Ehsan Mani outbursts may not help in mending fences between BCCI, PCB

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

Ehsan Mani, a former President of the International Cricket Council (ICC), has re-started blaming the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) at a time when the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) is trying to mend fences with the neighbours.

I fail to comprehend what service the former ICC President is doing to the Pakistan cricket with this blame game. He has accused the BCCI of trying to isolate Pakistan from the cricketing world and held it responsible for turning down the proposition of holding Pakistan's share of the 2011 World Cup matches at neutral venues.

A few months ago he had held India responsible for having engineered a split in the Asian bloc to deprive Pakistan of hosting rights for the 2011 World Cup following the attack on Sri Lankan cricketers in Lahore. He was of the opinion that the BCCI was doing so in the fear of losing the tournament altogether.

As a former chief of the controlling body of the game Ehsan Mani should have refrained from using the kind of language he did out in the open.
"I can say this with conviction that no board is today able to stand up to the Indian board in the ICC. Unfortunately, it is all about making money these days and the Indians dominate," he was quoted as saying.

Did he disclose any secret or was it breaking news of sorts? It was neither because everyone knows that India happens to be the biggest market and the bulk of the revenue for cricket is generated from there. Obviously the BCCI has greater significance in the ICC because of the financial reasons.

The BCCI or that matter the ICC could not be blamed for the excessive commercialization of the sport. Cricket has become an industry and its administrators are keen to market it as a very strong brand.

Ehsan Mani has had the feeling that the BCCI was instrumental in depriving Pakistan from staging their matches even at neutral venues.

"I know for a fact that this was decided, but India turned it down at the cricket committee meeting and since Saleem Altaf was representing Pakistan in Ijaz Butt's absence things went wrong somewhere. India then insisted that the matches should only be held in the South Asian region,” Ehsan Mani said.

"In a calculated manner, India is trying to isolate Pakistan from international cricket. No board is willing to support us and we have no inputs coming from other boards. No one including the ICC is willing to answer the most important question: what happens if relations don't improve between India and Pakistan. Will Pakistan get permission to play its matches in India?” he questioned.

"Given the existing relations between the two countries, any untoward incident can trigger off more problems. Then is the ICC willing to organize the World Cup without Pakistan?" he asked.

Ehsan Mani has every right to voice his concerns but he should also keep into account the nature of his outburst and its implications. May be he thinks that Pakistan’s cause will be helped in some way with this kind of attitude.

readmore »»

Adil Rashid’s shocking exclusion costing England dearly

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

Adil Rashid must be wondering what else he had to do in order to retain a place in the playing eleven. He had turned out to be England’s best player in the first One-day International against Australia at The Oval but he was dropped in the very next game and was not selected in the third tie either.

Adil was the pick of the England bowlers in the opening game, having conceded only 37 runs in 10 overs as Australia piled up a score of 260. In fact he was the only home bowler to have completed his quota of overs.

Then going in at number eight, he clobbered an unbeaten 31 off 23 deliveries to take England within a stroke to victory. It was the kind of all-round performance that must have done his confidence a world of good.

He was chiefly responsible for having taken England so close to victory after the top-order batsmen had failed to do the job. He was the man who brought the home side back in the reckoning when they had looked dead and buried.

The England skipper, Andrew Strauss, had reposed great confidence in the 21-year-old Adil and the young leg-spinner rose to the occasion against an Australian side looking to settle scores after conceding the Ashes.

It remained unclear however what prompted a change of mind on part of the England team management, particularly Strauss. How could have they even thought of dropping Adil from the line-up for the very next game remains a mystery.

Two wrongs don’t make one right. If they had erred by not playing Adil in the second game, which they lost by a bigger margin than the first one, they should have recalled him for the third game which they didn’t. There was further humiliation in store for the home side now facing the prospect of losing the seven-match series in the very next game.

In fact people have already started talking in terms of a possible whitewash in the ODI series. It would be a shame for England if they lose it so heavily against an Australian side that’s not the best in the business either.

"We haven't played well enough, clearly, but I don't think it's for lack of trying. We have had three poor batting performances, and the first two were very winnable at the halfway mark, but as a batting unit we just haven't fired. We have got to be honest with ourselves and have a look at it, in terms of how we can improve. In one-day cricket, you can't go into your shell and grind it out, you've got to play with enough confidence to put a competitive score on the board, but at the same time make good decisions," the England captain said after losing the third game.

Strauss admitted that his inability to finish off things was creating problems for his side. "When you're batting well, you have to make hay but I haven't done that, and that's frustrating. Every time you pull on an England shirt you've got a chance to go on and achieve something, and I am as culpable as anyone," he conceded.

England, handicapped by the absence of Kevin Pietersen, need Strauss to fire if they have to stage a comeback in the series. Strauss also has to ensure that England do have sufficient attacking bowlers in their line-up and Adil Rashid is someone he cannot afford to ignore anymore.

readmore »»

Wasim Bari faces the challenge of lifetime

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) has finally put someone in the right place.. Ijaz Butt had acquired the services of quite a few ‘greats’ after taking over the leadership of the Board last year but he was found wanting in posting them at the right places leading to controversies and bitterness.

The appointment of Wasim Bari, a former Pakistan captain and of the greatest-ever wicketkeepers the world has seen, as the Chief Operating Officer (COO) of the PCB can be described as one of the rare good moves by the Board in the recent past.

The PCB, not surprisingly, was in the news for the wrong reasons with the policies of Ijaz Butt backfiring more often than not. It has come as a pleasant surprise to have someone like Wasim Bari as the COO.

Wasim Bari thoroughly deserved the slot by virtue of his qualification, experience and expertise. He had been a part of the senior management of the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) for quite sometime having worked alongside people like Arif Ali Khan Abbasi, Tariq Kirmani and Zaffar Ahmed Khan.

He has always believed in and advocated for professional management. Even when he was serving as the chairman of the national selection committee, he desired the PCB to be run on corporate lines like Cricket Australia and New Zealand Cricket.

Now he has been elevated to the position which he richly deserved. I think he’s the perfect choice for the post of COO. That’s one part of the story.

The other part begins with his appointment as the COO. Will he be able to deliver? Will he be allowed to adhere to the principles of professional management? Or will he prefer to work quietly and turn a blind eye to the follies to be committed by his superiors.

Wasim Bari is an ice-cool gentleman who can work for very long hours. He is not afraid of the workload. But he could be tested when pressurized to sign or verify ‘fishy’ matters. Skill and temperament are his forte. Let us see how he handles Ijaz Butt who has been criticized for having made the PCB a one-man show.

Obviously it can’t be expected of Wasim Bari to challenge or over-rule the decisions of Ijaz Butt. They have certainly developed a level of understanding already. The issues could be different now since Wasim Bari is now the COO, not the Director Human Resources.

The critics of Wasim Bari condemn him as a ‘yes man’ of the bosses. They may be partially right to the extent that he’s a soft person who doesn’t like to quarrel. But one should not question his integrity.

I don’t think anybody will dispute of him possessing the nerves of steel. Selection is a thankless job where you are subjected to the harshest of criticism for the faults of others. He remained the chief selector for quite sometime, coped with the pressures bravely and gave the results.

He, however, faces the challenge of his lifetime now. It’s a much tougher assignment than being the chief selector or Director HR of the PCB.

readmore »»

IPL forces New Zealand to shorten Australian series?

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

It’s becoming increasingly clear now that the Indian Premier League (IPL) has attained the highest priority for the administrators of the game world over. Every cricket board seems to have made a point of late not to schedule many international games at a time when the IPL is planned to be held.

Although New Zealand Cricket have given another excuse but there’s little doubt in anyone’s mind that it’s the IPL that actually prompted them to shorten Australia’s tour to their country in the coming season.

Australia's tour to New Zealand in 2009-10 features two Twenty20 Internationals in late February to be followed by a five-match ODI series for the Chappell-Hadlee Trophy and two Tests.

Originally three Tests were scheduled to be held during the tour but the itinerary released by the New Zealand authorities the other one mentioned only two Tests to be held in Wellington and Hamilton starting on March 19 and 27 respectively.

It was quite a shocker because it will be the first time in 20 years that New Zealand would be hosting Australia for a series of less than three Tests. It would keep the top guns of Australia and New Zealand players engaged until March 31 and they would then be free for the IPL.

The IPL 3 will be getting underway in India on March 12 and will continue till April 25. The decision to scrap the third and final Test between New Zealand and Australia would allow the players of both teams around 10 more days in the IPL.

"Playing Test cricket in New Zealand after the cessation of daylight saving and deep into the second week of April is not realistic. Therefore our only option has been to limit the series to two Tests," Justin Vaughan, the Chief Executive of New Zealand Cricket, explained.

Isn’t it a strange argument because New Zealand had played host to a Test match against India during the month of April only this year. In fact a Test match was added to tour upon the request of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), who denied more action for their team following the cancellation of the tour of Pakistan.

Well the New Zealand Cricket need to find some other reason to justify their decision to cut short the Test series against Australia.

Obviously the New Zealand Cricket is not the only board in the world that has made a move to accommodate the IPL. They could not have done this without the blessings of the more powerful Cricket Australia. Both the boards must have been in agreement to have two Tests instead of the planned three.

Anyways there is plenty of cricketing activities to be held in New Zealand in the coming season as they would now be hosting Pakistan instead of touring the country. Pakistan would now be playing their three ‘home’ Tests against New Zealand in New Zealand. Between the tours of Pakistan and Australia, New Zealand would also be playing host to Bangladesh.

readmore »»

Australia double lead without ever looking convincing

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

What a pity that Australia have been allowed to run into a 2-0 lead in the seven-match series of One-day Internationals by England, who appear the more balanced as well as versatile side in comparison to their traditional rivals.

The present Australian outfit is a mere shadow of the great one-day sides they used to field until the recent past. There are more bits and pieces cricketers in their eleven now than the specialists.

England have themselves to blame for having squandered the opportunity in both the games. They had the Australians on the mat for quite sometime but their own batting fared pathetically and the advantage was surrendered.

In both the matches the Aussies barely managed par score, batting first. With the hosts having packed their side with one-day all-rounders, they were the ones who appeared the favourites to seal the fate of the match at the start of their chase on both the occasions. Surprisingly, however, they lost their way in both the games and even the depth in their batting could not cover for the follies of their top batters.

The Australians also had their share of problems in the batting department but they somehow made up by the late flourish in both the encounters. Callum Ferguson was chiefly responsible for keeping them afloat after the unconvincing performance of their established batsmen.

Australia faced the danger of being bowled out for a low total, even after Ferguson’s half-century in the second match at Lord’s. They had barely crossed 200 when their eighth wicket fell and England had all cards in their pocket with James Anderson and Ryan Sidebottom bowling splendidly in the death overs.

It was Mitchell Johnson, of all people, who rescued Australia with a flurry of big hits that yielded runs at brisk pace and all of a sudden England had to chase down a target of 250 instead of 210 or 215.

Left-handed Johnson's late assault actually revived Australia. He swung his bat at everything to score an unbeaten 43 off 23 balls. He was helped by some ordinary fielding as well, adding 41 off the last four overs and a bit with Nathan Hauritz. England’s wicketkeeper Matt Prior was guilty of letting go two boundaries that should have been stopped.

England, however, regained control with a solid opening partnership between skipper Andrew Strauss and the enigmatic Ravi Bopara. The Australians, at that stage, were running out of options as a cakewalk victory for the hosts looked more likely than anything else.

But England collapsed in the unlikeliest of circumstances. They were on top of the game when the self-destruction began. Michael Clarke must have heaved a sigh of relief watching the England batsman commit the kind of mistakes that would have embarrassed even the schoolboys.

Paul Collingwood fought a lone battle in the end but he was let down by his partners at the other end. The asking rate was very much manageable and the powerplay overs were at their disposal. But England didn’t have wickets to cash in and they eventually lost the match by 39 runs.

readmore »»

Return of Bond propels New Zealand

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

Three wickets for 18 runs off four overs. These are the figures that would surely make every bowler proud in any form of the game. The analysis will be considered even better if it’s achieved in a limited overs contest. These would obviously be recognized as exceptional figures in the shortest version of the sport.

In that context the bowling performance of New Zealand’s spearhead Shane Bond, making a return to international cricket, was better than the best as he powered his team to a magnificent 22-run win over Sri Lanka in the second Twenty20 International at R Premadasa Stadium in Colombo on September 4.

Although Jesse Ryder ran away with the Man of the Match award, for his half century as well as outstanding fielding, it was the superlative spell of fast bowling from Bond that sealed the fate of the game as well as the series.

New Zealand, having sneaked a narrow victory in the previous game, had done well to reach a total of 171 but the target could never have been considered out of reach of the Sri Lankans on a pitch where slower bowlers were more likely to do the business.

With Bond back to take the new ball the bowling attack of New Zealand gained more potency and purpose. It’s always a huge advantage to have a quality fast bowler attack with the shining ball rather than having an ordinary mortal spraying in different directions with the intent on containment.

There is no better way of controlling the rate of scoring than take wickets. That is exactly what New Zealand are more likely to do when they have someone like Bond having the ball in his hand.

I think it was Bond more than anyone else who made the difference. He dismissed the dangerous Tillekaratne Dilshan in the very first over to open the floodgates. Kyle Mills, who shared the new ball with him, was also lifted and he responded with two quick wickets to deny the hosts the kind of flying start they needed to be ahead to chase down a target of 172.

Mahela Jaywardene and Kumar Sangakkara revived Sri Lanka with an enterprising fourth wicket partnership but the New Zealanders knew they always had a chance when they broke through.

Daniel Vettori looked a more confident leader, after the nightmarish two-Test series in which his team was blanked. He deserved the credit for having kept the motivated after the debacle and his inspirational captaincy was instrumental in bringing about the turnaround.

New Zealand, who lost the Test series 0-2, have won the Twenty20 series 2-0. They have lifted their game considerably and their rejuvenated outfit would be a threat to both Sri Lanka as well as India in the upcoming series of One-day Internationals.

New Zealand, who looked pedestrian in the Test matches due to the lack of firepower in their bowling attack, have come to life of late. Bond has helped their cause immensely, providing Vettori a much-needed attacking option.

readmore »»

Bridge legend Masud Saleem passes away

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

Bridge legend Masud Saleem has passed away, after a protracted illness, in Karachi. He was 69. He was a diabetic patient for the last many years and both his legs had to be amputated due to gangrene.

He died on August 31 and was buried at the Chiniotis graveyard in North Nazimaad the same afternoon. He has left behind a widow, two sons and two daughters for mourning besides a large circle of friends, admirers and duplicate bridge players, holding him in high esteem.

He was the first partner of Zia Mahmood, and a key member of Pakistan’s bridge team that made history in 1981 by entering the finals of the World Bridge Championship in its maiden appearance in Bermuda Bowl.

Masud was born on May 1, 1940 in Chiniot. He first appeared on the bridge horizon in 1962 as the organizer of a tournament at St. John’s Club. It’s a matter of history that this was the largest participated bridge tournament in Pakistan with 62 teams.

He won first tournament of Karachi Club in 1971 for Zaman IV, playing as a partner of Nishat Abedi and Waheed Bux Quadri. He won five Zonal Championships for Pakistan besides innumerable ranking bridge tournaments. He won national championships as many as seven times.

For almost three decades, his outstanding achievements for Pakistan in the bridge arena, both at home and abroad have had no parallel in the history of sport in Pakistan.

Right from 1978, when Pakistan first burst upon the international bridge scene, as runners-up in the Far East Bridge Federation Championship despite the handicap of two walkovers to Taiwan, Masud’s prolific abilities led to a string of staggering bridge victories to Pakistan.

Having finished runners-up, in the very first appearance by Pakistan, in the Bermuda Bowl World Championship held in 1981, Masud was rated as the most gifted bridge player in world with a remarkable in born natural talent that led him to be distinction of having won the most laurels for his country in bridge.

His artistry in handling problems of bidding, play and defence was legendary for, as he combined his natural ability of card handling with his profound knowledge of the game backed by a phenomenal memory.

“Masud was foremost a friend and a special one. In all the 40 years of our friendship I do not recall a harsh word or a mean gesture from him,” Khurshid Hadi, President Emiretus, Pakistan Bridge Federation (PBF), observed.

“Even the most intense discussion on bridge was usually conducted in short mainly inaudible bursts followed by a shrug of the shoulders as if to say ‘I said what I had to now its up to you to agree or not.’ Masud was a wonderfully gifted player,” he added.

“His last years have been full of difficulties which he shouldered with dignity. It will not only be the bridge world that will miss an outstanding player but the world will miss an exceptional man,” Khurshid Hadi reckoned.

Rehena Saigol, a former President of the PBF, also paid glowing tributes to Masud Saleem, describing his as one of the greatest bridge players produced by the country.

“He had been laid low by illness in the last few years of his life and the PBF did hold a few benefit events for him. He has made outstanding contribution to the sport of bridge in Pakistan that can never be forgotten,” she thought.

The former PBF President recalled that Masud was outshone by his more flamboyant partner, Zia Mahmood, but the former also played a most significant role in putting Pakistan on the bridge map of the world.

readmore »»

WANTED: A representative body of sports journalists in Pakistan

By Syed Khalid Mahmood

The first seed of the Sports Writers’ Association (SWA) in England was sown in November 1947 with that legendary statement: "It is desirable that an association of sporting journalists be formed.

Historically it were half a dozen representatives of the national sporting press who had made the historic decision over the lunch and five of them formed an exploratory committee that met in a Fleet Street about a month later.

The Association was founded on 15 April 1948 with 21 members on board. The first annual dinner was held in 1949 and the following year the first ballot was held among members, by then numbering nearly 100, to determine which six men had contributed most to Britain's international sporting prestige - still the criterion on which annual awards are made.

As they entered the 21st century, and after the Association merged with the Professional Sports Photographers' Association and began to represent an ever widening range of sports journalists across all media, the SWA changed its name to Sports Journalists' Association (SJA).

It’s the Britain's voice at the annual congress of the Association Internationale de la Press Sportive (AIPS). It’s also affiliated to the Union European de la Presse Sportive (UEPS).

Today the sports journalists’ fraternity of Pakistan needs a similar platform more than ever before. It’s high time for the working journalists of the country to rise above the self and join hands to lay the foundation of a body that could become Pakistan’s voice in international sports journalism affairs.

Regrettably the element of unity has been found missing in the ranks of the sports journalists in Pakistan and the efforts made once in while by a few individuals have not yielded the desired results.

How could one expect to get the results if the objectives are not clearly spelled out or when the people attending the meetings to form the Association are shy of reporting it in their newspapers or broadcasting it on air?

Not a single working sports journalist in Pakistan might disagree with the observation that a vibrant national body is so desperately needed now that could represent the national sports media on the Pakistan Olympic Association's press advisory committee, and offer advice to members covering other major events. The body, once formed, could also act as a consultant to organizers of major events who need guidance on media requirements.

The absence of a truly representative body is costing the working journalists dearly. A battery of journalists is sent to the Olympic Games, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games and South Asian Games by the POA but less than half of them actually go out there for the coverage of the event. The POA has its priorities and they don’t have a mechanism that could allow them to sponsor the genuine journalists only and discard those going for joyrides.

The proposed body should have an essential service for all sports journalists-writers, sub-editors, photographers, presenters, producers, cameramen and editors-working in national and regional press, radio, television and websites.

A few individuals have attempted to form a national body with the hidden and at times even not so hidden objective of furthering their own vested interests.

The Pakistan Sports Writers Federation (PSWF) was founded and run by S M Naqi, Farooq Mazhar and Ali Kabir who considered themselves above board and dared doing things in the manner they pleased. The body revolved around these gentlemen, two of whom have now passed away and the third one has been laid low by illness. Unsurprisingly the body has remained dormant for the past one decade.

It was in the late 1980s when another group, led by Anisuddin Khan, emerged by the name of the Federation of Sports Journalists of Pakistan (FSJP) and they held a couple of meetings at the YMCA in Karachi that were very well attended. But the FSJP could not take off, primarily due to the lack of vision of its leaders who just couldn’t set the ball rolling.

The most significant step yet towards the formation of a truly representative body was witnessed in 2006 when Ehsan Qureshi mustered the support of the majority of the working journalists to form the Sports Journalists Association of Pakistan (SJAP). He did a lot of running around to establish the Association on solid footing but the move was sabotaged by hypocrisy.

There have been a couple of initiatives of late but unfortunately neither of them might be able to serve the purpose and it’s an extremely unlikely to have anything like the SJA of England coming up.

Amjad Aziz Malik and Zahid Farooq Malik, who somehow made their way to Milan, Italy, earlier this year to attend the AIPS Congress, have set off to revive the PWSF, albeit in a controversial and undemocratic manner.

The Maliks mobilized their resources to organize a two-day seminar/workshop at the Pakistan Sports Complex in Islamabad on August 15 and 16 but they very conveniently omitted the open debate session that deprived the participants the chance of putting forward their suggestions about the election process.

Instead of discussing the matter out in the open, the Maliks deemed it proper to close deals with the persons of their own choice and they came on stage only to announce the names of the people having been nominated for various assignments.

It was a wonderful idea to have invited the sports journalists from every nook and corner of the country. But by sharing the key posts between themselves and not even bothering to seek vote of confidence from the house undid their own good work.

Fingers have also been pointed towards both the Maliks about their standing in the profession of sports journalism in particular. They have not won friends by avoiding elections and declaring themselves as the President and the Secretary of the self-proclaimed PSWF.

If they were sincere to the cause of the profession and serious in reviving the body they should have simply formed a committee of three to five members to carry out the nationwide membership drive after which elections could have been held.

Soon afterwards the ‘bigwigs’ of sports journalism in Karachi met over tea but they were unable to come to any conclusion either. The organizers were short of concrete ideas and one was unsure about the purpose of the hastily arranged meeting.

It was disappointing to listen to the remarks of the veterans of the profession, who appeared confused and double-minded. If they were unable to resolve whether to form a national association or restrict themselves to a city body it was a clear reflection of lack of homework or division of opinion.

Abdul Majid Bhatti and Shahid Akhtar Hashmi, who conducted the proceedings, were unclear about the issue either. Waheed Khan, for reasons beyond comprehension, was not prepared to look beyond Karachi while Anisuudin Khan tried to impose his thoughts in the usual manner of his.

Although quite a few big names of the profession were in attendance in the meeting at the Karachi Club, besides the young guns, a consensus could not be developed and by the look of things yet another opportunity was wasted.

readmore »»