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?!

Akmal: "Being dropped is not an easy thing to take". Yes, imagine what the ball feels like Kamran!

With the World Cup fast approaching, and Pakistan choosing to send in a early preliminary list of layers to the ICC for vetting, Kamran Akmal has decided to come out into the open about his frustrations at being ignored. Having asked the ICC if he is under any investigation and been given the green light, Akmal is surprised as to why he has not been brought back into the fold after being dropped for his poor performances in England.

The belief is that Akmal is being shunned by the PCB as there are suspicions that he has been involved in match fixing. With the PCB recently being told by the ICC to clean up their act, they may just be playing it safe by keeping Akmal away from the international side, even if there is no hard evidence he has been involved in fixing.

So why is there this cloud over Akmal? Suspicions first arose during the tour of Australia when Akmal dropped four catches behind the stumps in the 2nd Test, three of them off of Michael Hussey, who was Australia’s only hope left in the innings. Hussey managed a century, and carried his bat with the tail with Pakistan eventually losing by 36 runs. This led to Akmal being questioned by the PCB, and he was later dropped for the Twenty20s against England in Dubai.

When Pakistan flew to England, Akmal was sent a notice by the ICC seeking information about events related to the 2010 World Twenty20 held in the Caribbean, as the suspicion in regards to Akmal’s performances continued. On the same tour, he was dropped for the 2nd Test against England after a string of missed opportunities behind the stumps and poor batting scores.

He was also recently named in a video by fixer Mazhar Majeed as one of six Pakistan players that Majeed had on his side, ready to engage in fixing games.

Akmal in thought after dropping an easy chance off Strauss - one of many mistakes

Another thing I noticed was Akmal’s demeanour after the match fixing scandal involving Amir, Asif and Butt came out into the open in England in August. Up until then, he seemed very edgy and pressured with his batting and keeping. After the scandal broke, he seemed to begin to play with more freedom. Whilst the statistics for his wicket-keeping before and after the scandal are not available, and he has played only two Twenty20s since, we can compare his One Day innings’ before and after the spot fixing scandal broke in August 2010 adequately enough.

Akmal averaged a very good 40.2 in the five ODIs he played after the fixing scandal. If we take the same number of innings (five) before the scandal, his average drops to 21.2. What made Kamran suddenly want to score after the scandal had broke? Was he know playing freely rather than to the instructions of a fixer? Since then, he has also made his first ever double century in first class cricket scoring 268 for National Bank of Pakistan last month, and has generally batted well in the Quaid-E-Azam Trophy scoring 530 runs at an average of 75.71 so far this season. What could explain Kamran’s sudden run of form?

Whilst any one of the above points would probably not mean much on their own, brought together, they certainly raise question marks over whether Akmal gave it his best every single time. It does not tell us he was fixing games, but if he wasn’t trying his best, you would have to ask why?

Pakistan's new Test captain Misbah Ul-Haq showed the way with three half-centuries in four innings

Pakistan can come out of the drawn two-Test series against world number two South Africa with their heads held high. Though the argument may be that the wickets in the UAE were batsmen friendly, Pakistan’s reconstructed batting line up still held it’s own against South Africa’s, and South Africa had the better bowling attack. Let us also remember that Pakistan’s batsmen have struggled to pass 250 in Tests for a while now, batting paradise or not. Were it not for the time factor, Pakistan could have come close to or matched South Africa’s aggregated total in both the Tests, and that’s no mean feat.

The return of Younis Khan was a major factor in the ability of our batsmen to finally start playing Test match innings and setting Test match totals. The successful re-emergence of Mohammad Hafeez, Misbah Ul-Haq and Taufeeq Umar was also pleasing to watch. I have always been a big fan of Taufiq yet he is just one of many that have been the victim of selection favouritism in the past. He is a proper Test batsman.

Then there’s the emergence of the two youngsters Azhar Ali and Asad Shafiq. For some reason, Azhar, despite being a reserved young man, seems to really irritate the opposition, ending up at the receiving end of some hostile bowling. He did so in England and here against South Africa also. But his composure and temperament was a joy to see. Shafiq came into the ODI side in England and you could immediately tell the young man was going to be here to stay. I was hoping to see him in the Test side much sooner as it was clear he had what it took to succeed. He got his chance in the 2nd Test though, in place of the out of form Umar Akmal, and he didn’t disappoint with a well played 61 in the first innings.

The biggest positive after the performance of our batsmen was the captaincy and personal performances of Misbah Ul-Haq. Amongst his supporters, of which I am one, Misbah could and should have been Pakistan’s captain years ago. But as the fixing scandals have revealed, people were in and out of the Pakistan team for reasons other than cricket back then. Hopefully Misbah will continue his good form and still provide us with a few good years during which time a younger future captain can be identified.

And last but not least, we must mention Abdur Rehman. The left arm spinner has been in almost every squad in recent times but rarely gets a game. He is the type of cricketer that, though he may be limited in natural ability, makes the most out of what he has got. He reminds me very much of England’s Michael Yardy. You know what you will get with these guys – good team players that will always play their part, with bat or ball. Maybe Pakistan need a few more of this type of player rather than the natural gifted types, that blow more cold than hot.

The only concern now is with the bowling attack. Had we had Mohammad Asif and Amir in the side, it would be no over-exaggeration to say that we may have even come out of this series as victors. It was unfortunate that Wahab went down with an injury and it is now clearer than ever that Mohammad Sami is just not good enough for the game at the top level. I still remain hopeful that Amir will be allowed back into international cricket and that alone really could make the difference to our Test team bowling attack.

There was almost a resigned pointlessness to Pakistan playing Tests not so long ago, due to the depressing manner in which we capitulated. But the character and heart shown by the players in the performances in these two games has given the Stani fans lots of hope.

RELATED POLL RESULTS. HOW DID YOU DO?

How will Pakistan do under new captain Misbah Ul-Haq in the two game Test series against South Africa in the UAE?
* 0-2 Loss (29%, 9 Votes)
* 0-1 Loss (26%, 8 Votes)
* Draw (23%, 7 Votes)
* 2-0 Win (16%, 5 Votes)
* 1-0 Win (6%, 2 Votes)

Will Mohammad Sami be seen in a Pakistan shirt again?
* No, it’s time to move on (42%, 5 Votes)
* Yes, but he shouldn’t be (33%, 4 Votes)
* Yes, he still has what it takes (25%, 3 Votes)

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 cynics are already suggesting that Zulquarnain engineered this whole saga in order to provide a better life for him and his family by seeking asylum in the UK. Geo News reported that he had already applied and certainly from his words: “Help my family somehow. If it can be done, send my family here (UK)”, it seems that his actions may have another motive behind them.

Zulquarnain Haider does the sajda - Honest man or opportunist?

The manner in which he has behaved since the alleged threat he received for refusing to fix matches has also been strange. He did not inform the Pakistan coaching or support staff and lied to them in order to obtain his passport before he disappeared. Neither did he confide in any of his team members or inform the ICC’s Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU). He has also yet to request the help of the Pakistan High Commission in London, something the cynics would say would have been one of his first steps if he feared for his and his family’s safety.

The message coming from his family in Pakistan also tends to suggest we’re not the only ones confused by Haider’s actions. His brother was quoted in The Times of India as saying: “He should return to Pakistan or if he has issues coming back home because of the threats he should at least come back to Dubai and join the team again. His wife and children are also very concerned about him and believe he should be back at home they don’t want to go to London”.

But could the threats to Haider have been genuine, and is this an honest man trying to do the best for his country and family? Retiring from cricket, the means by which he earned a living, cannot have been an easy thing to do. Earlier this year, he dedicated his second innings 88 in the Test against England to his late father and to the victims of the Pakistan floods. So are these the actions  of the kind of man that would cheat the world into trying to obtain asylum in a foreign land? He also seems to be a God-fearing man, evident from his prostration (sajda) when he brought up his 50 in the aforementioned innings. Yet we’ve also seen Mohammad Amir do the same, and we all know the kind of things he’s allegedly been meddling in.

Whatever has been going on, Zulquarnain needs to inform all the relevant authorities as soon as possible so that the truth can come out into the open. This includes the police, the PCB and the ICC’s ACSU. If it is true, if he was approached and threatened, then it says something about our remaining players and back-room staff that Zulquarnain felt the need to flee without being able to trust anyone enough to tell them. He is basically suggesting, after all that went on in England, that corruption still exists in the Pakistan team set-up.

'It's all sorted!'

After a meeting between Ijaz Butt and Younis Khan, Younis has been cleared to resume his international cricket and has been drafted in to the limited-overs squad for the games in the UAE against South Africa. It comes just at the right time as Mohammad Yousuf looks likely to miss the series with a groin problem.

It does seem as if Mr Butt is beginning to alter his modus operandi after some forced introspection which followed his allegations against the England team. Yet his ‘apology’ to the ECB, and now his offer of an olive branch to Younis looks more as though he is desperate to cling on to his role. Whatever was discussed in the meeting between Younis and Butt, I would have been surprised if it came out that Younis was the one of the two to have backed down.

Along with the ICC’s warning to Pakistan to sort it’s administration out, I get the feeling that Ijaz Butt has been given a set of demands from within, that he has to comply with if he wants to stay on as Chairman, and like the dignified man that he is, he has climbed down from his position and accepted. This is in the same week in which the ICC’s task force in charge of bringing cricket back to Pakistan, will also be setting out some recommendations for the PCB to implement. Is Butt set to stay on for a new term as PCB Chairman? We hope not, but the signs do not look good.

Ijaz Butt multi-tasks: On the phone and reading the newspaper upside down at the same time. Isn't Pakistan cricket lucky?!

Ijaz Butt’s outburst was a real chance for the ECB and ICC to do something for Pakistan cricket in helping to remove Butt from his position as captain of the Pakistan ship. But a simple apology from Butt means that all is well and good once again. For the ECB, ICC and Ijaz Butt, it is at least, but under Butt’s command the Pakistan ship continues to drift into rough seas towards rocky shores.

I was hoping that Butt would be stubborn as usual and refuse to apologise, forcing the ECB to take him to court, and the ICC to suspend him. But deep down there was a feeling that he would retract his comments with a grovelling apology in a desperate attempt to hold onto his position. Self-preservation has always been Ijaz Butt’s main goal.

The ICC, it is believed, were ready to suspend Butt yet preferred to give him time to retract his comments and issue an apology. The head of each ICC member board automatically becomes an ICC Director, and it is from this role that the ICC could have suspended Butt. Yet instead of getting their hands dirty, they waited, as they love to do, rather than take the lead as the game’s governing body and take the required action against a guy that cricket does not need.

The ECB had taken their position very early in threatening legal action unless Butt apologised. I get the feeling that any legal battle may have overlapped their beloved up and coming Ashes series as court cases are generally long and drawn out, and England did not want to be dragged into such a distraction. Nevertheless, the allegations were grave and I’m surprised the ECB has settled for a simple apology.

Giles Clarke, the ECB Chairman, who heads the task force in trying to help out Pakistan cricket, has been a great support in trying times for Pakistan. By taking legal action against Ijaz Butt, here was a chance that he and the ECB could have taken that would have helped Pakistan cricket no end. Unfortunately, it does seem that in the end, everyone including the ICC and ECB, were in it for their own good. It does not seem as if the change will come from the outside so now and it must come from the inside, but who?

A PCB statement read: “The PCB and the Pakistan players completely reject the allegations made by the Sun newspaper and the ICC yesterday about the Pakistan team’s conduct in the 3rd Nat West ODI at The Brit Insurance Oval.

“The allegation’s were wholly irresponsible and completely without foundation.”

“The PCB expresses its gratitude for the outstanding conduct of the Pakistan team since after the first spot fixing story broke and will take all legal and disciplinary action which may result from these allegations.”

“It remains in the best interests of world cricket, the players and in particular of cricket supporters that the tour should continue, and it would set a dangerous precedent to call off a tour based on the misguided and inaccurate allegations of an English tabloid.”

Pakistan’s recently appointed new Chief Executive said: “We are looking for an apology. If it does not come we’ll look at other options. You can’t impugn someone’s integrity without having proper evidence.”

“To date I can say that we have received zero evidence of anything having influenced any Pakistan player since the three players were sent home. Clearly we will seek advice but there are quite strong laws of defamation.”

Earlier, an ex-Pakistani captain said: “I’d be making a few phone calls to legal sources to try to take this a little bit further. I can’t think of anything worse than your name mentioned in terms of fixing a game of cricket.”

Pakistan’s current captain Shahid Afridi said: “We would like to express our surprise, dismay and outrage at the comments made by the ICC and the Sun newspaper. We are deeply concerned and disappointed that our integrity as cricketers has been brought into question again”

“We refute these allegations completely and will be working closely with the PCB to explore all legal options open to us.”

“Under the circumstances, we have strong misgivings about continuing to play the last two games of the current series and urge the English team and management to distance themselves from the Newspaper’s allegations.”

“We do, however, recognise our responsibilities to the game of cricket — and in particular to the cricket-loving public in this country — and will therefore endeavour to fulfil these fixtures to the best of our ability.”

Despite the appeals from captain Shahid Afridi, unfortunately it seems that the ECB’s players have failed to distance themselves from the allegations as it was reported that Jonathan Trott, England’s South African star, made fixing remarks to Pakistan’s Pakistani star, Wahab Riaz, which resulted in an ugly altercation in which Trott ended up grabbing Wahab by the throat.

The Newspaper allegations and the ICC’s conduct has also managed to influence the likes of Ian Botham who, despite nothing being proven, has decided to call for Pakistan to be banned from international cricket. Ian Botham has as of yet failed to explain why his stance has changed as he had no such wish after the initial spot fixing allegations during the fourth Test at Lord’s.*

*All quotes are that of either the ECB, Michael Vaughan or England captain Andrew Strauss. The words in bold have been changed simply to demonstrate the holier-than-thou, self-righteousness of the English board, players, pundits and media in feeling hurt when Pakistan had the same accusations flung at them but did not react like the English have.

The difference is England were accused by an idiot in Ijaz Butt, someone who not many people pay attention to, but Pakistan were accused by cricket’s governing body and by an English newspaper; yes, a newspaper from the land of these sanctimonious saints. Shouldn’t Pakistan be the ones upset? Shouldn’t Pakistan be the ones taking legal action? Shouldn’t Pakistan have been the ones calling meetings on whether to continue the tour?

England had no answer to Gul's reverse swing

A quite brilliant spell of swing bowling from Umar Gul clinched Pakistan the third ODI against England at the Oval. Gul finished with figures of 6-42 which included three bowled dismissals. Through certain parts of the Test series and the previous two ODIs, Gul has looked a shadow of the man who holds the accolade of being the best bowler in Twenty cricket – the form of cricket which is harshest on bowlers. Gul does seem to be one of those bowlers that needs to be near optimum fitness in order to perform at his best. A few niggles whilst he has been over here in England may lay claim to why he hadn’t shown the type of bowling he showed today.

At most points throughout the England innings it seemed as a forgone conclusion that England would knock off the runs and go into a 3-0 unassailable lead. Indeed, Billy Doctrove who saved Andrew Strauss and England in the last game tried his best to do so again today when he for some reason did not refer a stumping appeal to the third umpire. Luke Wright was the batsman and Umar Akmal, deputising for his injured brother behind the stumps, did very well to time the stumping just as Wright’s foot was off the ground. Rather than go up to the thrid umpire and make sure, Doctrove immediately said no as Akmal appealed.

Earlier in Pakistan’s innings, there was a far less convincing appeal by England, and one that would be far less in line with the spirit of the game, when Shahid Afridi took evasive action to a throw which struck his bat and went onto the stumps. Docrtrove walked over to the stumps to replace the bails and seemed as if he wasn’t going to even consider it as a run out until Stewart Broad queried it. After taking a few seconds to think about it, Doctrove went upstairs for the decision and Afridi was given out. The difference between the two events was a clear case of double standards that could probably only be explained by some sort of inferiority complex displayed by umpire Doctrove.

In regards to Doctrove not going upstairs for Wright’s stumping; getting a marginal decision wrong is one thing, but when you have the third umpire as a back up and you don’t use him, it’s criminal. I hope Pakistan raise the issue and Doctrove is reprimanded as this kind of thing cannot happen again at the top level of the game. He has already cost Pakistan the previous ODI, and he almost cost us another one. Of course, this is the same Billy Doctrove who stood back quietly as umpire Darrell Hair decided to act as judge jury and executioner in the infamous Oval Test in 2006.

So onto the fourth game in the series on Monday with Pakistan unfortunate to be trailing 2-1. Should the Stanis take the next one, it will leave an exciting decider at the Rose Bowl on Wednesday.

Andrew Strauss sullies the game but it's acceptable

Cricket has always seemed to take the moral high-ground when it comes to sports related problems such racism and hooliganism we see in football, or the continued battle athletics has with drugs use. But there is no other sport where cheating is so blatantly accepted as just a part of the game. We saw the hue and cry over the recent spot fixing allegations against the Pakistan player where law makers, supporters and players of various nations acting as if they had been truly hurt, but where are these voices when something like this happens? I deplore match-fixing, let me make that clear, but I deplore this form of cheating too. Whilst people may argue there is no comparison between the no-balls Amir and Asif bowled, I will simply ask them which act influenced the result of the game? Was it those no-balls or Strauss’ failure to walk when he was on 38 and went on to make a match winning 126. Who is the bigger cheat?

I rate Andrew Strauss; he is an excellent batsman and a good captain. What I admire about him most though is the intelligent and thoughtful manner in which he speaks even when ungracious coach Andy Flower does the opposite. Unfortunately, when Strauss doesn’t walk he badly lets himself down. Now this is not the first time Strauss has been involved with something like this. In the Test series that has just finished, Strauss stood his ground on two separate occasions after Pakistan’s appeals had been declined by the umpire but then reviewed on request. Now Strauss knew he was out, he knew the review would show he was out, but he still stood his ground. Even if I had edged behind for example and been given not out but had still stayed at the crease, once the bowling team had asked for a review I would walk even before the third umpire’s decision because it would be embarrassing not to do so. Strauss unfortunately did not, on two separate occasions. A man’s character, his reputation, is far more important than what he achieves in a game Andrew. Of course, Strauss is not the only one in cricket who is guilty of this, but when such a nice gentleman can repeatedly do it without obvious regret, it gives you an idea of how acceptable it is in the game.

Not only is this cheating not discouraged in cricket, it is well rewarded and and thus, encouraged. Strauss was presented with the man of the match award for his match winning century, a century he had no shame in celebrating when he brought it up in the 34th over of the game, even though he was out much earlier. Had I cheated my way to a milestone, I wouldn’t have celebrated as Strauss did, but of course, I wouldn’t have been there in the first place as I would have walked off when I was out.

But maybe that is just a reflection of the way of the world. If you do bad, cheat, take short cuts and are selfish, you get rewarded, but if you’re a good doer you get shunned and sidelined, like Rashid Latif for example who has recently been forced to resign after he revealed how Pakistan’s cricketers meddled in match-fixing in the past.

So while the law makers, players and supporters of different nations put up this act of being appalled by the recent spot-fixing allegations, let them remember their contribution too, to the cheating that goes on in this game. Neither are you or your game that innocent after all. In his book What Price the Moral High Ground, author Robert Frank challenges the notion that success is achieved only at the expense of doing good, and cricket, the gentleman’s game, can do far worse than to challenge this notion too and get rid of this accepted disease that pervades the game.