canning kaneria

Don't get me wrong. I like Danish Kaneria. I saw him on a plane once, showing a picture of a hot woman in a magazine to Kamran Akmal. I found it amusing. He seems friendly. And he has an innocent look about him, like he's not hiding anything.

Unfortunately, that's the problem. What he's actually like as a person I can only guess, but it's quite clear that as a bowler, he's not hiding anything. He has no tricks up his sleeve. Or up anything, for that matter.

When he first came on the scene, there was talk of a new prodigy - a new Abdul Qadir, even. He took plenty of wickets against South Africa, Sri Lanka, India, and Australia. But a closer look at these figures suggests something might have been wrong. Here's a sample: 2/100, 4/117, 7/118, 2/130, 5/125, 7/188, 6/150, 3/136, 3/123, and 5/127.

Clearly, that's a lot of wickets. But it's also a lot of runs. Those 44 wickets came in a small number of tests, but at an average of 30. His career average is 33. Not counting Bangladesh, it's 36.

So his average isn't great. Fine. Problem is, it's getting progressively worse. Since the start of 2006, it's an appalling 39.

I'm not the biggest fan of using numbers to judge a man's performance, but there's a story here. The fact is, he has become more playable. And it's not that he's getting worse as a bowler, or playing on unconducive pitches. It's just that people are getting used to his bowling.

Kaneria is, essentially, a one-trick pony. He can turn the ball a fair amount, and he will work hard, bowling at the same spot all day if Inzi wants him to. But that's about it. Playing Kaneria is like riding a bike: once you know how to do it, you know how to do it. And only in the event that you make a mistake will you get out.

His googly is so ill-disguised that even lower order batsmen are able to read it with a fair degree of regularity. And he has no flipper to speak of. He doesn't vary his flight too much, and only vaguely varies his line.

These are times in which every team has a number of analysts trying to pick up the opposition's strengths and weaknesses. Predictability is not a virtue. Kaneria needs to jazz up his game.

And if he doesn't, then the management needs to look into replacing him. I'm sorry Danish, but that's far too many innings of 45 overs 3 for 150. The times they are a'changin'. Change with them.

-----
cross-posted at cricket.bloggers.pk

arrogance shmarrogance

I am sick of people saying:

"Shoaib Akhtar is arrogant and therefore should not play."

It is idiotic. Since when did humility become a prerequisite for playing cricket, or any sport for that matter? These players are supposed to be professionals. This is their job. If Shoaib is arrogant, don't go to dinner with him, or invite him over to play with your kids. But surely you can work with him. God knows we've all worked with a few arrogant idiots from time to time.

I am not a fan of Shoaib's antics. But his 'arrogance' does tend to make him an exciting player to watch. He is a celebrity and a superstar, and every now and then he should be allowed to act like one. The way his career has been manhandled says less about him and more about the disastrous state of man management in the PCB (and in Pakistan in general, for that matter).

It is a pity that the PCB has not learned to deal with Shoaib the way the Australians managed to deal with Warne. The Aussies did so well, in fact, that a man who has been found guilty of both match-fixing and doping is still hailed as a hero around the world. There are other circumstances at play here of course (the Australian media is a tad more influential than the Pakistani media, for example) but even so, Shoaib is lucky if he gets respect from his own countrymates.

So what if he's arrogant? He's the best bowler we have (sorry Asif, but it's true). Unless I'm missing something, the team that goes out to represent Pakistan should consist of its best players, not its most humble. Otherwise we may as well just send out a bunch of 11 beard-toting, God-fearing mullahs and see how they do.

Oh, wait... we already did...

-----
cross-posted at cricket.bloggers.pk

eleven is too many

Pakistan needn't worry about silly things like having an 11 man team.

When we started the series I was ecstatic that four specialist bowlers were playing, instead of the Razzaq/Afridi/Malik types that Woolmer seems to love from so deep within the most sensitive parts of his cock. Alas, my joy was unjustified after all. It appears that even if we had sported a team of 11 bowlers, only two of them (Kaneria and Asif) would have bowled. Asif may be our best option for taking wickets, but after his having bowled 40 overs in an innings even I'd fancy my chances of lasting a couple of his overs. At this rate, he may suffer a heart attack before the end of the series. Let's just hope that Nandrolone doesn't wear off anytime soon.

This is bad not only for Asif, but also for the other bowlers. Sure, in the second match it was justified, given Shoaib's "injury," (more on this later) but the way he was overbowled in the first test was retarded. Pakistan started the innings needing to bowl out South Africa for under 199, on a 5th day track that wasn't unplayable but not exactly flat either. The 60.5 overs that ensued were distributed as follows: Kaneria - 24.5, Asif - 14, Hafeez - 12, Rana - 7, Nazir - 3.

Why did Rana and Nazir even play? Just to fill up spaces in the team? What is this going to do to their egos? "You guys are good, but, er, right now we need wickets, so hang back and let Asif the maestro handle it."

About batsmen. Why have so many? It's not as if they score any runs. Seems to me the (two) bowlers do a pretty decent job of getting runs. In fact, if they were to replace Yousuf, Younis, Inzi, and all the tail-enders with a bunch of Imran Farhats, I doubt our team would make it past 100 anywhere but in Pakistan. So why bother with all of them? Play the only 3 batsmen that matter.

What about wicketkeepers? Who needs one? If Akmal's performance is any guide, it doesn't really matter if we have someone back there at all. We could do with a little wall the size of Akmal just fixed behind the stumps, just to stop things from going to the boundary. Catches are overrated anyway.

So 3 batsmen, 2 bowlers. Then they should pick 6 random people from among the spectators to come and play. Who knows, they might score 8 runs each, and that's 48 bonus runs that all the Yasir Hameeds in the world couldn't get you. They say Pakistan is unpredictable anyway. Why try and dispel the stereotype?

-----
cross-posted at cricket.bloggers.pk

lost in the desert

Nicholas Kristof has written an interesting piece in the New York Times on the common stereotypes about Islam. In it, he argues that no "religion's influence is intrinsically peaceful or violent," but admits that "some Muslim societies do have a real problem with violence, wih the subjugation of women, with tolerance."

His main point is that Muslims exist across the world, and subsequently the practise of Islam spans too broad a spectrum to be so easily summarized. In fact, "The mosaic of Islam", he says, "contains many hopeful glimpses of the future."

He cites a Muslim in Brunei who implies that the problem is not with Islam, but with 'Arab' Islam. By putting it this way, Mr. Kristof simplifies the problem by breaking it up geographically: Asian Islam is like this, and Arab (or more specifically, Saudi) Islam is like that. This is partly true. Local culture and history do tend to play a large role in the way the religion is practised. But that's not the whole story.

The trouble with Saudi Islam is that it, moreso than its counterparts, is so opposed to updating its rituals in any way that integrating its followers with the rest of the world is becoming increasingly difficult. As a smart Muslim once pointed out to me, it "needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century."

What Mr. Kristof fails to point out, however, is that Saudi Islam, as the supposed purveyor of the faith, has a significant influence on other varieties, regardless of geography. Pakistani Islam, for example, often uses the Saudi model as a yardstick, unwilling as it is to carve out its own identity.

What's left is a problem that is exported out of Saudi Arabia into other parts of the world. The Saudis are quick to justify everything they do in the name of Islam, making it hard for Muslims everywhere, especially less educated ones, to deny their alliegance to some pretty dastardly things. The result is that many Muslim societies, among which Pakistan is a shining example, are sharply divided along educational, not geographic, lines.

Mr. Kristof drives home his point with a slightly melodramatic comment:

There is a historic dichotomy between desert Islam — the austere fundamentalism of countries like Saudi Arabia — and riverine or coastal Islam, more outward-looking, flexible and tolerant. Desert Muslims grab the headlines, but my bet is that in the struggle for the soul of Islam, maritime Muslims have the edge.

So what about places like Karachi, that are, quite literally, both maritime and desert at once?

peckerdillos

Pakistanis are idiots.

Since Friday, no less than 12 people have either mentioned or sent me a link to this BBC article. It's about how Indian men have smaller penises than standard international condom sizes. The article itself is quite funny. But from the taglines appended to each of these forwards (generally in the "Haha, Indians are so lame, we have bigger dicks" vein), I gather that many Pakistanis consider this some sort of triumph of our nation over theirs.

This is completely stupid. Our two countries have only spent 59 years apart, separated by an artificial border. Many have criss-crossed this border several times over since independence, not to mention mass migration during partition itself. Conclusion: if Indian penises are small, then, sorry to say, so are Pakistani penises.

It would be fine if Pakistanis castigated Indians about things that are distinctly 'Indian', i.e. those that have evolved since partition. Unfortunately, such things (like democratic government, or entrepreneurial spirit, say) have generally shown themselves to be quite successful. Maybe we could learn a little from the things that are distinctly Indian, instead of ridiculing those that aren't.

Eventually maybe our penises will evolve in different Darwinian directions. Until then, young ladies throughout the subcontinent will have to look elsewhere for a good time.

will shoaib get fucked?

I'm sorry.

Call me juvenile, but this photograph may turn out to be quite prophetic in answering the aforementioned question.

I continue to wonder what will happen with this whole affair. Bob Woolmer has gone on the record saying he supports the decisions of both tribunals, which, umm, is a bit daft, given that they both handed out completely opposite sentences.

My guess is the ICC won't let this one slide. They already feel like the PCB has bullied them enough over the past few months (on which count I disrepectfully disagree). They will use the WADA excuse to push their weight around on this.

If the players do end up getting fucked, though, it will be unfair to them. They were made scapegoats in the PCB's unprecedented and unjustified campaign to promote justice and virtue. Regardless of whether or not they intentionally took nandrolone, they did not get a proper first trial; and it was the impropriety of the first that set the tone for the second.

Unfortunately, neither justice nor virture will prevail. If Shoaib and Asif were innocent, then their legacy has been unnecessarily tarnished; if guilty, then two intentional dopers are now openly allowed to play.

The PCB, on the other hand, deserves whatever it gets. I have tried to be supportive of them, but there's only so much incompetence I can take. The sad part is that they are likely to come out of all this relatively unscathed.

cream of shrooms soup

In an article about the inconsistencies in the PCB's doping trials, Osman Samiuddin proves his point that this is not Pakistan's first encounter with anti-doping legislation:

For Pakistanis who are celebrating this decision, they should first cast a sombre glance at the cases of Meherullah Lassi and Faisal Karim. They are possibly Pakistan's best boxers, among the region's cream as well, and they have just been handed life bans by the Pakistan Boxing Federation for testing positive for use of cannabis.

I am amused. First, Meherullah Lassi is an awesome name. Second, cannabis is no reason to get kicked out of any sport. If you can be a pothead and still be "among the region's cream," then good for you. In fact, you might well be able to tackle other region's creams if you stopped getting high all the time.

basically the same

Here is an audio version of an interesting NPR story. The US Ambassador in Berlin has started a program to meet with young German Muslims and set up a dialogue about each other's respective worldviews. As part of this program the kids even get to go on a trip to the States. They visit New York and DC; check out Times Square and the State Department; and talk to Americans about America, Germany, and Islam.

This is a great idea. A lot of these kids grow up in small immigrant communities, often underpriveleged, and never leave them. Like in any inward-looking community, they end up with localized and skewed ideas about a lot of things concerning the rest of the world.

A program like this gives these kids a chance to step out of their bubbles, and also to see the more “human” side of America - or at the very least gives them some context and a frame of reference for the country and its people.

I think there should be similar programs for Americans to visit Pakistan, and also, for that matter, for Pakistanis to visit the US. Just spending some time in the other’s country and speaking frankly with its people would give both sides a much better understanding of each other. It would go a long way towards dispelling so many of the pre-conceived stereotypes that people on either side can’t help but have these days. It would at least instil in young kids two fundamental facts: (1) that you can't blame an entire country or a tradition for the actions of a few of its members, and (2) that despite all the social, cultural, or economic differences, people everywhere are basically the same.

a bunch of dopes

I have watched events unfold in the Shoaib/Asif scandal with a fair bit of incredulity. For some reason I haven't posted about this yet. Maybe because I had a sneaking suspicion that it wasn't over. Well, lo and behold, it wasn't. In the latest development, they have both been completely acquitted of all charges brought against them. Which means the entire process of having a trial and serving out a harsh-but-fair punishment was one big sham.

Here's how it happened: PCB, an organization so fervent about maintaining its secrecy, so notorious for its lack of accountability or transparency, suddenly decided to sacrifice its two best bowlers just to showcase a strange new commitment to justice and integrity.

They rushed to judgment, and now the country looks like a bunch of bumbling idiots. They should have played it safer earlier. They should have either: (1) stuck to their time-honored traditions of secrecy and dealt with the matter behind closed doors; or (2) opened it to the world and had a proper trial - not one where the sentence was, as it appears, pre-determined, but a real and proper and final one.

What has happened is neither here nor there. And it is shameful. And it makes us look shady.

Of course, I'm not all gloom and doom about this. In fact, I'm quite conflicted. There's a big part of me that's thrilled they're back. No, not thrilled...relieved. Despite the team's recent 2-0 test victory against the Windies, there was no angle from which to see Pakistan lifting the World Cup. Now, at least such a chance is vaguely visible, if only through a powerful electron microscope.

recognizing records

So according to this article, a couple of Indian kids have broken the record for the highest partnership in any form of recorded cricket. In a school match, they put on 721 runs in just 40 overs.

My question is, why is this being reported as if it is actually a record? Is it comparable to Sangakkara and Jayawardene making 624 in an actual Test against South Africa this year? I mean, good for these kids, but this was a Hyderabad Under-13 school tournament.

Even Tendulkar and Kambli's 638-run stand in a 3-4 day game in a 16-17 year old all-India interschool tournament is a more valid record, although that too is overrated. Cricinfo's wording is priceless:

"The closest any Test batting duo came to going past the Tendulkar-Kambli record was when Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakkara added 624 for the third wicket against South Africa in Sri Lanka earlier this year. "

The closest they ever came?! Are you kidding me? 624 is pretty damn close to 638, and 624 in an actual test trumps 638 in a school tournament by about 500 miles. They shouldn't even be discussed in the same sentence.

Kambli, of course, remained unwilling "to buy the argument that school cricket makes for easy records."

So here's what I think. Tomorrow, there's a match in my studio apartment. All are welcome - boys, girls, infants, and seniors. The wall by the radiator is a six, and the tv stand is the wicket. If you hit the computer, you're out... Let's make some records!