Untouchables of Pakistan cricket: Innocent when proven guilty

With all that has come out of the inquiry and various player statements, it is clear that Shoaib Malik was one of the worst culprits. Unfortunately, with Malik still around, I can’t see Yousuf changing his mind and returning to the side. I know who I’d rather have back if I had a choice between Malik and Yousuf.

In some ways, the return of the players is evidence of the dearth in Pakistan talent with hardly anyone from the domestic game being trusted to be able to step up into the international side and keep these criminals out.  Many would say that this is something the punished players know and have been taking advantage of for some time. It is why, for most of the seven, it was important that the punishments were upheld, if not entirely, at least to some worthwhile degree. Right now the players must be inwardly laughing at the administration which governs and disciplines them. Ijaz Butt has denied that this will make the PCB seem like a soft touch to the players, but if everyone else thinks that is how it is looking then I’m certain the players are thinking likewise.

Butt’s excuse for the reinstatement of the players was that a constitutional process was simply followed and the players appealed and thus won their appeals. Yet this simply demonstrates the ineptness of those that handed out the punishments to the players, punishments which the appeals panel found were not deserved. So who are these inept people Ijaz? Hmmm. Until we have a change in the Presidency of the country, we will continue to suffer from this ‘jobs for the boys’ policy our Patron for the board and President of the country employs.

Will marriage have helped Malik to grow up?

So will everyone in the team now carry on as if nothing has happened? The recent leaked inquiry video will only add to the bad feeling between the players. With Shoaib Akhtar also returning along with the likes of Malik, we have almost all the ingredients for a recipe for disaster. Maybe there are not enough personality clashes in our trouble-maker’s XI already, so why not bring in Javed Miandad, Salim Malik, Abdul Qadir and Rashid Latif in as part of the backroom staff and really get the party started.

With captain Shahid Afridi recently stating that no politics in the team will be tolerated, it looks like his and coach Waqar Younis’ biggest test will be off the pitch in keeping things together. Shame, that.

Ijaz Butt: Needs to be harsh in his punishment of the Pakistan players

Pakistan cricket hasn’t exactly flourished under the stewardship of PCB Chairman Ijaz Butt. Described as “too old” and “physically unfit” by the senate’s standing committee on sports, many have felt that such an important role was beyond this 72 year old. On the team side, factionalism, internal bickering and a losing habit have plagued his time in charge.

Not being the most astute of operators, Butt is known to put his foot in where it does not belong. His insensitive and defensive approach in his response to the Lahore attacks was just one example. Rather than express condolences and outline the PCBs response, he went on the attack asking the ICC to ban match referee Chris Broad, for his comments on the lack of security. His most recent faux pas was the mixed messages he gave out in a press conference regarding the subject of match fixing.

Politicians are not the only people Butt has fallen out with. Javed Miandad, Abdul Qadir and Aamer Sohail, ex-Pakistani greats, have all come and gone from various posts during Butt’s tenure. Despite his unpopularity, Butt is still managing to hold on to his position of Chairman for the simple reason that he has the support of the most important man; Patron of the board and President of the country, Asif Ali Zardari.

The recent inquiry into the failings of the team on the New Zealand and Australian tour have given Butt an opportunity to do some good for his popularity. It is believed that the inquiry committee recommended heavy fines and bans for some top Pakistan players, including Shahid Afridi, Rana Naved, Shoaib Malik and the Akmal brothers, for various misdemeanours such as deliberately under-performing, provoking discord and undermining the captain.

While the details of any punishments have not yet been made public, Ijaz Butt has promised to take “more than significant” action against the players mentioned in the inquiry report. Butt needs to take this opportunity to do exactly that. Not only for the good of Pakistan cricket but for himself. He needs to realise that these mercenaries have not only made Pakistan cricket look bad, but have caused irreparable damage to himself and the likes of Mohammad Yousuf who came in for some harsh criticism as captain on the Australian tour. It is only now one can imagine how difficult Yousuf’s task must have been. These players need to be made an example of.

The Pakistan players: Some would have them lined-up and flogged

Banning the big names may be a difficult thing to do at the moment, but life will go on. Someone will step into their shoes and we’ll forget about them soon enough. It is a critical juncture which will be looked back at in years to come as the defining point of Pakistan cricket’s up-turn in fortunes. This is something that needs to be done to save Pakistan cricket. The players need to feel privileged to play for their country. Even if this “more than significant” action is Ijaz Butt’s last act, it will be a noble one and despite everything that has happened in the past, it will be the one that he will be remembered for the most.

So what was the Pakistani mindset from the beginning? Well it was one ‘hero’ after the other. Each buffoon of a batsmen that followed the previous one thought that a few quick boundaries here and the game would be over. But boundaries come with high risks attached, risks Pakistan did absolutely not need to take with a target like that. Not just once, but on many occasions throughout that innings they could have held themselves back and have gotten home comfortably.

After smiling about the recent security breach, Pakistan continued with their niceties by gifting three maidens (two wrapped in wickets) to Australia and effectively turning a chase of 6.4 per over into 7.5 an over.

The three shots I was not impressed with were those of Fawad, Rana and Gul. Admittedly, two of them are all-rounders and one is a bowler but the fact is all three were in at a time when they could see the situation the match was in, and all three could have taken us to the finishing line with singles. Fawad was probably trying to do just that but his shot was

The Pakistan players with their IQs displayed on the back of their shirts

something not even a school boy would be proud of. The Rana dismissal has to be looked into. I want to know why he missed the ball by a metre after facing a maiden the previous over. He is much better than that. As for Gul, with each ball he missed, a flashing “single” sign should have been going off in his head. But it seems with our players, not only is nobody at home, the lights aren’t on either.

We’ve shown glimpses of our talent throughout the tour but if there was one thing I’d put our losses down to, it would be the stupidity of our players. How good would we be if our cricketers showed a bit of intelligence and doggedness?

There are just two positives Pakistan can take away from this tour. One is the fact that there was not a series of Twenty20s, or they would have been whitewashed in that too. The other, they have found that one thing they have long been searching for, consistency. Nine matches and no wins, you cannot get more consistent than that.

Lalit and his girls: The 'best' thing to happen to cricket since....football

they reach the final. But what if they do reach the final? Some would say that this is a big ‘what if’ but they’d be ignoring the recent big ‘what if’ which prevented Pakistan’s players from playing in IPLIII.

The reason given was that the franchises could not be certain of the availability of the Pakistani players. So what do they exactly mean by that? Well, the Pakistani players would have been free from international duty in that period so this cannot have been what was meant. May be the reason is the fear that half way through the tournament, something happens in one of the two countries which would strain diplomatic relationships and heighten civil tension, causing Pakistan to call back its players for fear of attack in India. A big ‘what if’ in my opinion.

The most tasteless part of this IPL snub was that the Pakistani players were given false hope and led along until the very last minute, literally. Why did the eight franchises request the eleven Pakistani players up for selection if their policy was not to pick players that were not certain of availability? Well it is clear that something happened inbetween the period that these players were requested by the franchises and the time of the auction, and this is the sinister side to this whole situation.

With the franchises towing the same ‘non-availability’ line, it was obvious that the advice they received must of come from one source in that it was the same across the board. Clearly, all the franchises were in cahoots with one another and it was a collective and pre-planned shunning of the Pakistani players, even though this is being denied. If you are not convinced, are you telling me not one of the franchises would have been tempted by even a single bid for Afridi, Rana, Aamer or Akmal? Instead, when the names of these World Champions were read out at auction, there was complete silence in the room. It was so quiet that you could almost hear the little synaptic kerchings in Lalit Modi’s brain. It would be interesting to find out who it was that advised the franchises to make this change in policy and take this stance after they had no problem in requesting the players for auction initially.

Would the Indian crowds have turned on Pakistan's players?

When Pakistan’s players did not take part in IPLII, the argument from many IPL supporters was that it was the Pakistan government that banned the players from playing so the IPL was helpless. We argued then that even if our government had allowed the players to travel, they would have been stopped from playing somehow and that the Pakistan government merely made the decision easier for Lalit Modi. From what has happened this time around, it is clear that our belief was true.

The fact of the matter is, as soon as the time to organise IPLIII came around, those in the corridors of power began to think of ways in which to prevent Pakistan players from playing for whatever reason. The morally right thing to do would have been to begin to find ways of including them but morality isn’t something Lalit Modi will be known for I’m afraid. They waited until the end, hoping that Pakistan would prevent its players from travelling just like in IPLII, and making the decision easier for Modi and his cronies. But this time, both the PCB and the Pakistan government allowed the players to travel AND the franchises requested eleven of them to go under the hammer. As a result, something had to be done to stop them at auction and it quite clearly was.

I couldn’t care less if our players did not participate in that tournament and I certainly would not have minded had they been asked in good time, not to apply. But the immoral and degrading manner in which they were snubbed shows no class at all.

So, will the powers that be apply the same logic in the World Cup? Maybe they’ll do what they did here and leave it to the last minute hoping that Pakistan don’t make the final. But if we do make it to the final, the outcome of whether we are allowed to play will truly show us who governs world cricket.

Last chance for a talent unfulfilled

So why Sami and not anyone from our contracted players? We have Rana Naved, though not an out and out pace bowler, he has many strings to his bow. Rana is quite expensive though and this is probably the reason why he has never been favoured in Tests. Then there’s Sohail Tanvir and Yasir Arafat, both of whom can bat a bit and would have added strength to an already fragile batting line up. We also have Sohail Khan, a young raw talent who’s played just the one Test, against Sri Lanka earlier this year in which he failed to take any wickets and went for more than 6 runs per over. Also, there have been better performing fast bowlers on the domestic circuit, yet because of the poor quality of our domestic league, we cannot really use those performances as the be all and end all argument, whether it’s for or against the selection of any player.

I do not want to be too critical of Sami’s inclusion as I just have the sneaky feeling that if he does play, he will do quite well. After all, if Sami ever wanted an incentive to succeed, here it is. Having been in the wilderness since 2007 and now almost 29 years of age, with the emergence of the likes of Mohammad Aamer, even Sami would not have imagined he’d get an opportunity like this.

What seems to have worked in Sami’s favour is his experience at the top level and the fact that he has played in Australia before. In December 2004, Sami took 5 wickets in two Tests, having bowled 68 overs at almost 4.5 runs an over. Another advantage is the fact that Waqar Younis, who Sami has played and worked with before, will be with the team as bowling coach. Considering the above, his inclusion does seem to be a reasonable decision. Looking at it from Sami’s point of view, it is a great chance for him to get back in the team and go some way to fulfilling his obvious potential.

There was no Shoaib Malik or Rana Naved in the first ODI (not to mention Imran Nazir who wasn’t even in the squad). In the second ODI, Umar Akmal was dropped and Shoaib Malik was brought in. For today’s game, Mohammad Yousuf made way and back came Umar Akmal. Ask most Pakistan fans and very few would say we went in with our best side in any of these three ODIs.

Consistency in selection usually results in consistency in performance so why the need to make changes? These changes have basically all come about because of the conundrum that Pakistan are having with their openers. Khalid Latif, one of the openers brought in, has done very well averaging 43. His partner on the other hand, Salman Butt, averaged 28. Could we have done without bringing Butt back? Yes in my opinion, because it would have meant Umar Akmal, Shoaib Malik and Mohammad Yousuf were able to play in the same side. Kamran Akmal or Shoaib Malik opening with Khalid Latif could quite easily have given us the 28 runs an innings like Butt has, and evidently, by using fewer deliveries. It was surprising he was recalled in the first instance but to keep him and disturb a settled side was a big mistake.

Today was a big game for the Captain. Having scored 0 and 19 respectively, I was hoping he’d make a match winning century and do the honourable thing of handing over the reins to Afridi and then stepping down. Pressure is piling up on Younis Khan and some would say he brought it on himself with his resignation and subsequent demands for reinstatement. But having scored and excruciating 3 off 16 balls today, the chances are that he will not be going out like this.

Younis comes in at number three, a vital position where innings collapses are either born or die a slow death. Rather than stop a collapse today, Younis triggered one by running out a settled Salman Butt, and in the end, bringing more pressure on himself as was evident from the jeers he received at the presentation.

The final word must go to the two shinning lights of Pakistan cricket, Mohammand Aamer and Saeed Ajmal. Not only were they head and shoulders above the others with the ball, but they also were the two highest scorers in the Pakistan side, taking the game to the last over and almost snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. Man of the match Aamer’s 73 not out made him the first Pakistani number 10 to reach a fifty in ODI cricket. His partnership of 103 with Ajmal (33), was the second highest overall for the tenth wicket in an ODI. They were deservedly applauded by the Kiwis.

The chief protagonists in the fight back for Pakistan were Saeed Ajmal, Mohammad Asif and Rana Naved who bowled maidens in both the 45th and 47th overs of the Australian innings. This meant that not only had the Aussies have to worry about wickets but also the number of balls remaining.

Australia tied the game with a ball remaining which meant that India were out of the tournament at that point. Requiring one off the last ball they got there with a bye to keeper Kamran Akmal whose throw, had it hit the stumps, would have resulted in the game finishing tied rather than in an Australian win.

Pakistan again demonstrated why they have the world’s premier bowling attack. It had it all, spin, unerringly accurate yorkers…it was a joy to watch. Who said 50 over ODIs were boring? Well they certainly are not when Pakistan play them!

Pakistan will now play New Zealand in the semi-finals on the 3rd of October. Aamer will no doubt be back for that but Asif’s second spell would have got the captain and selectors wondering. He did well but expect Pakistan to go into the semi-finals with the side that beat India in the group stages.

Below is a list of the value of the contract in each category and it makes for some interesting reading.

Category A Rs 250,000 or £1,840 per month, £22,080 annually.
Category B Rs 175,000 or £1,290 per month, £15,480 annually.
Category C Rs 100,000 or £735 per month, £8,820 annually.

Though they were all pretty surprising, I was most surprised by the earnings of those who would fall into category C. Many of the players who were involved in Pakistan’s recent success and look to be in and around the team for some time to come, fall into this category of just £735 a month. This includes; Rana Naved, Fawad Alam, Saeed Ajmal and Rao Iftikhar. Here in the U.K, someone working at McDonald’s could earn more than that.

Inversely, there are some players in the top category who have either not played at all recently or have demonstrated that category A is one place they should not be. For example; Shoaib Akhtar, Salman Butt and Danish Kaneria.

Baffled? Well so am I. I would love to ask the meritocracy that is the PCB, how they decided on who goes in which category. Salim Altaf was quoted at the time (January 2009) saying: “The central contracts were devised by coach Intikhab Alam, manager Yawar Saeed and chief selector Abdul Qadir and the main criteria was seniority of the players”. Why seniority? Would any other professional organisation in the world, let alone cricket board, do this?

And if it was decided on performances, how do they explain Danish Kaneria? In 2008, Kaneria was in category C but without playing a single game for his nation, he found himself in category A this time around. I have nothing against Danish but I believe for someone who plays Tests only, he should be in category B at the most.

Obviously, this is just the basic wage as added to this would be match fees which players would receive for participating in a game and any awards for individual performances. Yet, this only exacerbates the situation for those in category C as they are less likely to take part in a game and earn individual awards anyway. The gap between categories C and B definitely needs to be smaller.

Taking into account the cost of living in Pakistan, there are still boards around the cricket world who take much better care of their players. I can now see why earning a better living through unofficial leagues such as the ICL did and would continue to appeal to some of Pakistan’s cricketers.

Category A (£22,080 annually)
Shoaib Akhtar, Younis Khan, Danish Kaneria, Shahid Afridi, Kamran Akmal, Shoaib Malik, Misbah-ul-Haq, Salman Butt, Umar Gul

Category B (£15,480 annually)
Yasir Hameed, Faisal Iqbal, Mohammad Hafeez, Sohail Tanvir

Category C (£8,820 annually)
Rao Iftikhar Anjum, Abdur Rehman, Yasir Arafat, Fawad Alam, Khurram Manzoor, Saeed Ajmal, Sohail Khan, Wahab Riaz, Samiullah Khan Niazi, Sarfraz Ahmad, Nasir Jamshed, Umar Amin, Azhar Ali, Abdul Rauf, Rana-Naved

In the past, we’ve had to keep on going back to Shoaib because there was no one else fast or good enough to partner Umar Gul as the other of the two Pakistan pace spearheads. Maybe part of the reason for his bad behaviour was that he felt he brought something unique to the Pakistan attack so was thus indispensable and could do pretty much what he liked. His recent comment, “I am the fastest bowler in history and it’s not possible for everyone to bowl at 150 (kph)”, does give some indication of such a mindset. Yet now that we have Aamer, and due the reasons which we will now examine, I think Shoaib would find it very difficult to get a place in any of our sides.

His reverse swing and slower ball skills will not be missed as Gul has demonstrated that he is one of the very best exploiters of these qualities. His pace will not also be a miss as both Gul and Aamer are adequately fast enough. In most of our sides, barring injury, we will probably go with three main fast bowlers due to the strength of our all rounders and spinners. With Gul and Aamer a certainty, this leaves one place. That place will no doubt be taken by Mohammad Asif who will return from his ban on September the 22nd. He will be the perfect new ball partner for Aamer, with his ability to seam the ball early on.

If we need to make up overs in a match, our world class spinners can easily do this to give the above three pacers a break. Added to that, an all rounder such as Razzaq, Rana or even Arafat can contribute should more pace be required. Shoaib loses out here because of the fact that he is just a bowler.

Shoaib failed to turn up for a fitness test for the one day series which follows the Sri lankan Tests, citing the illness of his mother. The fact that he is a disruptive influence and hardly fit, it will be better to pick reliable players in order to have a steady team selection. It looks as if Shoaib’s fate is sealed

Shoaib still feels he’s got “three-four good years left” in him. Looking at the reasons discussed, Bollywood awaits, time for Shoaib Akhtar to become Shoaib the Actor. What a waste.

To be honest, they’ve probably caused themselves as much embarrassment with their unprofessionalism as they have Shoaib.

Why Rao Iftikhar though? Decent bowler yes but not suited to Twenty20. Stani Army had suggested that Rana Naved should be called up having cancelled his ICL contract but it seems that the PCB still fear the reaction of the ICC and BCCI.