words of Solidarity coming out for Pakistan.
It was absolutely necessary to highlight the historical stance of Chopra’s country on the Russian invasion because they don’t leave any opportunity to exploit the situation in Pakistan. The world should know the truth.
I think it was “dangerous and reckless” for Chopra to suggest something of which he himself wasn’t sure. He cleverly kept it vague.
What his article has attempted to accomplish is to Isolate the controversies of Pakistan cricket and make them look different from those which erupt else where he has also tried to make other believe as if the troubles of Pakistan cricket are in some way affecting the rest of the cricket world and the world should stop paying any heed to Pakistan’s “call for Solidarity” in times of need and should tell the “Enough is Enough” How enough is enough should be implemented he has remained vague about it.
Pakistan is an equal member of ICC it’s internal management matters are none of anybody’s business. Mr Chopra might believe that his country due to his “recent successes” in international cricket give him and his fellow country men to look down on others but as far as I know the cricket world is not a primary school and India is not it’s head master.
March 24th, 2010 at 3:04 am
Wasim, I don’t think I’ve said much about the tone of Stani’s post at all. I’m upset about the fact that he’s putting words into Samir’s mouth – not only missing the point but encouraging others to miss it as well. Yes, at least one of the commentors bought the line that was being peddled.
You think it’s dangerous? Then say so – as you suggest, I’m not really placed to judge that, and if you’re right, saying so has a(n outside) chance of reducing whatever danger there is.
But keep in mind what has actually been said. You can read between the lines as much as you like, but Samir has since acknowledged than any reaction stronger than words would have to involves changes to the ICC structure – which would equally have implications for other nations as well.
Not saying too much can be cleverly vague, reckless, or often enough just plain sensible. Whatever the case, a helpful response always starts with what has been said. You’re happy to say don’t call Pakistan unpredictable, but what about Samir’s real point in saying it doesn’t help to describe unpredictability as wonderful?
You again mention calls for displays of solidarity, but ignore what he actually says about them. Not that he can’t tolerate solidarity, but that if fraternity is the basis for action, as they suggest, then all should consider how a family should react to a member with problems – and that’s not laughing it off. You say it’s a shame to only get indifference, but isn’t the thing Samir is complaining of just one form of indifference?
Tell us where he’s wrong, tell us what you think would help, but don’t twist words. I’m pretty sure that misrepresenting people’s arguments in practise results in at least as much, if not more, danger as arguments with vague conclusions. It’s certainly easier to avoid.
March 24th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
Jonathan
I have already explained you his motives what else you want me to say.
You said :.
“but Samir has since acknowledged that any reaction stronger than words would have to involve changes to the ICC structure – which would equally have implications for other nations as well.
This is exactly what he said:
Siva: Thanks for your comment. I’m not sure myself. But roughly: hold Pakistani cricket to a higher standard of behavior – but this can’t be done till the ICC structure changes. Secondly, be more critical of Pakistani dysfunction, and not indulge its constant paranoia. Again, this needs a lot of working out and frankly, the discussion will not stay purely cricketing then.
Is there anymore ambiguity left for you in the kind of reaction he wants to invoke against Pakistan? This is even more dangerous than what Stani percieved from his statements.
What will be accomplished by changing the structure of ICC? I think you are smart enough to understand.
Yeah! and be more critical of Pakistani dysfunction and not indulge its constant paranoia. (ln other words lets tackle paranoia with paranoia).
And mind you the discussion regarding the world’s reaction should not just stay limited to cricketing matters lets go the whole hog strike a full blow when the iron is hot.
You also wrote “Not saying too much can be cleverly vague, reckless, or often enough just plain sensible. ” Why you think it is plain sensible in this context?
Who has said that unpredictability is wonderful, Is the world blind, don’t they see the uproar in Pakistan regarding the poor performance of the team.
He is wrong in blowing things out of proportions for his ulterior motives.
Take a look at any sport you will see countless examples of players doing things against the general code of conduct of their sport,but these matters are always regarded as the internal matter of the teams or nations to which those players belong.
If there is a desire to restructure ICC in some quarters it is not because they are concerned of Pakistan’s disciplinary problems it has more to do with greed and hegemonistic agenda of a few member nations. Don’t use Pakistan’s problems as a pretext.
We have not misinterpreted him you have similar views to him therefore you don’t want to admit even after reading his own comment.
March 24th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
Jonathan
To be honest, I am not even sure what you are defending any more as anyone who has followed this debate from the beginning, will be able to see that your argument is becoming increasingly blurred. It is also verbose and unnecessarily over-complicated (or necessarily if you’re doing it to confuse) and involves a lot of lawyer-speak.
“You or I might not be convinced that it is as significant as Samir suggests. You or I might even think he could have asked it less offensively.”…Are you convinced Jonathan? Do you think he could have asked less offensively Jonathan? Why don’t you tell us? Why do you beat around the bush? The sentence above brings back memories of Tony Blair trying to make justification for the invasion of Iraq on the basis that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Why don’t you talk straight?
So how can they largely agree when Moiz said Chopra’s article is patently offensive? How can they largely agree when the whole reason for Moiz sending his article in was because he took offence to Chopra’s claims?
Again, you use the phrase ‘practical help’ when I did not say this. Yet you accuse me of putting words in people’s mouths?
You describe Chopra’s false claims as “one of Samir’s least fair statements” yet anything we say that you disagree with as lacking comprehension and us getting upset. And when anyone is drawing assumptions from Chopra’s article it is “unfair” on him but you you’re free to assume willy-nilly in regards to our arguments?! Also, him not saying too much is “plain sensible” but me not saying too much is“not dealing with anything Samir actually says”. It does make me wonder, but I have no idea why you support him so much. If you were such a moralist, it beggars belief how you can ignore some of the comments/insults from Chopra fans directed at me. Many of them personal like the personal comments you have defended Chopra from.
As for peddling lines, well you’ve certainly bought into what Chopra was peddling. I’d be laughing if I was him. As I suggested before, whether it’s through naiveness/innocence on your behalf or your natural ambiguity in interpretation, as Wasim put it, I’m not sure.
Anyway, let’s keep things simple and ask the obvious question. Have you yet asked yourself why this guy is writing about Pakistan cricket Jonathan? What was his need, his urge, and thus his intention? Do you not see anything in that Jonathan? If you still cannot see what he was doing then I cannot help you. Do we see Kamran Abassi writing about problems in Indian cricket? This is where all your arguments about Chopra’s innocent intentions fall flat on their face.
I am still dumbfounded at the great lengths you have gone in euphemising his claims.
Wasim
Many good points, particularly your last one on Chopra’s intentions through saying less.
March 25th, 2010 at 1:55 am
What’s the problem, Wasim? He’s says the discussion will not stay cricketing. You clearly don’t think the discussion should stay cricketing. I expect you and he will to a large extent take different sides of that discussion, but why not go ahead and have it on those grounds, instead of writing off the initial points because you can guess what comes next?
It’s plain sensible for me to say I’m not sure what the answer is. I can see problems with most answers, and presumably Samir can see problems with his own thoughts. But even if you’re right and it’s all just a clever trick, I am sure that always questioning everyone’s motivation causes more problems than it avoids, for many reasons.
Stani, I don’t think my argument has become any more blurred at all. You simply assumed I was saying more than I was in the first place, and I’ve responded verbosely (although with fewer words than the comments I’ve replied to!) using “lawyer-speak” to point out what I’m not saying.
I am defending the understanding that the Cricinfo post was mainly about amused indulgence being unhelpful (to everyone), and saying that your post, while claiming to deal with Samir’s theme, completely missed this and misrepresented it. Perhaps you missed this point because it was (explicitly) not aimed at you, but at people like me who to some extent have thought and spoken as Samir describes in the past. If you think he’s wrong, then tell me why I should keep thinking parts of the mess are simply funny – I haven’t seen any sign that you are making this argument.
As it happens, while I think stopping that sort of response would be good, I’m not convinced it is all that significant. I can see how to rewrite the post more carefully, but I was never defending it’s “offensiveness”. These questions are irrelevant to my point, it’s that simple.
Do you really believe that people can’t make similar points to each other without offending each other? I see it all the time.
If you see a difference between “coming to our aid” and “practical help”, please explain it to me. I explained why I think it was valid, but maybe I’m missing something. Having said that, even if am wrong about that phrase, I think the point of my whole sentence stands – what part of Samir’s post says that anyone has shown solidarity or come to Pakistan’s aid?
I said you lack comprehension, not simply because I disagree with something, but because I think you have wrongly presented what someone else has said. What could possibly support the claim that he “describe[s] solidarity with Pakistan as a common feature”? (It’s at least as bad in terms of comprehension as Rayden’s misinterpretation which Wasim rightly rebutted.)
Is there something offensive about saying you got upset? There are plenty of good reasons to be upset. My point was and is that according to what you wrote, your reasons were false.
I haven’t gone out of my way here to complain about personal attacks against anyone. When I mentioned yours, it was part of a whole sentence describing your post, intended to make the point that the post didn’t have any valid meaningful substance.
Carelessly picking out individual phrases results in misunderstanding. It’s particularly strange to do it while telling me I haven’t read between the lines. It’s not “euphemising” to insist on looking at least the whole sentence!
Then again, perhaps I shouldn’t have expected you to be any more careful with my words than with Samir’s.
March 25th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
Jonathan
“He’s says the discussion will not stay cricketing. You clearly don’t think the discussion should stay cricketing.”
No Jonathan I clearly think that there is no need to have a discussion in the first place every member has enough problems of its own to take care of Pakistan’s problems are not unique.
You were quick to assume implications for other countries if ICC is restructured but can’t assume what will be the implications for Pakistan if the discussion doesn’t remain purely cricketing , that in your opinion will be dangerous and putting words in Chopra’s mouth, he should have not opened his mouth on such a sensitive matter when he didn’t knew what he really wanted to suggest.
Nothing predicts behavior like behavior, the calls from Indian bloggers to reduce Pakistan to a junior member or to take away it’s test playing status are nothing new, so I don’t think that by questioning Chopra’s motives we are doing anything wrong. When the discussion will not remain strictly cricketing What does that mean? It only point toward the security issues in Pakistan.
I can’t believe that you are still insisting that Chopra’s post only dealt with “amused Indulgence”. You are totally ignoring the title of his article, the meaning behind calls for Solidarity in times of need, and Saying enough is enough, holding Pakistan responsible to higher standards after restructring ICC you haven’t even bothered to question the need to demand such an exaggerated response for Pakistan. But you have expressed your resentment over Stani’s response which in your opinion was offensive and out of context just because he used different words to express calls for Solidarity and tried to question who has been showing Solidarity with us we are already marginalized to the maximum extent.
As I said earlier you are free to form your opinion about Chopra’s article but don’t tell us that we have misinterpreted it because we have not.
March 25th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
I guess this tells you how much influence Pakistanis have on Cricinfo.com. Most of their commentators and admins are Indian so dont you expect it?
If more Pakistanis got involved with the media, this would not happen. Why would Eng Aussies or any other team care when Pakis are being bashed by India by unneeded commentary?
They dont, so we have to fend for ourselves., we cant even lose with pride., so instead of complaining as we have always done, lets do something about it, get more Pakistanis involved with cricinfo.com
simple solution
March 25th, 2010 at 3:38 pm
Ali
Unfortunately, the two that are involved on Cricinfo hardly stick up for us at the best of times. But I guess this is a Pakistani tradition of bashing one’s own with the hope of making the outsider happier. There’s being diplomatic, but ‘our’ lot take it to a backside-kissing extreme. I know this is a strictly English blog, but there’s a word which the English language doesn’t have which describes them exactly; that word is ‘pitoo’. They are too afraid to tell it how it is. Some of their articles are so watered down, they may as well have not written anything.
I completely agree with the concept you put forward though.
March 26th, 2010 at 2:02 am
Wasim, I don’t understand how anyone can want solidarity, but not want a discussion about what that means. As long as the security issue is around and people want to see international cricket in Pakistan (and I do), it’s not all going to be about cricket, is it? (I also think there are good reasons to re-evaluate the ICC structure, even without thinking of Pakistan!) But let’s take a step back…
While I personally don’t find it helpful to jump so quickly into motivations and “obvious” consequences, I only mentioned this because you brought it up in a response to me. I generally don’t object to you making most of the points you make. I didn’t say the article was only about amused indulgence, although that is clearly the main theme, and is perfectly consistent with the title, at least in my experience of families and the use of the word ‘tolerant’. He quite clearly suggests that there is a next step which he has left open, and I don’t see anything wrong with in some manner pre-empting where he (or anyone else) is going in a response. I’m not at all suggesting that that’s the same as putting words in his mouth.
What I did step in and say is that Stani’s post says nothing sensible or helpful. I didn’t call it offensive, and I’m not sure offended is the right word for my reaction. Either way, it does put words in Samir’s mouth and distort his meaning. I’m really not sure why you’re defending it – it even provides a possible explanation of Samir’s motivations different from the one you say is obvious!
Go back to Samir’s article and see what he actually says about “calls for solidarity”. I’m not ignoring any meaning there – he says that he finds it a bit over the top to invoke notions of fraternity, but suggests it should be taken more seriously if at all.
Go back to Stani’s post – he doesn’t use “different words to express calls for solidarity”, he takes some of the exact words Samir has used, and rearranges them to totally change the meaning. Like you say, he questions who has shown solidarity, but the only way that question becomes relevant is if we accept Stani’s distortion of Samir’s claim.
I really don’t understand why, after giving so many examples of what could fairly reasonably be said in response to the article, you and Stani are sticking by the post above, which is simply confused complaining, without anything likely to convince anyone who reads carefully.
March 26th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
Jonathan
Who said that we don’t want to discuss about solidarity but lets first define solidarity and what have been the calls for solidarity from Pakistan in the time of it’s need.
Also I would like to hear from you what exactly makes Pakistan team more guilty of indiscipline than the rest of the teams?
March 27th, 2010 at 1:15 am
I think it’s pretty clear that we’re talking about more than just indiscipline in the team. In any case, I think Samir would have a point even if we judge some other countries’ problems to be just as bad – they don’t have the same tendency to laughed off.
If you want to define the sort of solidarity you think would be helpful, go ahead. If you are suggesting that Samir’s claim calls to “support, shoulder-to-shoulder, [any] species of misbehaviour… never cease” is unsupported or at least overstated, then I’m not in a postion to comment. However, I don’t think that could take anything away from his main point – that if the rest of the world has a fraternal duty to display solidarity, don’t they also have a fraternal duty to have higher expectations and make them clear in the most helpful way possible?
March 27th, 2010 at 7:53 am
Jonathan you seem to be reluctant to define the terms clearly, and my problem is that if I will assume anything from what I think is on your mind regarding” more than Indiscipline” and ” Shoulder to shoulder support” then you will come back and say no I didn’t used these words” So lets be clear about what we have on our minds.
March 28th, 2010 at 5:49 am
Well, I didn’t use the words “shoulder-to-shoulder support” – that was a direct quote from Samir. I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on it, and explained why I don’t think it is makes a difference to the main point. Is it that hard to understand?
I did say “more than just indiscipline in the team”. That was simply a reference to the fact that it’s not just the actions of players that are raising eyebrows. Even on the field, it’s telling that Moiz delves twice as far back into history to respond to Samir’s post.
As I’ve already said, though, I don’t think that’s really the point. Do you think similar problems elsewhere, such as they are, are given a similarly (un)serious international reaction?
More broadly, do you think that world cricket shouldn’t have higher expectations of its members, or are you simply there are so many problems around the world that we can’t afford to react too strictly?