Showing posts with label England. Show all posts
Showing posts with label England. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Picture of the Day

Was sent this screen grab today from the Lord's Test match. Pretty damning, eh?


Salman Butt: ensuring compliance?

Anyone who has played any cricket or follows cricket closely could tell you that no fielder would be looking at the bowler at the point of delivery. They'd be looking straight ahead, at the batsman, in anticipation of the shot. That's fielding basics. But then not all fielders have money riding on no-balls.

Monday, August 30, 2010

Gutted!

Long-time readers of this blog would know that it's been a while since I last posted anything about cricket. In fact, my last cricket-related post was all the way back in May, which was right after the leakage of the inquiry committee hearings into our humiliating tour of Australia, and even that was about the alleged hygiene of the cricketers. Simply, I saw no point in endlessly moaning and whining about their abysmal failures as sportsmen and the even more abysmal state of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB)'s management.

But how on earth could I possibly ignore what has now happened? It has shaken most of Pakistan, and perhaps the entire cricketing world, to its core.

(Just in case, highly unlikely, that you are reading this from a different planet, here is what happened. And here. And here. And here. I don't have the stomach to repeat it.)


Mazhar Majeed: Mr Fix-it-All (source: NOTW)


But what can one really say any more that has not already been said? Two of the most comprehensive and well-written Pakistani responses by Five Rupees and Dawn blogger Farooq Nomani have probably said it all. Nomani's piece's title actually says it all: "How Low?" Seriously, the only response I really want to make, is the response I made when I first became aware of the story as it broke: Fuck them, fuck them all. Apologies for the crudeness, but there is simply no other way to convey the feeling one has having once again placed one's hopes and faith in someone, after having been burnt and let down before, only to again see the futility of it all. This was supposed to be the side that one was supporting through its dark times because it was in the process of rebuilding with young blood!


Green with Greed: (L-R) Asif, Butt, Amir, Akmal (source: NOTW)


I mean, if the worst flood devastation in our history were not bad enough, if millions of people without shelter and food and clothing were not bad enough, if the prospect of the country going economically under were not bad enough, if the barbaric mob violence and apathy in Sialkot were not bad enough, if the continued brutal 'target killing' of poor labourers and political activists in Karachi were not bad enough, if the continuing alienation of the Baloch were not bad enough, if the Taliban atrocities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the global war being fought in the Tribal Areas were not bad enough, if the terrorist attacks all over Pakistan were not bad enough, if the abuse and massacre of our religious minorities were not bad enough, if the apathy of our elite and establishment were not bad enough, we have to contend with this petty and shameless greed rubbed in our face as well?

Can we get a fucking break?

Incidentally, for those who are spinning this as a concocted ploy by the English press always out to 'get us' or holding out hope that there is no conclusive legal proof to convict 'our boys', I have just one thing to say to you: get your heads out of your asses. People in the know and even sports journalists were talking about Kamran Akmal and others being on the take for quite a while now - hell, during the Edgbaston Test one former cricketer even made similarly correct predictions about upcoming overs as detailed in the sting operation by The News of the World now, based, he said, on 'rumours' he had heard - the only difference was nobody had this kind of proof. And nobody was willing to bell the cat.

You know the old saying about chickens coming home to roost? That's what has happened to us. In every single awful thing that has happened to Pakistan recently that I have mentioned above. In this particular case, as Five Rupees puts it:


"I would argue that one of the main reasons we find ourselves in this mess is that we didn’t take care of business when we should have, in the mid and late 1990s. Everybody else did. The Saffies banned Cronje, and took stern action against everyone else (Herschelle Gibbs was banned temporarily for the mere fact of not disclosing that his captain had asked him to partake). The Aussies punished Shane Warne and Mark Waugh for disclosing weather information. The Indians banned Azharuddin and Jadeja. What did we do? We swept everything under the carpet. Only Salim Malik was banned, and really, his career was over anyway. Everyone else involved, including guys like Wasim Akram, were given light punishments, mere slaps on the wrist, despite overwhelming evidence against them (Ata-ur-Rehman wrote a sworn affidavit in which he alleged that Wasim asked him to bowl badly). Why did we do this? Simple, because we were afraid of what it would do to our cricket team. Rightfully so, I might add, since everyone from Wasim to Waqar to Inzi to Mushie was involved, in some way. But we took the shortcut then, and are paying for it now, because by not punishing it, we encouraged it."


Catch Them Young: Fixer Majeed hands over jacket with cash to Wahab Riaz, left, while Umar Amin looks on (source: NOTW)


There are bound to be questions raised about how the team selection may also have been manipulated to ensure the 'right kinds' of people in the team. Why for example had the Pakistan team become mainly a Central Punjab XI, why were certain undeserving players like Wahab Riaz (also implicated in this scandal) brought into the team above more deserving bowlers, why Afridi actually walked out of the captaincy (according to the alleged fixer Majeed, most of the players "wanted to f*** up Afridi because he's trying to f*** up things for them"), why there was such a haste to send the new wicketkeeper Zulqarnain Haider home (a report today in Jang claims that not only was he not given the customary 'test cap' he was handed a ticket back as soon as he came out of the clinic even though he had he had been hopeful he would be all right in a few days), why perennial keeper-in-reserve Sarfaraz Ahmed was not called up even if Haider had to be sent home, and why certain players like Fawad Alam continued to be kept out of the playing eleven.

But let's not kid ourselves that the current sorry lot at the PCB would ever be willing to tackle these questions or take the drastic structural actions required. They are part of the problem, not the solution. And no change can come about unless you recognize how deep the rot runs.

The worst part is not even that all of this shit is happening to Pakistan. The worst part is we steadfastly refuse to learn from our own history.

Friday, July 3, 2009

The Lopsided Sombrero


Andy Zaltzman is one of the funniest writers on cricket. Period.

This is from his assessment of Michael Vaughan's career after news of the former English skipper's retirement (on his regular blog on CricInfo):

In the pantheon of odd statistical cricket career shapes, Vaughan’s batting provides one of the oddest. In his first 16 Tests over two-and-a-half years, he had an average of 31 and strike rate of 40, with one century.

There had been little to suggest what was to follow. Then, in an 8-month, 12-Test incandescence in the summer of 2002 and the Ashes of 2002-03, he emblazoned seven hundreds into the history books, with an average of 76 and a strike-rate of 61, batting of a quality that few have surpassed. He was viewed by the great Australian team as one of the finest they had faced.

Again, there had been little to suggest what was to follow – a rather middling Test career. Increasingly niggled by injuries, perhaps encumbered by the captaincy, and mostly no longer opening the batting, he averaged just 36 in his last 54 Tests, with a strike rate of 50. Ten centuries punctuated periods of carelessness, lucklessness, and formlessness, but these were occasional peaks, rather the Himalayan achievements suggested by his 2002, and he too often tobogganed straight back down the other side of them back into the Valley Of Inconsistency.

At the start of 2003, Vaughan seemed to have the batting world at his feet. Unfortunately, the batting world, like the real world, turned out to be round, not flat, and the Lancastrioyorkshireman spent the rest of his career trying to balance his feet on it, with only intermittent success.

...

Broken into sections and plotted on a graph, Vaughan’s batting average forms a career shape known to some scientists as ‘The Lopsided Sombrero’, or, to others, as the ‘Meerkat Popping His Head Up Above A Baseball Mound’. This compares with, for example, Matthew Hayden’s ‘Bactrian Camel Drinking From A Puddle’ (three slumps (periods in which he averaged 24, 30 and 23) sandwiching two humps (69 and 60)); or Brian Lara’s ‘Stuntman Chickening Out Of Jumping The Grand Canyon And Instead Riding Down One Side, Across The Middle, And Up The Other Side, Then Continuing On For A While To Escape The Disappointed Fans’ (average of 60 in his first 31 and last 51 Tests, 40 in the 49 Tests in the middle). Mike Gatting can also claim The Sombrero, although, with averages of 23 and 22 stretching out either side of a peak period of 62, his was pulled down lower over the wearer’s head than Vaughan’s. The Sombrero is probably the most common career shape, but few have had as tall or pointy a crown as Vaughan.


Monday, June 8, 2009

In Defence of Pakistani Cricket

Saeed Ajmal tries slapstick in effort to entertain

There has been much too much negativity around the Pakistani cricket team's performance after yesterday's match with England. Most of it, I think, is uncalled for.

People have criticized our fielding since we dropped at least 5 catches in the space of 20 overs, Saeed Ajmal dropping two, Ahmad Shehzad, Salman Butt and Yasir Arafat one each, and gave away, in the "shoulder-shrugging estimation" (as Andrew Miller termed it on Cricinfo) of skipper Younis Khan, about 20-25 runs through shoddy fielding. This is just looking at the bad aspect of things. Nobody's talking about the fact that we actually managed to take 3 catches (one of them not even a sitter) and restricted the English to just 185, when they could easily have crossed the 210 mark. I prefer to see the glass as half-full rather than half-empty.

Critics are also complaining about Pakistan's batting performance, claiming we never got going, or, as Waseem Akram put it in terms he understands best now, never "teed off." They point out that when we knew that we needed over 9 an over to begin with, we should have made full use of the fielding restrictions in the first 6 overs (as every side in T20 actually does), and when the required run rate shot up to over 16, gone for the big strokes rather than trying to gently nudge the ball for singles. They have also criticised the fact that whereas the English were hitting the ball at will over the boundary, our guys could hardly cover half the ground before being caught out at mid on. Personally, I think this was all a bit of miscommunication and does not warrant the kind of vicious attacks on Pakistani players we have seen. I have it on good authority that the captain had worked out a comprehensive strategy whereby the goundwork was being laid for the big assault between the 40th and 50th overs. Apparently panic set in around the 17th over when it was communicated to him that there were now only 3 overs remaining. Can happen to anyone.

There have also been calls for the head of the coach Intikhab Alam, especially since he is reputed to be earning in excess of 700,000 rupees per month without much to show in terms of success, or even a competent display on the field. Stories are circulating about him and Younis being at daggers drawn over strategy. Apparently this division arose particularly after the 17th over of Pakistan's batting when Younis began to panic, because in Inti's opinion, Pakistan should have tried to see the day out by preserving wickets. After Misbah holed out, Inti was in favour of sending in a night-watchman, a tactic Younis apparently rejected. This vilification of Inti, again, I think is, unfair and petty. Those who follow Pakistan cricket as assiduously as myself, know that all Inti ever promised when he took up the job was that we would get to see the "Pakistan team in a new light." I think he has lived up to that promise.

People bitching about our performance have also shut their eyes to the other positives that the game provided. It was lovely evening, the stands were full, they played "Dil Dil Pakistan" on the stadium speakers before the start of the Pakistan innings, a tune we thought had been consigned to the dustbin of history (and I don't agree with those who think that should have given us a clue to what kind of innings we would see), the rain didn't stop play in the middle and apparently the beer stall did roaring business despite (or perhaps because of) the Pakistanis present in the stands. Best of all, despite this being The Oval and the umpires being Billy Doctrove and an Australian, nobody walked out of the ground and refused to return.
In any case, as skipper Younis said to CricInfo, who really cares what happens in the T20 World Cup???:

"It won't be a disaster even if we exit before the Super Eights," said Younis. "It would be sad if we don't make it, but I have never attached too much importance to Twenty20 cricket, as it is fun cricket. I mean it is more for entertainment, even if it is international cricket. It is all for the crowd. Twenty20 is all about fun. Everybody expects players to come out and entertain."


I think the captain has it perfectly right. We have been highly entertained and we should be happy with that.