Mohammad Amir - A young man that needs to get back on the straight and narrow

Almost two months into their sentences, there’s been much debate about whether Mr Justice Cooke got the sentences right for Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir. Yet certainly in Amir’s case, this isn’t about the length of sentence or the punishment itself, even.

If his sentence does not reform him, then Amir may have been a corrupt cheater, but the failings against him would have been far worse – and that’s without considering how such a young, talented man was failed before the spot-fixing scandal broke.

Justice should not be just about punishment. Real justice should have an element of rehabilitation to it. It’s not only about the punishment, but more importantly, it’s about the lesson. Will the custodial sentences handed out to Butt, Asif and Amir teach them that what they did was wrong? In Butt and Asif’s case, I’m not really bothered, but Mohammed Amir will have many years ahead of him in cricket, and his sentence would have needed to act as education to him too.

In an interview with Sky Sports News a while ago, Michael Atherton spoke about how Amir should be given a second chance and welcomed back into cricket after he has served his sentence and ICC ban. I would be inclined to agree with that, but Amir would have to have fundamentally changed as a person by then.

Throughout the scandal, up until the court case, Amir along with Butt and Asif has been pleading his innocence despite all the evidence against him. Even now, we still hear interviews from the families of all three men, saying how their sons are innocent and haven’t done anything wrong. How can this be? What do the players themselves think about what they have done and what have they been telling their families?

For me, this is a social issue, linked to the blasé attitude towards corruption and the prevalent moral turpitude that exists amongst many in Pakistan society. In a country where a man wanted by Interpol is elected president, a deliberate no-ball in a cricket match is just a no-ball – it is insignificant. Despite Amir and Asif’s guilty pleas and Butt’s punishment, I wouldn’t be surprised if the three still believed that they’ve hardly done anything wrong.

It’s a mentality that is very easy to criticise, but very difficult to understand for those that have grown up here and in other more developed countries. Take for instance the fact that faith is important to many of the Pakistani players, yet even in that infamous Test match where he was cheating, we saw Amir do the sajda (prostration) upon getting a wicket. So as a God-fearing person, did he really think he was doing something so wrong by bowling a no-ball? It appears he didn’t.

So can we, looking on from our ivory towers over here in our developed West really pass judgement? Is it fair to apply our rules and judge them by our laws and form opinion from what we would consider acceptable living in the society we live? Certainly if we applied the two allegations that were applied to the players against many in that country, then we’d have a problem on our hands. Yet that is a failure of the leaders who have for decades failed to serve the interest of the man on the street. So just like the people have been failed by the powers that be in Pakistan, was Amir not also failed by the PCB and the ICC?

Unlicensed agents buzzing around impressionable young stars is something the Pakistan board should have been very wary of since the Justice Qayyum report over a decade ago. Yet it was allowed to happen freely. The ICC was spending millions on its ACSU unit yet it took an English tabloid and a relatively simple sting to uncover the biggest scandal in cricket.

If Amir comes out of Feltom and returns from his ban still thinking that what he did was ‘just a no-ball’, then the British justice system, along with the PCB and ICC, would have also failed Mohammad Amir.

Stani Army on Twitter and on Facebook

Tabrez Ali Janjua also writes at www.khelopakistan.com

Both Butt and Asif were found guilty by a unanimous verdict in regards to the charge of conspiracy to cheat, and by a 10-2 majority verdict in regards to the charge of conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments.

The three players now await sentencing

Conspiracy to cheat carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison and/or an unlimited fine. Conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments carries the heavier sentence of up to seven years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.

The judge will now consider the verdict before the sentences will be pronounced later this week. In the mean time, both players remain on bail.

It has also emerged that Mohammed Amir had pleaded guilty to the charges on September the 16th, yet the news was not allowed to be reported due to court restrictions in place that would prevent the verdict of jurors from being unfairly influenced in regards to Butt and Asif.

At the time, Amir’s barrister Ben Emmerson QC said “Amir wants to make it clear he wants to take full responsibility for what he did by bowling two deliberate no-balls. This vulnerable 18-year-old boy, as he was then, was subjected to extreme pressure from those upon whom he should have been able to rely. He recognises the damage he has caused Pakistan cricket and he wishes to do his best to put that right”

By making Amir out to be the “vulnerable 18-year-old boy”, Amir’s legal team is hoping that he will receive a lighter sentence. Yet the prosecution presented a number of key bits of evidence that could be interpreted as Amir being everything but the innocent and vulnerable boy his team is trying to present him as.

Key to the prosecution’s evidence is a number of text messages Amir had sent to some unknown numbers and also to Azher Majeed, brother of the agent at the center of the scandal, Mazhar Majeed. One text message read: “Amir here, don’t call my phone, ICC-police have taken my phone, are you able to delete those calls you made to me? If you can do it okay, don’t reply”.

Whilst Pakistan fans were hoping for some clemency to be shown to Amir, evidence of his involvement in what went on has cast doubt over whether any leniency will be shown by the judge towards him. Of course, the one thing in his favour is that he did plead guilty, thus it is probably a given that he will receive a lighter sentence than Butt and Asif who have throughout the case maintained their innocence despite the overwhelming evidence against them. The best Amir can probably hope for is a heavy fine, but we will find out later this week how much lighter his sentence is than the one Butt and Asif are to receive.

Stani Army on Twitter and on Facebook

Tabrez Ali Janjua also writes at www.khelopakistan.com

Likely custodial sentences will come as a shock to the players

The jury in the spot fixing case has currently retired to consider its verdict, leaving many Pakistan fans wondering about the nature of any possible sentence should Salman Butt and Mohammed Asif be found guilty.

The two players in court are facing charges of conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments and conspiracy to cheat. Mohammed Amir and agent Mazhar Majeed had themselves earlier this year pleaded guilty to the charges.

Obtaining and accepting corrupt payments is an offence contrary to section 1 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906. It carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. Cheating is an offence contrary to section 42 of the Gambling Act 2005. It carries a maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.

The maximum sentence for the above two offences does not only apply to the offence itself, but also to the conspiracy to commit such an offence, as is alleged in the case of Butt and Asif. So which kind of sentence are the players likely to receive?

The first thing we would have to consider is whether the duo is likely to be found guilty of the alleged offences. Personally, I feel that the writing is on the wall for a number of reasons. The ICC has already found them guilty of spot fixing and handed out their punishments. Though far from a legal court, their investigations must have had some proof to go on for them to hand out such long term bans.

Then there is the fact that both Amir and Majeed have admitted to spot fixing i.e. basically admitting that a crime had taken place. Their confession therefore implies that Butt and Asif would have been involved to some degree. Before sending the jury out to deliberate, Justice Cooke’s direction to aid the jury in their decision making was: “You can proceed on the basis that Majeed and Amir were involved in the spot-fixing at Lord’s, as all parties agree that is the case”.

Finally, there is the fact that neither Butt nor Asif stuck to the same story. They were seen to turn on one another through their lawyers a number of times during the case, undermining one another’s story. In fact, these denials and counter claims regarding one another’s stories points to an inherent distrust, suspicion and treachery among the two – common attributes of wrongdoers. As the old saying goes, ‘there’s no honour among thieves’.

So, the likelihood is that they will both be found guilty on at least one or both the charges. The one thing Asif has going for him in regards to the offence of conspiracy to obtain and accept corrupt payments is that none of the money handed over to Majeed by the News of the World reporter was found with Asif. Even then, Asif is looking at a maximum prison sentence of two years if found guilty of the offence of cheating.

Due to the seriousness of the charges and the huge sums of money involved, expect Mr Justice Cooke to hand down a custodial sentence to both Butt and Asif, should they be found guilty. It will send a tremor across the cricketing world, but maybe some time in prison is exactly what is required, with all three of the players demonstrating a nonchalant and dismissive attitude to authority and the seriousness of the alleged crimes since the scandal broke. It’d give them plenty of time to think about their actions and the people they have allegedly cheated.

With a prison sentence likely, we must now await the jury’s verdict and then sentencing from the judge to be sure. Due to the complexities of the case and the bundles of evidence to consider, it should be said that the jury’s deliberation could well run into next week. If that is the case, the judge, Mr Justice Cooke, may well accept a majority verdict rather than the unanimous one he had initially asked for.

Tabrez Ali Janjua also writes at www.khelopakistan.com

Mohsin Khan - A defensive minded coach?

What I saw last Saturday is something I never want associated with Pakistan cricket, and neither is it something I would want to see in sport in general, or in any contest for that matter. To not even try, however small the chance of victory, defies the purpose of playing any sport.

As the Pakistan batsmen came out to bat needing 170 off 21 overs in the final innings of the first Test against Sri Lanka, their fans around the world sat riveted to their TV screens, anticipating an enthralling run chase. But as ball after ball was blocked, it was obvious that going for the win was not what was discussed amongst the Pakistan team management in the interval.

When asked after the game, interim coach Mohsin Khan’s response was “…we felt we didn’t want to make a mess of things…We decided that given the field set, we would opt to bat out time”. Now this is in stark contrast to what the coach was saying just a few days earlier. When speaking of the ‘successful risk’ the Pakistan selectors had taken in picking a young squad for the recent tour of Zimbabwe, Khan said “To achieve a big goal, you have to take risks…As a selector, or now a coach, I won’t be afraid of taking a risk”. Easier said than done, right Mohsin?

170 runs off 21 overs works out at just over 8 runs an over. Now had Pakistan – with 10 wickets in hand, on a docile track – scored 60 off the first 5 overs for example, it would have left them with around 6 and a half runs per over from there on. Suddenly, things don’t seem that impossible do they? Even if Pakistan had lost 2-3 wickets trying to chase the win, they could have still then reined themselves in and started blocking. Sri Lanka would have realised in just a few overs that a draw was on the cards and the captains would have shook hands early, meaning Pakistan wouldn’t have needed to bat out the full 21 overs to then save the game anyway.

While there is an inherent risk of losing wickets whilst playing attacking cricket, there is no guarantee that you won’t lose wickets playing defensively, as Taufiq Umar demonstrated. Now he could quite easily have gone down fighting, losing his wicket whilst attacking rather than the good for nothing manner in which he did. At least we would have then been closer to having some idea of whether a win was possible.

There was an argument that Sri Lanka had no field restrictions and it would have been difficult to score boundaries, yet 2s and 3s could have been picked up relatively comfortably, and would have caused Dilshan to make a few enforced field changes, bringing some players in. As mentioned in Cricinfo’s text commentary, it was a relatively large outfield too.

Many have placed the blame of not attacking squarely on captain Misbah’s head. Yet for me, this would have been a decision influenced by the team management and coach in particular. Another thing that points to this is that former coach Waqar Younis said himself on commentary that he’d have been trying for a win i.e. giving us some insight into the psyche of the Pakistan decision making machine pre-Mohsin Khan. And of course, far from being a yes man, Misbah is not the type to cause discord hence would have gone with the coach’s suggestion. The power dynamic within the Pakistan camp would dictate that a coach would be able to enforce his decision on a captain, rather than a captain on a coach, meaning that even if Misbah would have wanted to go for the chase, he wouldn’t have been able to.

I cannot, for one second, imagine the Australians not going for a win had they been in a similar situation. The attitude Pakistan displayed was not the attitude of winners. If we do not test ourselves, we will never know how good we can become. While drawn Test matches may suit our neighbours over the border, this cautiousness and lack of adventurousness is not the Pakistan way – cornered tigers are braver than that.

Those fans that wanted Pakistan to attack on that last day came in for some harsh criticism with suggestions that a t20 mentality had overtaken them. Yet this is nothing to do with t20 cricket – Pakistan should have at least attempted to go for the 8 an over target regardless. If anything, it is the Test match mentality that has done Test cricket harm here. You don’t play Test cricket to draw. Test cricket is still about the contest, still about trying to win. It is called ‘Test’ cricket after all.

Sport is a test of human endeavour. Great things are achieved, records are broken by people that try, by people that TEST themselves. Having been so far ahead in the game and having dropped so many catches, Pakistan should have wanted to come out and try and win the game to make up for their complacency. They should have felt this urge.

If the thrill of the chase, the courage needed to test oneself is too much for them, then why play at all? Why not just quit cricket altogether, marry an Indian actress, move to Bombay and become an Indian film actor. They certainly have the perfect coach to show them how to do that.

Tabrez Ali Janjua also writes at www.khelopakistan.com

The offending tweet on Premachandran's twitter page, was carried on the Cricinfo site via their 'World Cup on Twitter' feed

For some reason, the Indian writers on Cricinfo have a strange fascination with Pakistan cricket. In the past it’s been the likes of Sidarth Monga and Samit Chopra, and this time it was Dileep Premachandran on his twitter feed. Premachandran writes for Cricinfo and should be well aware of his position. He also knows full well that his comments are going onto the main site so the excuse that it’s his personal twitter page doesn’t quite wash.

Not very professional for the largest cricket website out there to be publishing personal insults directed at players by their writers.

The ICC - Different rules for different teams

It has been reported that the ICC’s anti-corruption and security unit (ACSU) may be investigating Australia’s World Cup game against Zimbabwe after the Australians got off to a uncharacteristically slow start to their innings. When supposedly pressed on the matter, cricinfo reports that the “ICC said it did not comment on any ACSU matter, including whether or not a match had been investigated”. Really?

Back in September you may remember how there was a second round of allegations that followed the News of the World sting, that the Pakistan team were match-fixing. This time it was the Sun Newspaper, which had apparently handed over evidence to ACSU. The ICC’s response then was to go public on the matter, telling the media that Pakistan were being investigated by ACSU again, and remarkably, this was even before informing the PCB itself. So why the double standards? Why the hush-hush when it comes to the Australians but the indiscreet nonchalance when it came to the Pakistanis? Let’s remember, the Pakistan team, which did not include the suspended trio of Asif, Amir and Butt, were found completely innocent of the allegations in the end, despite having to cope with a trial by media due to the ICC’s blunder.

In defence of the Australians, teams are allowed to play slow as long as the intention is pure and it is a tactic employed to win the game. But whether there was something sinister in it or not is a separate issue, it is the ICC’s double standards that is the point of discussion here.

Will Pakistan raise issue with the ICC? I doubt it. They clearly have a inferiority complex and thus will continue to be treated as inferior by the governing body and their officials.

On a side note; what has happened to Ijaz Butt? England, who Pakistan have just had a highly charged series with, and India, Pakistan’s arch rivals, have just played out a tie in a World Cup match. Added to this, Shane Warne, previously linked to match fixing, actually predicted a tie. Am I the only one who is amazed that Ijaz Butt has managed to keep his mouth shut and has not questioned the result?!

What is going on in Zulqarnain Haider's mind?

In our last post in regards to Zulqarnain Haider’s actions, we raised some concerns about the manner in which he was behaving and argued that he needed to reveal more about the incident which caused him to flee Dubai in order to remove suspicion that he had conjured up this whole scenario for personal gain. Three days on and his pubic comments have done nothing to allay fears that Haider is taking everyone for a ride. After being interviewed by the ICC’s Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU), Haider was unable to give them any information about the person that had approached him in Dubai.

We are not close enough to the man to know if lying is any part of his character, but there is one trait in particular displayed by him which one would see in a compulsive liar, and that is wanting to be seen as a good-doer, a hero. This was obvious in an interview which he gave to the BBC, in which he came across as wanting to be the whistle-blower who cleaned up the game of cricket, and was willing to give up his career and a lot of money to do so. Surprisingly, for a 20 minute interview, it was remarkably lacking in any detail of his meeting with the fixer or his experience of others involved in fixing in the game, despite being repeatedly asked probing questions by the reporter.

It’s also been the case that in two separate interviews, whenever he is asked about the meeting, his mentioning of the death threat is almost an afterthought, as if it didn’t really happen but must be added on to the end as if to bring weight to what he is saying, with Haider putting the threat to fix games and comply with the fixers before it. Surely when asked ‘What did he say?’ when going through an experience like that, ones first response would be to mention the threat to yours and your family’s lives first? Unless of course it didn’t happen and you have to make it up.

Haider says he received the threat after the 3rd ODI, but he only chose to flee after the 4th match, four days later. His reaction in running was one that someone would make instinctively, yet the threat was four days before. Therefore there must have been some sort of planning and calculating going on by him. Why did he wait so long? And to run away and not tell anyone? Was this the Haider we saw in England when he made a courageous 88 on debut in the 2nd Test and stood up to the English bowlers getting under their skin? Is this a man whose instinct is to run?

Whilst his actions were suspicious from the outset, deep down I really had hoped that here was a man who had made an honest decision to stand up against corruption in the game even if it was going to cost him his career. And that was the strongest argument in Haider’s favour, that he was willing to give up his international career.

Yet recent reports have emerged that Haider was on the verge of being dropped for the 4th and 5th ODI in Dubai against South Africa.  Was Haider’s international career on the verge of ending anyway? Did he realise this? Did he jump before he was pushed? He has had previous experience of being shunned so may have seen this as the end. He was upset at being sent home early after the tour of England after injuring his finger, and may have taken this latest exclusion as signalling the end to his career as the selectors, captains and coaches, clearly did not prefer him. If this was the case, all that was left for Haider was a return to Pakistan to continue his career, forgotten, languishing in a poor domestic league.

Or, was there an alternative? Had someone got into Haider’s head on the recent tour to England? Did they tell him about how the likes of Mushtaq Ahmed, Saqulain Mushtaq, Mohammad Akram, Azhar Mahmood and Yasir Arafat had all made a successful career and stable life for themselves and their families, plying their trade in the English counties? Was this temptation too much for Haider to resist? Was it time to put a plan in to motion?

I’m not sure about the ins and outs of asylum law, or whether Haider could have played over here in the U.K anyway for any significant period of time, but certainly, eventually gaining citizenship and playing in a top class county set-up would have been appealing to him.

Haider has been complimentary to the British authorities from the outset of this saga. He should remember though that the British authorities are no soft touch either. If there are any holes in his story, these same authorities he has complimented will pick them out and his intentions will soon be exposed before everyone. So is Zulqarnain Haider a lying opportunist or is he a brave man, willing to sacrifice all for the sake of not just the game in Pakistan, but the game everywhere? You decide.

The PCB's 'legal eagle', Tafazzul Rizvi

I don’t know much about Pakistan’s legal adviser Mr Tafazzul Rizvi, but something tells me he doesn’t enjoy striking whilst the iron is hot. The ICC have cleared Pakistan of any wrong doing in the ODI against England at the Oval, yet all we see coming from the Pakistan camp is an expression of relief. It appears this was a completely false newspaper allegation made by an English tabloid at a sensitive time and was a kick in the ribs that Pakistan did not need as it was already on the canvas. It resulted in Pakistan being further ridiculed and shamed in the media with the likes of Ian Botham calling for Pakistan to be banned from cricket, and the likes of James Anderson, Tim Bresnan and Jonathan Trott making on-field comments they shouldn’t have. These allegations were most hurtful to the remaining clean Pakistani players after the three of Asif, Amir and Butt, who were linked with the spot fixing scandal, had been sent home. Yet the Pakistan camp just expresses relief? They should have jumped on this straight away.

Cricinfo reports that when Tafazzul Rizvi was asked about the news that Pakistan had been cleared and whether there would be any pending legal suit against the Sun newspaper, his reply was that they would await for the outcome of the inquiry into the initial News of the World spot fixing allegations. Yet the News of the World’s and the Sun’s allegations were completely separate. Why should they not instigate legal proceedings against the Sun now, whilst also taking a look at the role of the ICC, who broke the news of an investigation before informing the PCB, and the role of the English players in inciting bad feelings amongst the teams?

Had the PCB’s legal advisers been on the ball, then the second round of allegations would have been nipped in the bud at the time, with the ICC being pulled up to explain itself for breaking the news of the investigation to the media without informing the PCB themselves. A good legal team would have also briefed the whole Pakistan team, back-room staff and administrators on what to say and how to handle themselves in the media after the initial spot fixing scandal, and we may not have had the infamous outburst by the PCB Chairman, Ijaz Butt. Is anyone linked to Pakistan cricket actually any good at what they do?

Misbah Ul-Haq receiving the trophy for leading his side to a domestic title earlier this year. He comes with plenty of domestic captaincy experience

Though it seems that Misbah Ul-Haq has been appointed Pakistan’s Test captain for the two games in the UAE against South Africa more through circumstance than preference, it is the right appointment as far as Stani Army is concerned.

Upset at being dropped for the tour of England, Misbah’s argument was that he had a better average in all forms of the game than most of the touring party, and he had a case. The reasons for Mohammad Yousuf and Younis Khan’s axing were that the former had retired and the latter had still not apologised for some apparent disciplinary issue. The reason for Misbah’s axing was less obvious even though it was said that the team was looking to go in a new direction with younger players. The recall of the 36 year old Yousuf mid-series put paid to that excuse. Many argued that Misbah was out of form, but then which of the Pakistan batsmen had shown form in the series’ in New Zealand and Australia that had preceded? At least Misbah had been making runs in domestic cricket whilst the others continued to fail on the international stage.

When Younis Khan resigned as captain this time last year, we went through the four possible candidates for the job of captain and Misbah certainly looked as good as the rest if not better in our opinion. He seemed a clean member of the side (from corruption as oppose to drugs!…o.k, and drugs), intelligent and well-spoken. This is something that former Pakistan coach Geoff Lawson has mentioned recently, backing the choice of Misbah as captain. Lawson said that Misbah had the “best cricketing brain” in Pakistan, which is no small compliment, and that he deserves the captaincy “but Ideally he should have been captain six years ago.”. He went on to say: “He has a statesman-like demeanour which so many Pakistan captains have lacked and he handles adversity analytically not emotionally. He knows how to get the best out of players and he is a winner, note his outstanding domestic record as a leader”. A very suitable candidate to repair some of the damage Ijaz Butt and some of the players have caused between Pakistan and the international cricketing community.

At 36, many will argue that we should have gone for a young captain but look around, there is no one younger even close to being a suitable candidate. Though he may not be a spring chicken, for a guy who takes good care of himself, at 36 he is no cricketing geriatric either. Good personal performances considered, he’d still have a few years left in him yet, and whilst there is  a strong case for going young in terms of regular team members, there’s no harm in having an older, wiser head as captain. The future is in the future, are we always going to be playing our cricket in the future? What about the here and now? We must get the balance right.

Before the England series, we did mention on here that it would be a defining tour for six players, three of whom were not playing, namely Yousuf, Younis and Misbah. It was argued that should the youngsters that have come in fail to perform, the selectors would return to the old guard once again. Well Yousuf was recalled that same tour, Misbah is back and calls for Younis are loud and clear.

Though Shahid Afridi had mentioned recently that he’d consider coming out of Test retirement to captain the side for the sake of the nation, we cannot have him do what he did in England and walk out on his team. This expression of ‘I will return if my country needs me’ is exactly the one which Afridi gave when he took over the Test captaincy last time. It certainly didn’t stop him from quitting mid-series. He was never a serious option this time around, and if reports are to be believed, even came close to losing his captaincy in the shorter forms, something which was backed up by the fact that the ODI and Twenty20 captain for the UAE matches was announced some time after the squads were.

So what of Younis Khan? Whilst many are supporting Younis’ case for selection and then captaincy, we should remember that had Younis not been so hot-headed in walking out on the captaincy, he would probably be leading the team right now. He has had the ball in his court a number of times yet chose to walk away as if to try and make some moral point. Yet, when taking on the likes of Ijaz Butt and Jamshed Dusti, Younis should have played them at their own game. Running away and sulking has not helped Pakistan cricket or him. Ijaz Butt is probably the worst thing in Pakistan cricket right now, yet we must remember that the last time Younis stepped down as captain, Butt actually refused to accept his resignation, at the PCB headquarters and later in the car, but it was Younis who insisted. Ijaz Butt’s removal as Chairman will no doubt signal the return of Younis Khan to the side. Should Misbah do a decent job in the interim, he could well find himself with the Test captaincy on a permanent basis with Younis left to concentrate on his batting. If not, then Younis will probably be back to step in again, so don’t despair just yet Younis fans.

Now if by some remarkable act Ijaz Butt presents the world clear evidence to back up his claims, I’d be the first to hold up my hands. But, I have complete faith in his ineptness and stupid rantings that this will not happen. From reading his comments, I think the English team have a very strong case and should take him to the cleaners which would then allow Pakistan cricket to distance itself from him, hastening his removal from his position as Chairman.

When questioned at the toss in regards to Butt’s comments, it was clear that an agitated captain Shahid Afridi wasn’t too happy. Right now, his and the rest of the players and coaching staff’s hands are tied, but once legal proceeding are initiated by England, Butt will have other things to worry about and our players can then distance themselves from him.

Yet, his removal will by no means guarantee us a Chairperson with a brain as the root of the problem and Patron of the board, Asif Zardari, will probably be choosing who to put in place again. We can only hope it isn’t one of is pals or a yes man, and that the recent shame that has been brought onto the nation has jolted him into thinking of getting some advisers around him before he makes the appointment.

Of course, Osman Samiuddin and Kamran Abbasi of cricinfo needn’t be afraid to apply…that’s if they really feel like doing something that makes a difference for Pakistan cricket. Because anyone can just write about it, even me.