The mighty Australians, as was expected, won the tri-angular DLF Cup title in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur last week. Two other former world champions West Indies and India were the other teams featured in the warm-up event for the Champions Trophy.

Though the DLF Cup tri-series was not given much importance in the cricketing circles it helped in analysing the strength and available options of the participating teams ahead of two key ODI events -- Champions Trophy and World Cup. Rest of the major teams -- Pakistan, England, Sri Lanka and South Africa had already demonstrated their cricketing credentials recently in different home and abroad competitions. Now the scenario is quite clear and one can make grading of the leading sides on the basis of their recent performances at least for the upcoming Champions Trophy being held in India in a few days time.

Remember, four teams Sri Lanka, the West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe will play qualifying round matches from October 7 while the main round encounters of the Champions Trophy, also known as Mini World Cup, will commence from 15th of this month.

All the leading Test playing nations would vie for top honours in the fifth edition of the ICC Champions Trophy which is the second biggest one-day tournament in the world and it is one that has eluded Australia so far. Remember Australia were knocked out in the semifinal in the last two Champions Trophy events. However, this time they looked quite serious to win the mini-World Cup event.

The first tournament was staged at Dhaka in October 1998 and raised more than £10 million. South Africa under late skipper Hansie Cronje won the inaugural event in which nine countries participated. West Indies grabbed the runners-up position in the event. Kenyon capital Nairobi hosted the second edition of Champions Trophy in 2000-01 when New Zealanders were triumphant mainly due to Chris Cairns's 102. The runners-up position went to India in the 11-nation competition.

India and hosts Sri Lanka shared the next trophy in 2002-03. This time, the number of participating teams was 12. Sri Lanka shared the trophy with India when both attempts to start the final were washed out by tropical storms. In the previous event, former world champions West Indies lifted the winners' trophy when they beat hosts England in the final in 2004.

The Champions Trophy tournament will definitely be a test of all the leading sides to play according to their reputation and leave a positive impact ahead of showpiece World Cup event. Even the struggling teams like West Indies, England and Pakistan can restore their confidence through a quality performance in the 'Mini World Cup'.

It may be remembered here that prior to recent controversy-packed England tour, Pakistan was not among the list of struggling teams. Prior to this fateful trip, Pakistan had a wonderful unbeaten run in five Test rubbers during the last 17 months. As far as Pakistan's performance in limited version is concerned in the said period, it cannot be called as hundred per cent satisfactory. Remember, Pakistan won the ODI series in India 4-2 and West Indies 3-0 last year but lost the home rubber against India 1-4 earlier this year. Then they won the low-scoring 3-match series in Sri Lanka but drew the five-match rubber in England 2-2 with one no-result match.

Cricket followers may remember that last year Pakistan recovered excellently in both the Test and ODI series in India. In the Test series, they were 1-0 down and then won the third Test at Bangalore which was captain Inzamam's 100th match, to level the series. And then in the ODIs, the Pakistan team were 2-0 down but they marvellously won the remaining four games to carve out a 4-2 series result.

Pakistan can repeat last year's wonderful performance in India by reviving the shattered confidence of its boys. The so-called ball-tampering allegations against Pakistan in recent England tour may have a strong effect on boys. PCB high-ups must hire the services of a top psychologist to revive the spirits of the boys, if they want to gain some encouraging results in the upcoming Champions Trophy and other future competitions including World Cup mega event.

An analysis of recent months shows that champions Australia and Sri Lanka are certain to take the field in the Champions Trophy event with a clean record and great confidence against other opponents. While all other leading sides including Pakistan, England, South Africa, India, New Zealand and West Indies have mixed results and different kinds of limitations and frailties. As per their form, level of players fitness and above all recent performances, South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan formed the second best group.

According to the same criteria, India, England and West Indies fall in category three.

The 1996 world champions Sri Lanka, who formed the two-team top group along with Australia, did a great job in recent months under stand-in captain Mahela Jayawardene. They knocked out two cricketing giants South Africa and England with clear margins. The Sri Lankan team, who is gradually transforming into a formidable unit, first drew the Test series 1-1 in a magnificent way against England and then whitewashed the hosts in the five-match ODI series. They also won the historic Twenty20 game in England. In this process they won seven international matches in a row on English soil for the first time in their cricketing history.

As World Cup showpiece event is looming rapidly, Sri Lankans are looked far ahead among the Asian teams for the mega event as far as preparations and prospects are concerned. Sri Lankans are likely to give reigning champions Australia a big challenge in the upcoming Champions Trophy and then in World Cup. It may be recalled here that Sri Lanka had a dismal record until a year ago against all opponents. They lost to India 2-0 early this year then crashed to Test and ODI series defeat against Pakistan in May last. And due to these poor performances, Sri Lanka could not qualify for the Champions Trophy automatically and will have to play qualifying round matches.

As far as England team are concerned, they beat Pakistan in Test series 3-0 and drew the ODI rubber 2-2 but on one can predict about their same level of performance in India. One should remember that Pakistan's irresponsible performance and poor team selection played major role in England's Test series victory than their own performance.

The South Africans, apparently a formidable side, also entered the Jaipur Trophy with mixed feelings after having a heavy thrashing at the hands of ruthless Sri Lankans recently. It's to be noted here that South Africa suffered a 2-0 defeat in the Test series last month against islanders. Hosts India also had a not so impressive record in the near past. Set aside the DLF Cup debacle, they also suffered a 1-4 defeat in ODI series and won Test series 1-0 after hard struggle against West Indies a couple of months ago despite having long batting order and plenty of variety in pace bowling.

In the recent DLF Cup, India and Australia did a lot of reshuffling and experimentation and gave their youngsters an opportunity to get international exposure. Even in their attempt to try different combinations, both the teams particularly India at times lost their way and crumble to low scores.

The Pakistan captain has himself said that he will not appeal against the ban but no doubt the 366-ODI expert will be dearly missed at the ICC Trophy

At the grassy arenas he plays the ball inside out and at The Oval last Thursday, Inzamam-ul-Haq, though, wasn't at the historic field with his cricket gear, he almost played it inside out, in a closed room too.

Amid very different feeling among his admirers as to what the outcome will be, the Pakistan captain faced the International Cricket Council (ICC) Code of Conduct hearing that started on September 27, Wednesday.

On hundreds of occasions, in his illustrious career, he has been attacking his opponents inside out on the playing fields, but this time in London Inzamam had to defend, on a very 'different pitch', and against a 'very unusual opponent'. He defended solidly as he was cleared of the ball-tampering charge made against him by now-very-famous umpire Darrell Hair at The Oval in August. Inzamam showed that he could defend firmly off the field too.

While Ranjan Madugalle, the ICC match referee, declared his verdict at the hearing, clearly dismissing the ball-tampering charge, the four-match One-day International (ODI) ban just stopped the ball from going over the fence; it was just a one-bounce four, one of the most memorable fours of Inzamam's career, may be way too precious than Javed Miandad's 1986 Sharjah final!

The ban, imposed on Inzamam for twice leading a protest against the umpires (Hair and Billy Doctrove) by failing to take the field after the tea break at the relevant time on the penultimate day of the Test, was very much an occurrence that was predictable.

After The Oval Test debacle, resulting in the very first incident of forfeiting a game by a team in the 129-year history of Test cricket, Inzamam has come out with flying colours last Thursday, while not forgetting the four-ODI ban the veteran batsman will now face.

The game, Inzamam and his team members, Hair, the ICC and of course the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) -- these are the five entities which were the parties in The Oval episode.

Who gained what, or who lost what in The Oval affair? With the reputation of the game, which itself has been shaped, played and developed by the people, has been restored by them after the September 28 verdict, the remaining four stakeholders are now placed at different positions.

Not surprisingly first to Hair. The veteran umpire of 76 Tests has been taken out from the ICC Champions Trophy, a decision the umpire has accepted, which one feels is a sensible decision. But after the ICC Trophy what will be the future of Hair? Where does he stand after the September 28 verdict? What about the 2007 World Cup? Can a big risk be taken by naming him for the Caribbean extravaganza while not forgetting his objectionable record in international games?

Though he has said, after The Oval hearing, that "Of course I wish to keep on being an umpire", one strongly feels the person needs a lot to think before entering the ground for an international assignment in future. If the players or rather teams, specially the ones which have been the victims and fans, don't want Hair to carry on, in a natural reaction to his unpleasant conduct, then perhaps it would be very difficult for Hair to continue to wear the 'black and white combination', at least in international cricket.

After the August 20 incident the role the ICC has played so far, apparently appears to be unclear. No individual or a group of individuals should be allowed to take control of cricket, affecting the spirit of the game negatively. All things considered, umpires are human beings too, and therefore they can also make mistakes, it is as plain as this. The game's world governing body needs to realise that apart from having very clear-cut code of behaviour for the players, there should also be a distinct set of rules for the umpires so that they can also be held responsible for any action that may be harmful for the game or the players/fans.

Therefore it is time the ICC should get more active to make necessary amendments in the game's conventions to accommodate some additional discipline regulations for the umpires so that The Oval-like scenarios can be avoided in future.

The PCB must have got a very harsh lesson from The Oval incident. According to some media reports, emerging after August 20, no proactive stance was adopted by the PCB which worked very cautiously on the issue rather than taking the matter aggressively. Having an idea, being the national cricket governing body, that Inzamam and his boys had done nothing wrong with the ball at The Oval, the PCB, in fact, should have filed a suit against Darrell Hair swiftly as suggested by Imran Khan; and because it didn't happen, it indicates either a glaring PCB blunder or an obvious gap of communication between the PCB and the Pakistan national team, and that too on an extremely significant subject!

Though the PCB chief Shaharyar M Khan, after the September 28 decision, has said that the board doesn't rule out calling on the ICC to investigate Hair's conduct in the (Oval) match for bringing the game into disrepute, still one believes a more early-cum-rigorous PCB posture, based purely upon principles, could be possible.

Actually the PCB, while not shattering the norms of the ICC, can also ask the world governing body a big question: why was a solid proof not presented regarding the ball-tampering charge made by Hair rather than extending the matter long, subsequently ending with a ban on Inzamam-ul-Haq, who could be proved innocent (through the lack of evidence) without an ICC hearing, and who could be leading Pakistan in the Champions Trophy had the four-match ban not imposed on him?

The appointment of the team's manager is regarded as crucial from the organisational point of view, specifically on a tour to England. And the PCB doesn't get any high grade in this subject area too. Zaheer Abbas, who is a 78-Test former star, was selected for the long England trip. Zaheer couldn't play his role when it was most required -- on August 20 at The Oval. And while here Zaheer has defended himself, one wonders on what grounds the PCB had named him the manager for the highly prestigious series in England.

Concerning Inzamam and company, the party 'under fire' in the story, the whole credit goes to the squad for playing the game with honesty and unity and thus proving themselves no wrongdoers. Inzamam, mainly, deserves the bulk of tribute. He declared after the hearing, "Now it has been proved we are not guilty of ball tampering. This is a victory for Pakistan". Yes, you are right Mr. Inzamam, indeed it's a pure moral victory for Pakistan and for you and your entire team as well.

Before wrapping up one would like to say a very few words for the betterment of the Pakistan team in future. Had the Pakistan squad left the field as soon as Hair made the ball-tampering charge and imposed a five-run penalty before the tea break at The Oval, the touring party's case would have been much stronger. Not coming out of the dressing room at the time of play gave the umpires a chance to use this action against Pakistan, a development that eventually resulted in a four-match ban on Inzamam.

The Pakistan captain has himself said that he will not appeal against the ban but no doubt the 366-ODI expert will be dearly missed at the ICC Trophy. It now all depends on Younis Khan and his troops to display their full potential in India, only to see their veteran captain making a comeback and proudly entering the Mumbai venue to play the grand finale.

The main characters of CLR James's 'Beyond the Boundary' a bestseller and the best cricket book ever written were Thomas Arnold, the 19th century headmaster of Rugby, Thomas Hughes, the author of Tom Brown's Schooldays, and WG Grace. James was dazzled by the grandiosity and elevated moral standards of Arnold's ideas, apparently happy to overlook the fact these ideas included contempt for the working class and a terror of universal suffrage. What mattered, in James's views, was that Arnold introduced compulsory games for his pupils -- "the only contribution of the English educational system of the 19th century to the general educational ideas of Western civilisation".

One went to the PCB to work, allured by the idea of Victorian public-school ideology. One was scathing about the quasi-feudal system that governed cricket until well into the turn of the century, with its distinction between professionalism and amateurism, and its determination to perpetuate the myth of an enduring and natural social hierarchy. One only found bizarre set of principles being instituted to run cricket in Pakistan. Arnold's theme, his contempt for the working class and a terror of universal suffrage was very much present. The mid-summer dreams were dashed as the prophecies about being part of the elite cricket management came tumbling down.

For a moment, one thought one had seen the worst. It wasn't. Being cursed and having fallen on the wayside, as a bystander, one saw cricket being destroyed. One felt disenchanted to see the ICC rebutting Pakistan's requests. It was really discomforting. The PCB were again confuted, clearly indicating how seriously they are being taken by world's only cricket governing body.

The pinch was felt badly as ICC's stance about Darrell Hair's appointment indicated wheels into wheels; how ineffective our cricket administrators are and how badly we need someone to stand up fighting Pakistan's case. It wasn't about absolving Inzamam-ul-Haq of Level 2 or Level 3 offences; it was about being heard in the forum.

It wasn't about the ICC showing its teeth, it was about how submissively our cricket is being run, and how poorly our cases are being presented -- it was indeed hurting. It also seemed that the Pakistan management had not been following the procedures. Waqar Younis claimed to have seen the ball in play at The Oval the one caused the furore, and was sure that it had not been tampered.

In what capacity had he gone to see the ball and under which law he was given access to the ball? At times, one is left baffled. And then was the news that Zaheer Abbas was not required to attend the ICC Disciplinary Committee hearing since he had already filed his report. One is shocked over such statements.

Zaheer was the manager and his presence was definitely required in England while Shaharyar Khan, the Chairman PCB according to the Code was not really needed to be with Inzamam. And one was flustered to read Syed Abbas Zaidi's statement in the press regarding Mushtaq Ahmad's appointment as an assistant coach of the Pakistan team. According to Mr Zaidi, Mushtaq has been active in county cricket, playing for Sussex and that his conduct has been immaculate.

Regrettably, Mr Zaidi forgot to go through Justice Qayyum's report. It was not about Mushtaq as a player but Mushtaq in a position of responsibility. To refresh Mr Zaidi's rusted knowledge one must quote a paragraph in the report: "This Commission therefore recommends that Mushtaq Ahmed be censured, kept under close watch and be not given any office of responsibility (selection or captaincy) in the team or on the board. Furthermore, he should be fined Rs 3 lac."

In the hands of age-old bureaucrats, to some seasoned well-honed spotless foreign office luminaries, cricket's future darkened at a breakneck speed. Vision of CLR James, that one had carried since an early age was not only dented but rested in absolute peace. It wasn't cricket governance it wasn't about a leaf of pastoral or a colonial legacy. It was run with ruffling inadequacy. Frailties were well-masked.

One really questioned if the recent Oval controversy rattled the PCB Chairman, so completely, that emotions prevailed over sense. For such were his demands on the PCB after the fourth Test against England at The Oval was forfeited for the first time in 129 years of cricket history. The ICC-BCCI stand-off had seen the India-South Africa Test (third of the series) at the Centurion stripped of its official status. It was a face-off of such magnitude that, had an understanding not been reached in time, it could well have split the world body. In fact, the home series against England was in jeopardy until the opening Test at Mohali. In Pakistan's case, no understanding was reached between a waffling chairman, an exasperating captain and a pig-headed umpire. Such was the irony that the match referee was never in the fray.

It was a complete chaos. Unlike Jagmohan Dalmiya in November 2001, Shaharyar Khan had seemingly given in, timorously requesting the ICC to establish a commission to independently examine the root cause of the controversy. Better said than done, he seemed unclear whether Darrell Hair followed the procedures and acted in accordance with the ICC Code of Conduct, including the guidelines on the natural justice as set out on page 55 of the Code, during that Oval match. Pakistan never made a written submission rather took the law in their hands and went to an extent of forfeiting the Test.

Here one must quote BCCI's stand against Mike Denness. They made sure that the ICC established a Referees Commission that examined and reported to the ICC Executive Board on whether the ICC referee followed the procedures. The matter was discussed in full in the ICC Executive Board meeting in Colombo in March 2002 in acquiescence with the BCCI. A Commission was appointed by the ICC in consultation with the BCCI consisting of persons of the highest reputation and at least two of them being reputed former cricketers.

Even better was the promise that the Commission was to advise on matters, a five-point agenda which needed to be cleared, as a part of the restructuring of the match referees panel. The powers of ICC's match referee were revised and curtailed.

It was initially thought that the controversies could be good for the game. Retrospectively, one must say the ICC remained frigid, not eager to bring radical changes in its laws, bylaws and code of conduct. One remembers there was a skirmish at Port Elizabeth between Mike Denness and Sachin Tendulkar, the former charging the latter of ball-tampering and once Virender Sehwag was suspended as a consequence, the third Test at Centurion Park was stripped of its official status.

Recently with Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove charging Pakistan bowlers of tampering at The Oval leading to forfeiture, it couldn't effect necessary, meaningful changes to the Code. One shouldn't fail to understand; it's no rocket science -- the ICC is not too hard-nosed but the cases are not being pleaded vigorously supported by logical deductions.

In Pakistan's case inept management has led to spoiling of things. One has to be really equipped to write sharply and revealingly about the mismanagement. As an outsider, the one who had once been in, right there in the centre of action, is irked to see people overlooking the real need for professionals taking up cricket management in Pakistan. Honest, we still have one of the best teams in the world and it seems they just can't win anything. It was only about poor administration, about administrators who were wearing pads and batting gloves but not holding the bats. Our attitude towards tradition and modernity has been callous; one of apathy and blasÈ.

Paradoxical as it may seem, one's own criticism of the potentates of the PCB -- who are usually denounced as fossilised non-reactionaries -- is that they aren't reactionary enough, there aren't capable enough, not conscientious, they are. Given their hostility to almost everybody outside their own magic circle -- one has expected them also to shun cricket development or pursue development only if it was not hurting their autocracy and power-play.

The Chairman of the PCB despite his best attempts to douse The Oval fire with his diplomatic remarks unknowingly ended up completely electrocuted. When one is in the fray, when one is in the seat of power one must be resourcefully equipped to tackle the problems, problems which can have repercussions of colossal magnitude. Had they done their home work, having slightest clue of the historical perspective, they would have pinned not only Darrell Hair but also the ICC; they couldn't. They reacted imprudently and ended in a very tight corner.

PCB's stance about standing behind their captain and their open condemnation of Hair left them sticky; they had actually jumped to conclusion too soon. It showed their myopia, their eccentricity and their obliviousness to the ICC Code of Conduct. Now someone shouldn't tell one that the PCB Chairman was not expected to know the ICC laws, bylaws and umpire's jurisdiction or the manager, who himself had been a cricketing ace not familiar with the norms of Test matches. It was shocking and left many morally dry. In the end, only manager was the sinner, swiftly removed by the chairman who had been party to the incident.

PCB had a princely Bhopal progeny, with a charismatic persona surrounded by damn near useless staffers and officials with no aptitude even for sport, let alone cricket. And their inaptitude was visible during The Oval fracas, some unwarrantedly coming in the crossfire, the others slipping through backdoors. These snotty managers were near unpromising and doomed to failure. They cowered behind huge ancient gates of the Brit Oval, so it seemed; Embarrassing, really. Retrospectively, in the post Oval wrangle one sees Shaharyar Khan's regime by most measures has come out as a failure. Clinging tenaciously to his highbrow foreign office profile, having hazarded a host of appointments, from an ambassador to foreign secretary, service in Rawanda to manager of the Pakistan team to PCB Chairman he has been the one with a gaudy line in patter and a sunny indifference to cricket's real needs.

Not to be indignant, one could opine that managing cricket from top it seemed that the thing was eternally beyond his means and his strongest ally invalided out of action once the real trouble arose at The Oval.

One is irked to see the PCB hierarchy holding seats of power, and from the decision making pedestal, the gibberish, the mumbo jumbo at The Oval, to untimely Sky Sports interviews, to shameful selection of players with the Pakistan dressing room giving a look of an arrival lounge in England, failed diplomacy to stuttering proclamations of having added spice to cricket management to worsening morale, bad handling of people like Shoaib Akhtar and Yasir Hameed, inability to save Shabbir Ahmad's career... well, you name it.

These were not misfortunes; on the contrary, they have been nothing but failures of a frankly unpleasant regime. When Shaharyar Khan first entered the office, people admired him from the perfect distance. He had people in his government brusque, boorish and overbearing. Even admirers who grew close enough came away disabused-No, indeed. Without Pakistan under Inzamam-ul-Haq winning back-to-back series in fact, Shahrayarís cricket government might have faded much earlier.

It seems they would fail in attempts to manufacture bats from English willow and inflatable pads -- honest to God they haven't done a thing right, and it should not be taken a less objective analysis of the last three years of cricket administration in the country, let alone some personal barbs or cutting remarks. It's exactly what we have come across. Cricket hasn't benefited, a bit.

With the Test series over in 1992, there remained three One-day Internationals. England won easily at Trent Bridge but Pakistan hit back at Lord's, where the match was spread over two days because of rain. Pakistan batted first, scoring 204. Miandad was cheered by the crowd for agreeing to bat on in poor light on Saturday evening. The next morning, Allan Lamb, batting for England again after missing the last three Tests, complained quietly to the umpires about the state of the ball.

The umpires met with the match referee, Deryck Murray, during the interval. Also present was Don Oslear, acting as support for umpires John Hampshire and Ken Palmer. Murray called for Intikhab Alam, showed him the ball and told him, according to Oslear, "Someone had altered the condition of the ball and it would have to be changed". Intikhab asked who was interfering with the ball. The umpires said they did not know. Then Intikhab not Graham Gooch selected a replacement ball from a box of worn spares. Intikhab did not accept the allegation but was happy to change the ball. He and Javed Miandad then asked to inspect the old ball, which Oslear, on his own initiative, had already locked away.

Miandad wanted the old ball taken out again and replaced after a single delivery; it was Murray and the umpires who insisted on doing the whole thing secretly. Oslear then informed Micky Stewart, who passed the news on to the England players. Afterwards, Alan Smith, Oslear, Murray and Lawrence drew up a press statement. Before it was released, they were joined by Intikhab, Murray, Khalid Mahmood and Miandad.

At their request, a phrase in the statement declaring that the 'the condition of the ball had been altered' was deleted. The controversy was dealt with brilliantly, no match was forfeited, no slur was cast on nationís integrity and solemnity and Pakistan won the series 2-1.

The problem was dealt mindfully, intelligently and diligently because people at play were capable, knew their subject and were completely dedicated to their jobs. One must believe, Pakistan's management in 1992 was much superior to the one at The Oval recently. The PCB then was being run by people well-versed with the intricacies of cricket; they were extremely proficient. The only solution to Pakistan's problem is to overhaul cricket's management in the country; cricket is being run flaccidly and by people who are better equipped to enjoy only post-retirement days, a game of golf here, some tonic there.

It is heartening to note that the PHF President Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali, using his sagacity and farsightedness, has made a laudable decision by not taking action against Mohammad Saqlain on disciplinary grounds. A lot of buzz was going on in hockey circles following Saqlain's interview to a foreign radio against manager/chief coach Shahnaz Sheikh.

From top to bottom, everyone attached with the PHF was harping on the tone that players should not issue statements and those found violating the order be penalised. While the Secretary PHF Akhtarul Islam had said that PHF might conduct an inquiry against captain Mohammad Saqlain and other senior players for their outburst against the chief coach, Khalid Mahmood, chairman of the national selection committee had also reacted to Saqlain's statement and hinted at the disciplinary action against the skipper.

With the farsighted and sagacious decision of Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali to forgive Saqlain, the entire buzz has come to an end which is a good omen for hockey in the country. For players and the game go together and as such they can voice their concerns over what they feel and see both on-and-off the field.

However, what makes the hockey lovers worry is the statement of Mr Jamali in which he has delineated the reasons behind the Pakistan's debacle in the World Cup in Germany and has said that Shahnaz Sheikh will be retained as coach till the Asian Games in Qatar.

Jamali was quoted to have said "the feedback I have received from the team management supports the claim that grouping in the players badly jeopardised the prospects of the team in the World Cup." The PHF chief further said that the players were divided in groups and they did not have the required coordination with the team management.

Now the question is how the PHF can instill harmony in the 'divided outfit' with the same coach continuing his responsibilities and same players making the national team. Though it is said that Saqlain has tendered his apology to coach Shahnaz Sheikh, the differences between the coach and a group of Saqlain-led players have reached a level which can never be normalised and either of the two will have to be part ways with the team or the net result is that Pakistan will face some more debacles on the hockey front.

What happened at the World Cup and after that will continue to haunt Shahnaz and the concerned group of players and will affect their inter-action at the unconscious level.

Justice demands that coach, manager and captain all three should have resigned after what happened at World Cup. Hasan Sardar was sagacious enough by tendering his resignation and Shahnaz Sheikh and Mohammad Saqlain should also have followed the heed because it's the trio of coach, manager and coach which make or break the team.

Pakistan finished a disappointing sixth in the 12-nation competition after finishing fourth in Pool A with just a solitary win, two defeats and two draws. And now that the factors behind the debacle have come to the fore, the entire responsible individuals should be taken to task.

There is no denying the fact that harmony between players, the coach and team management is a must for making a winning combination.

Shahnaz Sheikh is a former hockey great and an expert on the game, but coaching seems to be beyond his grasp otherwise he would have exhibited his talent in handling the break-away element in the team.

Hockey is our national sports and the laurels won by hockey players far exceed the number of successes in other sports. However, the irony with hockey is that players are often sacrificed at the altar of the so-called code of conduct etc while the officials go scot-free.

It may be mentioned here that in past too, mishandling of hockey affairs by the top brass had resulted in a 'historical' revolt against the hockey regime which deprived the team of best players and also weakened the foundation of the hockey. The impact of that revolt can still be felt at the national level. Players and coach go together, if the two are at logger heads, how the nation can expect marvelous results.

Pakistan players are getting fewer facilities as compared to what their counterparts get in oteh countries. Pakistan is lagging well behind in modern hockey concept as compared to countries like Germany, Australia and Spain. During the World Cup, the German team had a ten member supporting staff and they are getting specialised training in all areas of the game. Compared to that Pakistan players were not even on talking terms with their coach, and the net result was a total failure in the WC.

It was a wrong decision to appoint Shahnaz Sheikh as chief coach of the team after taking over from deposed Asif Bajwa just six weeks from the World Cup. Shahnaz did not have a magic stick to turn the mediocre side into a winning combination in just six weeks, but then he should have at least made the team a unit to exhibit a better talent in Germany.

He has bitterly failed in doing that and his continuation as coach can make things worse for the national team. Saqlain was not alone in his protest and he had threatened en bloc resignation of the team, which indicates that majority of the team members were not in harmony with him, so how can one expect a better understanding between coach Shahnaz and the team players.

Both the appointment of Saqlain as captain and Shahnaz as chief coach has stirred quite an opposition in sports circles as the track records of the two suggest that the duo are not fit for what was assigned to them. Shahnaz was a great player of his time and also an expert on hockey affairs, but he is a misfit as coach of the team, because the coach should be person who can wipe out differences from the side rather than creating rips within the team rather than inculcating the same.

As far as Saqlain is concerned, he was dropped twice on the eve of the 2000 and 2004 Olympic Games and had a three-match suspension by the International Hockey Federation (FIH) for hitting an Australian player in an international tournament last year. He did not play the first three-matches of the July six-nation Champions Trophy but played later and the Pakistan finished fifth. Under Saqlain's captaincy Pakistan failed to win any major single tournament and in Germany, we failed miserably and finished sixth in the 12-nation World Cup.

It is a fact that Pakistan had no chance to be on the Word Cup medals table as ours was a mediocre side, except two or three players. So the humiliation of being relegated from the fifth to sixth place in the World Cup was not surprising to impartial observers of the game. But the PHF bosses cannot absolve themselves of their responsibility of team's abject failure under their appointed captain Saqlain.

The first phase of the 10-day national training camp for the build-up of the team for the Asian Games would start from October 10 at Islamabad followed by the second phase from October 31 at Karachi. The PHF will invite 33 probables for attending the camp and no decision has yet been taken to retain Saqlain as captain which indicates that Saqlain will not be made captain, but the decision to retain Shahnaz as coach is not in the interest of the our national sport either.