|
|
|
|
 |
 |
   |
cricket A new
age of cricket is here. It will be all about speed; all about power; and
would be totally unstoppable. And when you go onto the field, you've got to
have just one attitude: "Hit out or Get out". The
rationale of conducting the The
Twenty20 World Cup is being played this month, and every cricket fan is sure
that this cup will also go into the hands of the Aussies; then what is the
use of holding such a big tournament by inviting all the teams from the
cricketing world. From the commercial point of view, it has every reason to
be conducted. From the cricketing point of view, it will be a one-sided
competition, where the Aussies will again prove their mighty status. Ganguly
joins elite club of 11,000 runs makers In the
third One-day International at Edgbaston in Birmingham on Monday, India lost
the match by 42 runs, but opener Sourav Ganguly scored 72 runs and joined the
elite club of batsmen with 11,000 ODI runs. cricket Is the
ICL illegal? One may well think about ways in which cricket will be harmed or
benefited from this new insurrection, significantly in Pakistan. Enough
emotive statements have been given on the subject. Most one has read owe more
to the heart than to the head: to anger than to reason. Very recently
Pakistan Cricket Board's Chief Operating Officer stated that the players
defecting to the Indian Cricket League could face a ban. Prospects
of ICL for Pakistan and the Sub-continent Right now, all eyes are set on the new development rather a new addition to the existing forms of cricket, i.e. the Indian Cricket League (ICL) that has promoted mixed reactions from cricket circles, who are weighing both the pros and cons of it. While some call it as no comparison for the today's available versions of the game, other see it another Garry Sobers Cricket Series in the making. Pakistan
clinched first Asia Cup title in 1982 in style The
inaugural hockey Asia Cup was to be held in Lahore originally but was later
shifted to Karachi because of wet weather in Lahore. The Chinese team had in
fact reached Lahore and had to fly back to Karachi.
A new
age of cricket is here. It will be all about speed; all about power; and
would be totally unstoppable. And when you go onto the field, you've got to
have just one attitude: "Hit out or Get out". The
inaugural edition of the Twenty20 World Cup is just around the corner (from
11th Many
cricketing pundits and gurus had feared that this upcoming form of the game
was just an 'entertainment' and nothing else. They
thought that it would affect the Test matches and One-day Internationals (ODIs).
The reason: Because T20 matches are crowd-pullers, short in duration and full
of excitement and thrill. But as
the first T20 World Cup is just nine days away, things don't look the same.
This short-form of the game has taken the world by storm. And its fame has
risen so much that the ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed said that "if
cricket is selected for the Olympic Games in future, T20 format will be
selected to represent the game". Coming
towards the participating teams, every outfit is well prepared and geared up
for the first edition of the tournament and want their hands on the winning
trophy. But it wouldn't be that easy as most of the teams stand a chance of
winning the Cup. The
problem that has arisen is with the Asian teams. They haven't played that
many T20 games in their history. Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka have played
tons and tons of ODIs and are far ahead in numbers if compared to other teams
but their T20 count is very short. Sri
Lanka, the top limited-overs team in Asia who were World Cup finalists in
April, have played just three T20 internationals so far. Pakistan has played
two and India and Bangladesh, who have played quite a handful of ODIs now,
one each. And
these teams haven't had much of T20 games on their domestic circuit as well.
Pakistan has hosted a few tournaments while their counterparts have just
started to promote it at local level. Asia has
organised more one-dayers than any other region, but India, Pakistan and Sri
Lanka have been so reluctant to embrace Twenty20 cricket that they have yet
to host an international match. Meanwhile,
cricket's shortest version has become an instant hit in England and South
Africa. They regularly host these types of tournaments. Domestic T20 cricket
was introduced in England in 2003 to boost dwindling viewership. The main
reason Asian countries haven't promoted the T20 format, if talking about
viewership, is that they already have huge crowd turn-outs even if they are
hosting Tests or ODIs. But that
shouldn't worry them much as they have enough firepower in their line-ups to
rattle their oppositions. Team
Pakistan, who had an embarrassing World Cup campaign in the West Indies, is
on a roll now. With a new captain (who doesn't have experience of skippering
the side in a major tournament), a new coach and a new look team; they are
the ones to watch out. Boosted
by the return of pacers Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif (both of whom missed
the World Cup due to injuries) for such a major tournament, the team doesn't
lack match-winning instincts in its bowling department. Rao Iftikhar Anjum
and Umar Gul can provide much needed assistance if the front-line pacers
suffer any injuries. The all-rounders
are present in numbers in the team with skipper Shoaib Malik, Karachi
youngster Fawad Alam, Mohammad Hafeez and seasoned campaigner Shahid Afridi.
And with Afridi among the ranks, expect some fire crackers when he goes to
bat. Batsmen
aren't short of class either. Younis Khan, the most experienced batsman in
the line-up after the retirement of Inzamam-ul-Haq from limited-over games,
will lead the pack which will miss the services of Mohammad Yousuf, who has
opted to play for the Indian Cricket League (ICL), after being left out of
the national T20 squad. Imran
Nazir, after his thunderous hundred in the World Cup, will open the innings
for Pakistan and a good start to the innings will be expected of him every
time he opens the innings. Vice-captain Salman Butt, who was in superb form
during the practice T20 matches here in Karachi before the team's departure,
will accompany him. Abdul
Rehman is in the squad as a spinner as is Misbah-ul-Haq, whose selection has
been criticised a lot. Both of them are unlikely to get any chance. Kamran
Akmal is in the frame again and if he gets back his form that made him one of
the top wicket-keeper/batsmen, Pakistan surely have a chance to be on the
top. Neighbours
India, meanwhile, have a slim chance of succeeding in the tournament. They
don't have world-class batsmen Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and regular
captain Rahul Dravid in their line-up. Inexperienced
Mahendra Singh Dhoni (the wicket-keeper) has been named as the captain.
Though Dhoni will be accompanied by the likes of hard-hitting batsmen such as
Yuvraj Singh and out-of-form Virender Sehwag, the rest of the line-up lack
international exposure, experience. Irfan Pathan, after being left out for
the tour of England, makes a return. World
Champions Australia would seek to win three in a row (of major cricketing
trophies) after winning the International Cricket Council (ICC) Champions
Trophy last year and their third consecutive World Cup this April. Though
skipper Ricky Ponting doesn't like the idea of playing that many T20 games
and considers this form as the game as just 'mere fun', he is obviously
serious about winning the upcoming tournament. Australia
are the only team entering the tournament with a full-strength squad. Adam
Gilchrist will open the innings and if he plays like he did in the World Cup
final, it would be curtains for their opponents. Mathew
Hayden, the World Cup's topscorer, is back to his best as is pacer Brett Lee,
who missed Australia's triumph over Sri Lanka in the West Indies due to an
injury. Ben Hilfenhaus has been given the chance to represent Australia after
star pacer Shaun Tait was ruled out due to an injury. England,
according to me, can pull out a few surprises if they play to their
credentials. They have been performing well in the limited-overs games (had a
3-1 lead against Indian in the seven-match series before they play again
today). Paul
Collingwood has brought a bit of stability to the team and with the likes of
Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen in the squad, which has been selected
totally on domestic T20 competition performances, England, actually, does
stand a chance. Upcoming youngsters such a Ravi Bopara and Stuart Broad are
there to provide a bit of spark which is needed in T20 cricket. Besides
that, World Cup finalists Sri Lanka are the most threatening teams in any
form of the game. Though Muttiah Muralitharan has been ruled out of the
tournament, their squad still has the experience and talent to go all the
way. Hosts
South Africa doesn't seem the likely candidate to succeed. They haven't
selected world-class all-rounder Jacques Kallis. Though home-crowd advantage
would play a role, that isn't everything a team needs to win. The
Kiwis have been knocking on the door of big tournament success forever and
this wouldn't be an easy assignment for them to break the jinx. Spinner
Daniel Vettori will lead the team which doesn't have Stephen Fleming, who is
currently liked with the ICL, in the ranks. Other
participating teams in the tournament; the West Indies, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe,
Kenya and Scotland, have been trying to push a level further but still remain
a class behind when it comes to international level. Though
the Windies can spring a few surprises, as they did when they won the ICC
Champions Trophy in England beating the hosts, their chances in the T20 World
Cup don't look bright. Bangladesh,
though, have given a warning not to underestimate them. Their skipper,
Mohammad Ashraful, has said his team was underestimated in the World Cup too
when they beat South Africa and India. And he added that the Bengal Tigers
are ready to make an impression again. Only
time will tell who wins the T20 World Cup, but whoever does, will create a
legacy for others to follow in the future. The writer is a staff member at 'The News' Karachi
shehnu@gmail.com
The
Twenty20 World Cup is being played this month, and every cricket fan is sure
that this cup will also go into the hands of the Aussies; then what is the
use of holding such a big tournament by inviting all the teams from the
cricketing world. From the commercial point of view, it has every reason to
be conducted. From the cricketing point of view, it will be a one-sided
competition, where the Aussies will again prove their mighty status. Years
back in the late eighties and early nineties, when the one-day version of the
sport of cricket was getting popularity with the introduction of colour
sports kits, white cricket ball and black screen all under the artificial
floodlight of electric bulbs, the cricket fans enjoyed thrilling cricket,
marked by well-planned innings and an enthusiasm that there is no chance of a
drawn game; playing good means winning the game. The game
became a big crowd-puller, fascinating the stars and political leaders alike,
and Sharjah became the principal battlefield of cricket. Meanwhile, there
were protests from certain cricket professionals against this "commercialisation"
ofcricket at the cost of Test cricket. They believed that Test cricket was
the original version of the game that allowed batsmen and bowlers to show up
their cricketing talent, and the one-day version was a hurriedly-played game
emptied of a strategy to win the game. But
these solemn protests were swayed by a flood of one-day tournaments heavily
sponsored by multi-national companies, and one-day cricket established its
popularity, which it could not get despite being adopted for playing the
world cup tournaments. It was a shorter form of cricket but its inventors had
not the least idea that this shorter form of cricket will be followed by the
shortest form of cricket only within two decades: it is Twenty 20cricket
which has existed and been established as regular cricket -- a reality
undeniably proved by the establishment of Twenty20 World Cup this month in
South Africa. Much ink
has been sprinkled on the pros and cons of the Twenty20 version of cricket,
and in the final analysis, it is safe to say that this shortest form of
cricket will continue side by side with the one-day and Test versions. But
the point that has spurred me to write this piece of opinion is the wisdom
behind holding this, or any other, cricket tournament to be participated by
the Australian cricket team. The
Aussies have a marvellous and matchless record of winning cricket matches,
both one-day and Tests. They have been reigning the world of cricket for more
than a decade by staying as the world champions for at least 12 years (by
winning the World Cup 2007, their title as world champions spans over the
period of 12 years, at least, since 1999 to 2011. Undisputedly,
they are matchless, unconquerable and almost faultless; the qualities they
most obviously demonstrated during the Caribbean World Cup event this year.
On the one hand, they enjoyed thrashing the real minnows like Netherlands and
Scotland by heaping the totals of 358-5 and 334-6, respectively. On the other
hand, the greater their opponents were, the tougher their cricket was; they
reduced their great rivals, like South Africa, New Zealand and Sri Lanka, to
quasi-minnows. Resultantly,
all their matches were, in fact, one-sided games. Of the nine ICC cricket
world cup tournaments, four fell into the lap of Aussies, two into the
Windies and one each into those of India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. A very
simplified analysis is sufficient to show how magnifcent the Australians are.
The World Cup victories of India and Pakistan were a chance occurrence;
neither of the team could win all the matches during the tournament. The
invincibility of West Indies during the first two competitions comprised
victories in just five matches each time. The Sri Lankan invincibility was
dented by the two matches that fell into their lap without playing a single
ball; Australia and West Indies preferred to lose two points each to Sri
Lanka by refusing to play in Colombo on security grounds. No
doubt, the Aussies were not unconquerable during the 1987 and 1999 victories,
they excelled in the next two mega events of 2003 and 2007 by staying
unconquerable. It owes to the awesome performance of the world champions that
their sparse defeats during the last 10 years have become historical games,
letting their rival team to boast of defeating such a great team like
Australia; their defeat in the 2005 Ashes series after 18 years, Sri Lanka's
victory in the first final of the triangular series in January 2006,
Bangladesh's victory in Cardiff, South Africa's successful chase of the
biggest total of 433 in Johannesburg, England's victory in the recent
triangular series followed by a 3-0 defeat in the Chappell-Hadlee one-day
series in New Zealand are the few examples. It was
these recent back-to-back defeats of the Aussies -- Australia consecutively
lost five one-dayers against England and New Zealand before the start of this
World Cup game -- that shook this writer's confidence in the Ponting Eleven,
so as to conclude that the Caribbean mega event must be an open competition
with South Africa, England and New Zealand as strong teams. But the
competition, ironically, proved the dullest and most one-side World Cup
tournament in the history of cricket. In view of such an enviable record, the
Aussies can be rightfully predicted to be the champions of this World Cup
tournament also. It is a matter of real disgrace for all the cricketing
nations that they have been dwarfed by the giant Aussies and rendered too
impotent to record an upset in any of the international tournaments; the last
two World Cup tournaments are top examples of it. It has
since long been astounding me that none of the former world champions have
ever felt an insult in being beaten so badly by the Aussies; shame on the
teams of South Africa, England, India, West Indies, Sri Lanka and Pakistan
for being thrashed so repeatedly, so badly. They
must prefer playing cricket by excluding the Aussies, thus implicitly
admitting that they are super-humans and, therefore, undefeatable. In our
childhood, when we set a cricket match with a rival team, a condition was put
in place that a certain player, who was feared to be a big player, will not
be included in the team. Should the cricketing world not register a complaint
with the ICC against the Aussies that the world champions are super-human
cricketers and must not be invited to play any tournament? It seems to be the
only means of keeping a tournament open to all participating teams. About his ability to play on the off-side Rahul Dravid once said "First there is God, then there is Ganguly". But Ganguly is suspect against quality fast bowling, especially against the rising deliveries By Khurram Mahmood In the
third One-day International at Edgbaston in Birmingham on Monday, India lost
the match by 42 runs, but opener Sourav Ganguly scored 72 runs and joined the
elite club of batsmen with 11,000 ODI runs. Ganguly
(11,020) becomes only the fourth player to have scored 11,000 ODI runs after Ganguly,
35, reached the landmark in his 298th one-dayer. He has hit 22 centuries
besides 69 half-centuries and enjoys an average of 41.55. Ganguly's form has
been instrumental in several Indian victories and defeats. His 18 out of 22
centuries have resulted in Indian wins. He is an
attacking left-handed stroke player, strong on the off-side and a competent
right-arm medium-pace bowler. His main skill is to play shots specially on
the off side because there are very few players who can hit the ball in that
area as easily as he does. About
his ability to play on the off-side Rahul Dravid once said "First there
is God, then there is Ganguly". But Ganguly is suspect against quality
fast bowling, especially against the rising deliveries. Sourav
Ganguly justifies his selection considering the number of winning knocks he
has played for India. His batting is the perfect blend of elegance and power.
He has all the traditional style that goes with left handed batsmanship. He
is also a superb/perfect timer of the ball. The manner in which he steps out
and pounces on the ball is something to be enjoyed on the spot. Ganguly
regularly opens the innings with Sachin Tendulkar in one-day cricket, a
format in which his weakness against short-pitched bowling is not exposed. He
and Tendulkar have forged what is the most productive opening partnership in
the history of the game. The
arrival of Virender Sehwag in the Indian squad in April 1999 overshadowed
Ganguly, even Tendulkar with his display of smacking hits as an opener, saw
the decline in Ganguly's batting form and Sehwag cemented his spot as India's
one-day opener. But Ganguly never left hope and performed in domestic cricket
to make comback before the last World Cup and with his inconsistent
performance kept Sehwag out of the team on the recent England tour. The
left-hander has shown himself capable of taking any attack apart, in spite of
India's lack of success in the finals. His 183 off 158 balls against Sri
Lanka at Taunton during the 1999 World Cup was an unforgettable performance,
the highest total for India in One-day Internationals so far. Sourav
Chandidas Ganguly was born on July 8, 1972 at Calcutta (now known as Kolkata).
He made his One-day International debut against West Indies in the annual
triangular world series in Australia in 1991-92 at Brisbane. On his debut he
scored just three runs. Ganguly
was also one of the most aggressive captains India has ever had and has
emerged as one of the key components of the Indian team. Ganguly has given
the Indian team that confidence and ability to target teams or individuals at
key times. When
Sourav Ganguly took over the reins of the Indian team in 2000, he proved to
be an assertive and uncompromising skipper. The aggressive and no-nonsense
attitude of the captain encouraged a young Indian team to believe in
themselves and deliver the goods. He went to become India's most successful
captain with India winning a number of Test matches abroad. He also led the
Indian side in the World Cup 2003 final. Ganguly's
victory in Pakistan in 2005 -- India's first away from home in 11 years --
made him India's most successful Test captain ever. Ganguly was one of the
most aggressive captains India has ever had and has emerged as one the key
components of the Indian team. Ganguly has given the Indian team that
confidence and ability to target teams or individuals at key times. He also
led India to home victories against Australia and England. SOURAV
GANGULY: ONE-DAY INTERNATIONAL CAREER Mat
Runs
HS
BatAv
100
50
W
BB
BowlAv
5w
Ct Overall
298
11011
183
41.55
22
69
97
5/16
37.64
2
100 For Asia
XI
3
142
88
47.33
0
1
0
–
–
0
1 For
India
295
10869
183
41.48
22
68
97
5/16
37.50
2
99 v Africa
XI
2
120
88
60.00
0
1
0
–
–
0
1 v
Australia
30
647
100
22.31
1
4
7
3/41
46.42
0
12 v
Bangladesh
10
459
135*
57.37
1
4
0
–
–
0
2 v
Bermuda
1
89
89
89.00
0
1
–
–
–
–
0 v
England
22
839
117*
39.95
1
5
10
3/27
36.90
0
4 v ICC
World XI 1
22
22
22.00
0
0
–
–
–
–
0 v
Ireland
1
73
73*
–
0
1
0
–
–
0
1 v Kenya
11
588
111
73.50
3
2
0
–
–
0
4 v
Namibia
1
112
112*
–
1
0
–
–
–
–
0 v
Netherlands
1
8
8
8.00
0
0
0
–
–
0
0 v New
Zealand
32
1079
153*
35.96
3
6
9
3/32
39.11
0
11 v
Pakistan
49
1563
141
36.34
2
9
28
5/16
27.78
1
12 v South
Africa
29
1313
141*
50.50
3
8
6
2/24
31.66
0
7 v Sri
Lanka
44
1534
183
40.36
4
9
13
4/21
44.15
0
19 v U.A.E.
1
56
56
56.00
0
1
–
–
–
–
0 v West
Indies
27
1142
98
47.58
0
11
5
3/37
51.60
0
12 v
Zimbabwe
36
1367
144
42.71
3
7
19
5/34
26.31
1
15 Home 69
2894
153*
46.67
4
23
28
5/34
31.92
1
22 Away 96
3332
135*
37.02
6
21
20
3/22
55.75
0
32 Neutral
133
4785
183
42.34
12
25
49
5/16
33.53
1
46 Note:
All statistics are updated to August 30, when the 4th ODI between England and
India was played at Manchester cricket The Indian Cricket League: The establishment reaction As a result of the PCB's obstinacy, the players, the third estate of cricket, now have a chance to demand their own Magna Carta By Dr Nauman Niaz Is the
ICL illegal? One may well think about ways in which cricket will be harmed or
benefited from this new insurrection, significantly in Pakistan. Enough
emotive statements have been given on the subject. Most one has read owe more
to the heart than to the head: to anger than to reason. Very recently
Pakistan Cricket Board's Chief Operating Officer stated that the players
defecting to the Indian Cricket League could face a ban. Within
hours, there was a rebuttal when the Chairman of the PCB informed the media
that the board had not decided about their future course of action. The COO
being confuted, which isn't a new happening, the Indian High Court ended
doubts regarding the validity of the league. In an
unprecedented decision they invalidated the BCCI's assertions about ICL being
unlawful, further mentioning that the players now associated with it and
previously working with the cricket board in India couldn't be penalised for
working for the league. They
also went onto to the extent of permitting ICL to use the Indian Flag as
their colour, and that they couldn't be restrained from using the stadiums
and grounds. The high court verdict has now put the ICL on a strong-footing.
And we may well see a change in the heart at the PCB to boot. Why should
Pakistan ban players defecting to the ICL? Wasn't
the statement issued by Mr Naghmi too premature and rather out of step since
Dr Nasim Ashraf was taking his time, trying to keep the proposal under
consideration? The
future organisation of Pakistan cricket does involve many uncertainties. One
believes that cricket will emerge infinitely poorer in the next few years, as
a result of the shake-up that has taken place, the staff adding to Dr Nasim's
problems. His team hasn't been able to deliver as he must have imagined while
picking people for the prized jobs. Whatever
the negotiated settlement, the entrenched elite of the PCB who are running
the game with such absolute power, so blandly may well be in serious trouble
because of retractions of decisions and defections. The
lessons being learnt should provide the education for a more dynamic
administration; it doesn't seem happening. As a result of the PCB's
obstinacy, the players, the third estate of cricket, now have a chance to
demand their own Magna Carta. In the months to come, the significance of
these defections to the Indian League may well be that it allows the
cricketers to demand their basic rights which have been denied in Ad Hocism
or dictatorship, admittedly benevolent ones, which have been treating them as
power-abusing labourers. The PCB
seemingly overlooked Inzamam-ul-Haq to curtail player-power, but insensate
dropping of a masterly Yousuf has left the cricket board wounded. In future,
the players will take their share of power, and as in most other major
sports, especially the professional ones, they will be a significant force in
cricket government. The administration will revert to their role as public
servants. At present, the PCB looks confused about their objectives. In
general, Dr Nasim's team at the cricket board seems lacking the
cricket-management's nous, mature leadership and organisation. Their views
tend to be narrowly parochial, and in global terms, their relationships are
diversive rather than unified. In time, even if they survive, they don't seem
becoming aware of their managerial responsibilities. Dr Nasim
must wonder he may well need sports management experts, conservative radicals
or radical conservatives to govern cricket in the country. The PCB Chairman,
who to begin with had a vision to bring up cricket, seems trumped from
within. There is
a certain irony in regarding the Indian Cricket League or ICL, as the
champions of egalitarian revolution. Although they would not seem themselves
in this role, they have effectively provided the economic incentive and the
co-operative impetus to defy the status quo, this fulfilling the first
requirement of revolution. Since
long, cricket has been trying to come to terms with a richer, less structured
consumer society where cash has replaced class as a measure of social
standing. Despite loads of money earned by the cricketers still it is much
less than what other sports such as football, boxing, golf and even tennis
provide. Largely it has failed to move with the times, preferring to
perpetuate the manner and attitudes of the 1990s, when players and captains
alike came from pits and not the public schools as Mian Mohammad Saeed and AH
Kardar in the 1950s and Imran Khan in the 1980s. In the
1950s and even 1960s, in Pakistan, it was a time when a small entrenched
board, dominated by the ruling elite, decided team composition, according to
a formula which left the players in no doubt but that they were to consider
themselves as privileged representatives, rather than paid performers. It is
regrettable that such a step taken by Yousuf was necessary, but this has been
largely the fault of the reactionaries, some of whom could sacrifice the
prospects and balance of the team and its top players rather than to cede any
vestige of the power that they appear to have used recently.
This
myopia is resulting in attitudes based on doubtful principles. People, who
are knowledgeable and concerned, fail to understand that they are holding up
an umbrella while the ground around them is subsiding. To see Inzamam, Yousuf,
Razzaq and Imran Farhat defecting to the ICL, more out of disillusionment
than greed, this terrible outcome, which the cricket establishment is holding
up as a premonition of ultimate disaster, is neither a remote possibility,
nor a realistic solution. Although
I have many and varied opinions about the newly turned corporate PCB, I try
to avoid any pretentious analysis of its character. The impact of conflicting
statements and almost habituated reversal of decisions tend to obscure the
real issues. Large and disillusioning though the impact of recent defections
to the ICL on country's cricket, it must be seen that the PCB has acted more
as an initiator than as a catalyst. It seems
that the defections are a result, and not a cause of cricket's constitutional
mess. One tends to avoid prejudice, personal opinion and politics, although
this is difficult when discussing the shifting power base of the Pakistan
game. As I see it, there is little to be gained in worrying about what might
have been, so I concentrate on the situation as it exists. The day
hasn't come, though it is drawing near. With Younis Khan saying that he may
well decide to prefer the ICL (at some appropriate time) will see Pakistan
cricket plunging into disintegration. No more argument, no more first-person
recollections. The chronicle is on the brink of completion. Country's team
seems heading towards complete erosion. Even
though there have been tougher issues in Pakistan's cricket history, the
recent defections to an Indian league with more in line incorporates the wild
shoot-out between experienced cricketers and the head-strong, narrow-eyed
directors, functioning and non-functioning (the Chairman must be worried
about his working-team at the PCB); they have acted like gun-slingers. The
player-administration face-off has sparked a hidden cloak-and-dagger activity
in the cloisters of cricketing decisions and hard-nosed administration. With
the unrepentant and emotionally repressed selectors bestriding the tumult,
tempers rocketed. Cricket
critiques were shaken by what is going on regarding the defections to the ICL.
Relations between the senior cricketers barring Shahid Afridi and the PCB
management have severely been damaged. It hasn't hurt only the careers of
people like Razzaq and possibly Yousuf (though a compromise is likely on
cards) but also fairly exposed the uncertain nature of the people at Lahore,
typifying their helplessness. Dr Nasim
Ashraf must now be feeling the drag added to his over-burdened shoulders by
the team he picked to implement his policies. This player-power has been
thrust upon people like Yousuf and even Razzaq. This eruption wasn't
desirable or necessary. And this was completely avoidable; it has been about
a huge communication gap between the players and the working team of the PCB.
One may
well contemplate particularly Yousuf has been a victim of insensate selection
decision. One is surprised since the supercilious, aloof, hard-nosed,
tight-mouthed, ruthless, austere, intelligent and capable AH Kardar could
come down to the level of players, bringing them on the table, pepping them
up and also leaving them fully exposed if the situation warranted. He read
the issues and executed decisions keeping in view the global and local
demands. Nevertheless, presently there is no compassion, no receptivity and
no Kardar. One
wonders why the Chief Operating Officer couldn't mediate between the players
and the PCB. He is highly paid (Rs 450,000 per month), has a Berkeley
background and has been a civil servant. Mediation must be alien -- the COO
on a telephonic interview in an early morning programme on Pakistan
Television (PTV) claimed publicly that the PCB had contacted Mohammad Yousuf
in Dir where he had gone with a like-minded religious group. Yousuf
informed the management that he had decided to defect to the ICL. Accepted
and no further negotiations, it seemed from the statement of Mr Naghmi. In
the midst of a crisis like situation, Mr Naghmi along with Mudassar Nazar
(Director NCA) and Ali Zia (GM NCA) left for Australia in connection of
establishing a biomechanics department at the NCA in Lahore. It seems a
far-fetched option. By its
divisive nature, and because of the vast mass of conflicting views and claims
springing from the defected players and board's stance, no earlier policy
remotely compares with it. At present, each of the major players defecting to
the ICL is distinctly either heroes or villain. Dropping star players has
polarised the two tools of the cricket board (cricketers and the management),
though not quite in total terms, since there are people who accept it and
others who deplore it. The only
solution to the problem is to develop or hire Sports Management experts.
Since, it's hard to find qualified people whosoever comes in power tries to
pick like-minded people. Here we see people from different backgrounds coming
in and not really having plans and ability to tackle sports-related issues.
Given that most of the people working at the PCB don't have cricket's
knowledge-base or cricketing profiles, the players tend to challenge their
authority. Once
such defiance goes off, we see cricketers responding out of disenchantment.
The PCB working-staff instead of giving scientific solutions has adopted
reactionary approaches. We need a preventive approach. The conflict between
players and the management has seen people standing up to authority. It's
time that the PCB management takes a practical view. It is pointless to
condemn what has happened, without considering the creeping decay which is
apparent seeing top stars being neglected. After 1999, since ad hocism took
preference over the democratic set-ups in cricket in Pakistan, PCB behaved as
a monarch and players as power-sharers, and press/media in their
untraditional role, as arbiters of public opinion. The
system has been an anachronism for the past nine years and is now seemingly
on the brink of being doomed. Time has come that a change is needed in the
balance of power, the constitution of domestic and international cricket
should become democratic. The PCB
chairmen (whosoever is in the seat of power in the Ad hoc set-ups) should
inculcate in their working-staff, the directors and others to lose their
influence as monarchs, the board should cede its absolute governing power,
and players should not demand their share in the management. The
sponsors should become the first estate, who, through the power of their
bank-accounts, should demand value for their investments. If it doesn't
happen, cricket and its values will collapse. What we know, supported by
Indian High Court's decision that ICL hasn't really been a villain. PCB, well
they have been. Prospects of ICL for Pakistan and the Sub-continent In a way the ICL is nothing more than a product of the globalisation of cricket, where it has not attracted new venues, but has also lured huge investments and sponsors By Gul Nasreen Right
now, all eyes are set on the new development rather a new addition to the
existing forms of cricket, i.e. the Indian Cricket League (ICL) that has
promoted mixed reactions from cricket circles, who are weighing both the pros
and cons of it. While some call it as no comparison for the today's available
versions of the game, other see it another Garry Sobers Cricket Series in the
making. Its
supporters say that the International Cricket Council and its member boards
need to take the ICL seriously. Because it has the potential like the Kerry
Packer series to snowball into something big, but its detractors think
otherwise. Whatever
may be the future outcome of ICL for players and the game at large, it has
definitely had its impact felt in Pakistan as it has lured three topmost
players of our national team, rather the crux of the available experience and
talent in Pakistan. Sense of insecurity and uncertainty has gripped the
cricket board after the signing of some of the leading players joining the
ICL. So far
legends like Inzamam-ul-Haq, Mohammad Yousuf, all-rounder Abdul Razzaq and
young talent Imran Farhat have signed up to play in the breakaway contest in
its initial season which is set for October this year, but in the months
ahead, it can lure more 'angry' or 'victimised' players from Pakistan. In
fact, it has provided an alternate platform to the 'aggrieved' ones in
Pakistan cricket. In the past we have seen so many players, whose talent was
nipped in the bud; were not allowed to shine into real gems due to the
personal whims and caprices of those at the helm of affairs in cricket.
Players power also played havoc with the careers of many a young talent. But it
will not be the case now, as these thrown out individuals will be able to opt
for the ICL offers. It will definitely bring an end to the existing
uncertainty, sense of insecurity and lack of financial security among
players. Every player has the right to look to his future. In Pakistan there
is no financial security for retirement days for the players. It may
be mentioned here that players in both India and Pakistan have been
complaining of excessive cricket and not enough wages. That's why the
individual players welcome the formation of
ICL for better prospects. However, the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB)
and the Board for Control of Cricket in India (BCCI) have certainly been
jolted by the appearance of a 'parallel' cricket. The
chiefs of the two boards have started issuing statements aimed at keeping the
players at bay from the ICL. The irony is that most of the cricket boards of
the world as also the cricket ruling body the ICC have kept mum over the
issue and have been following a 'Wait and See' policy. However,
the cricket boards of the two arch rival nations of the Sub-continent -- the
PCB and BCCI -- have started making a hue and cry over the ICL affairs and
have been vehemently criticising the new emergence on cricket horizon. They
have gone to extent of calling it as 'illegitimate'. The PCB has also
reiterated that any contracted player joining the ICL would thereafter not be
considered for selection for Pakistan. As far
as the BCCI is concerned, it too had been extremely harsh on its players so
much so that it withdrew the pensions of former players who have aligned with
the ICL, which is unfair as the players had earned the benefits for services
they rendered earlier. All this
indicates that the presence of parallel cricket like the ICL's would continue
to haunt the duo of the sub-continent's cricketing board as they fear to lose
their monopoly over the cricket affairs in their respective countries. It is
interesting to note here that over the years any new development in cricket
like the introduction of a new genre of the game -- ODI, T20 cricket, Super
Sixes -- or the addition of new venues like cricket in the desert states by
Abdul Rahman Bukhatir or the first time One-day Internationals in Toronto
etc, all has been a successful saga as cricket in all of its manifestation
has produced marvelous results irrespective of who is who at the helm of its
affairs. With the
addition of any new centre to the existing venues or the introduction of new
form of the game, cricket has prospered and produced thrilling contests that
have been able to lure capacity crowds. In a way, one would describe it as
upgradation of cricket and its adaptation to the requirements of the new ageóglobalisation.
The most striking feature of cricket in modern times is that it has become
more result-oriented and money-generating. In the
case of ICL, it's obviously a need of the time in terms of generating money
and providing alternatives to talented yet discarded players in cricket
playing crickets, particularly in the sub-continent which boasts of the
presence of three cricketing giant nations -- India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka,
all of whom have been World Cup holders and are known for producing tricky
spinners, wristy batsmen and devilish fast bowlers. In a way
the ICL is nothing more than a product of the globalisation of cricket, where
it has not attracted new venues, but has also lured huge investments and
sponsors. They see nothing wrong with the ICL. "It's a sporting as well
as commercial venture. That's it." analysts argue. After all the players
from the sub-continent play in county cricket in England. Besides, players
from Pakistan have also featured in the Indian hockey league so why to target
the ICL only, they ask. One
would agree with Pakistan's former batting legend Javed Miandad, who has
urged the Pakistan board to recognise the ICL in the larger interest of the
game and its followers. Javed
Miandad wants the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to recognise the Indian
Cricket League (ICL) before it escalates into the magnitude of Kerry Packer's
parallel World Series 30 years ago. "I don't think this policy of
banning players is going to work practically," Miandad was quoted as
saying by a foreign newspaper report. "Since
the ICL is not something which the governments have objected to, I think any
player can go to court and challenge any ban on him to play in and for his
country." It may be mentioned here that Miandad had played in the Packer
series. According
to newspapers reports, a survey in the urban centres of Pakistan terms ICL a
good opportunity. Many young cricket players of twin-cities Islamabad and
Rawalpindi as also in Lahore have termed that ICL as a good opportunity for
all the cricket players to play more competitive cricket just like county
cricket. They
said that it would be better for the overall development of the individual
and cricket in general. Most of them have shown doubt and observations on the
way cricket board is handling this situation of the ICL. The situation gives
rise to the question that would the PCB have behaved the same away if this
series was taking place anywhere other than in Indian?. They said that
without any sort of doubt this is a good opportunity for country young
cricket stars to play that sort of cricket. They
said that soon more players will jump to the ICL bandwagon. The ICL's
intention seems to be to give a boost to cricket and provide a platform for
players who do not get a chance to play for their respective countries. It may
be mentioned here that the Sub-continent is know for producing legendary
players like as the land of magical spinners, wristy batsmen and (in
Pakistan) devilish fast bowlers, into a place whose rich cricket
administrators can dictate the future of the game. What it lacks is money and
financial security to its legends. And developments like the ICL can make
cricketers rich in the region. It may
be mentioned here that when the WSC came into existence, its detractors had
also ridiculed the same as a "circus" and cricket played under the
Packer umbrella as "pyjama cricket". With the benefit of hindsight,
it was proved it had done great service to game and it's underpaid and taken
for granted practitioners world over. The WSC
did a lot for cricket, players and managed to convince game's adamant,
traditional administrators of price value of players who strive for
excellence, toil on field and fill coffers of their respective boards. Packer
modernised the game, metamorphosed it into big business, nay an industry.
Players owe a sense of gratitude to Packer for their lap of luxury. There is
a lot of money in cricket now, even at first-class level. The same can be
predicted about the role of the ICL. With the
initial investment of 100 million rupees, the league is starting in October
2007. The lucrative cricket under this title would go on for six weeks. It
will fetch one million dollars for the winning team. In the first edition six
teams will take part. The organisers have planned to increase its volume
every year by inducting more teams, and after three years sixteen teams will
be seen in the league. Every
team will be constituted with nine Indians and six overseas players. The
organisers have offered huge remuneration to the international players.
The
inaugural hockey Asia Cup was to be held in Lahore originally but was later
shifted to Karachi because of wet weather in Lahore. The Chinese team had in
fact reached Lahore and had to fly back to Karachi. The
Pakistan team which entered the foray was almost the same that had retained
the World Cup in Bombay (now Mumbai) in such an emphatic manner that it was
labelled by many as the Dream Team. Only one man was missing: the captain of
the World Cup winning side, centre-half Akhtar Rasool who had retired from
international hockey. He later on embarked upon a political career which saw
him elected to Punjab provincial assembly in no less than five consecutive
elections. Akhtar also served as a minister in the provincial cabinet. The
tournament was originally planned with eight teams competing, divided into
two pools. This format was later changed into a single-league of seven teams
as Japan withdrew at the last moment. Pakistan
started from where it had left at the World Cup, destroying all the opposing
sides. Sri Lanka was clobbered 14-0, China 10-1, Singapore and Malaysia by
identical margins of 7-0 and Bangladesh by 9-0. The
stage was set for the last league match against arch-rivals India, which had
also won all its matches easily but trailed Pakistan on goal average, leaving
Pakistan needing only a draw to win the title. More
than 30,000 people jam packed the Hockey Club of Pakistan (HCP) stadium. Both
the teams started cautiously, with Pakistan exerting more pressure. After
experienced full-back Manzoorul Hasan failed to convert the first two penalty
corners that came Pakistan's way, the other full-back Qasim Zia was assigned
the responsibility. The
young and handsome full-back (who later entered politics and is presently the
leader of opposition in the Punjab assembly) had only made his international
debut in the Indo-Pak series before the World Cup in November 1981. Qasim
responded magnificently and converted two penalty corners one after another. Pakistan
did not stop at that. Flying horse Samiullah sent a scorching cross from the
left wing. The ball reached his younger brother, right out Kalimullah --
Hello brother! Kalimullah banged it into the net from the top of the circle
with his trademark, unstoppable chop hit -- Thank you brother! But the
most spectacular effort was that of the wizard Hasan Sardar. The legendary
centre-forward picked the ball from near the centre line, then swerving and
dribbling, he dodged past four Indian defenders to put away the fourth goal. Those
who were privileged to see Hasan's great act termed it as "poetry in
motion". Some
connoisseurs regard it as hockey's answer to Maradona's goal against England
in the 1986 soccer World Cup which was later declared by FIFA as 'the goal of
the Millineum'. It was a
befitting finale for Hasan in a tournament dominated by him. He not only
scored the highest number of goals (16) with a double hat trick against China
but was also declared the Player of the Tournament, an award he had also won
at the World Cup a few months back. The
Chinese turned out to be the surprise packet of the event by clinching the
bronze medal. And now finally, after almost a quarter of a century,
China has emerged as a real threat at the Asian level for the first time.
They defeated both Pakistan and India for the first time ever to won the
silver medal in the 2006 Asian Games. Ironically it was Pakistan who had not
only introduced hockey in that country in the 1970s but have also been
China's mentors. By
lifting the first Asia Cup, Pakistan kept up its tradition of winning the
inaugural editions of major tournaments introduced after World War II which
include the 1958 Asian Games hockey gold, the 1971 World Cup, the 1978
Champions Trophy and the 1979 Junior World Cup. Rankings:
1st Pakistan, 2nd India, 3rd China, 4th Malaysia, 5th Bangladesh, 6th
Singapore, 7th Sri Lanka. Pakistan's
scorers: Hasan Sardar 16, Hanif Khan 11, Manzoorul Hasan 7, Kalimullah 5,
Saeed Khan 4, Qasim Zia 3, Manzoor Hussain Junior 2, Saleem Sherwani 1,
Samiullah 1, Ishtiaq Ahmad. The
Pakistan team: Goalkeepers Moinuddin and Shahid Ali Khan. Full-backs
Manzoorul Hasan, Qasim Zia and Nasir Naseer. Half-backs Rasheedul Hasan,
Ishtiaq Ahmad, Naeem Akhtar and Saeed Ahmed. Forwards Kaleemullah, Manzoor
Hussain Junior, Hasan Sardar, Hanif Khan, Samiullah, Saleem Sherwani and
Saeed Khan. Captain Samiullah Khan. Manager Khawaja Zakauddin. The writer is a freelance contributor ijaz62@hotmail.com |
|
September). And the hosts, South Africa, are all pumped up to host yet
another major cricketing tournament after hosting the 2003 edition of the
Cricket World Cup.
Sachin Tendulkar (15,175), Sanath Jayasuriya (12,116) and Inzamam-ul-Haq
(11,739) runs. 