Osman Samiuddin

Mohammad Yousuf's potential loss will be a big blow to the PCB © AFP

Rare is the issue in Pakistan cloaked in black, white and little else. The deeper you delve, the more complex it gets; contradiction, hypocrisy, incompetence, lies, and sometimes facts, happily swim together in this cesspool, where nothing is really right or wrong. So it is with the decision of four active internationals to sign up with the Indian Cricket League, and maybe sign away what remains of their Pakistan careers.

What you also find is bristling diversity of opinion here. So for every person who says the PCB is incompetent, uncaring, and has driven its players away, another will chip in about the mercenary nature of the modern cricketer. The media, newly loud and proud, captures it best; one article in The News vented fury at the greed of the players, while the cartoonist down at The Post did likewise at the board. Both views are forceful, neither is wrong; but they should not be mutually exclusive either.

The matter is indeed complex. Last year Mohammad Yousuf was the best batsman in the
world, in the form of his life. Soon, at 32, he might be banned from playing for Pakistan. He has reason to be aggrieved, dropped as he was from the Twenty20 squad - not for a youngster, which would have at least had the benefit of logic and planning, but for Misbah-ul-Haq, which has neither.

Yet should Yousuf be so hurt by an omission from, essentially, a lesser format of the game as to risk his entire future with Pakistan in one almighty petulant fit? And just how well does his image as a deeply religious and spiritual man, free from material trappings, sit with his keenness to play in a league where only the financial details seem to have been finalised?

Abdul Razzaq eagerly became the poor, victimised, senior servant of Pakistan cricket, forced out before his time. Injury forced him to miss the World Cup, after which, he complained, the board didn't bother calling him even once. If true, it is indeed a sad, damning indictment of how the PCB treats its commodities.

As sad, perhaps, as Razzaq's reaction to his dropping from the Twenty20 squad. One omission is all it took for him to renounce international cricket. Had they Razzaq's stomach for a fight, Graeme Hick, Mark Ramprakash and Sourav Ganguly - no strangers to axes or comebacks - would have committed suicide long ago. Forget that Razzaq's form in the last two years, under any microscope, from any angle, given any spin, called for no better than the chop.

And what to make of Imran Farhat? Some injustice has been done, it is true. He was dropped just before the World Cup, having been persisted with for some time, for Imran Nazir, who hadn't played an international in nearly three years. But from the way Farhat attacked selectors and justified his joining the ICL, you'd think Don Bradman had been axed, not a man who, after six years in the game, averages 33 in Tests and 30 in ODIs with three international hundreds.

Inzamam-ul-Haq's choice is of a different nature altogether; not only is he, at 37, not in the team's current plans, even if he was, it would not have been for much longer. And he fits the ICL profile; nearing the end of his career, this is an opportunity not to be spurned.

If we're being ruthlessly honest, then Yousuf's potential loss is the greatest. The PCB has already acknowledged as much, albeit a little tactlessly. If pushed, a future without Farhat, Razzaq and Inzamam is tangible, but without Yousuf? Reconciling, as Pakistan must, to a middle order without Inzamam is difficult enough; without Yousuf as well it hardly bears thinking about.

Ultimately, that the only active internationals to sign are from Pakistan says as much about the players as it does about the board, but it says most about the traditionally fractious relationship between the two. None of these players was bound to inform the board of his decision, and none except Yousuf did; the board's failure to contact Yousuf or Razzaq when central contracts were being signed was similarly telling.

Now, four days later, little save vague noises about bans and reconciliation with Yousuf emerge from board officials. Having maintained loudly that joining the ICL would result in life bans - and having been subsequently caught off guard - a u-turn for an administration increasingly renowned for them, is not ruled out.

What to make of it all? Feel first for Geoff Lawson, who was welcomed to Pakistan with this development, a greeting that, for novelty, is up there with eskimos rubbing noses. Then resign yourself to the methods of Ardeshir Cowasjee, that irascible, legendary columnist who, when writing of Pakistan's muddy politics, often invokes the famous Urdu proverb: Iss hamaam mein sab nangey hein (All are naked in this bathhouse).

Mohammad Yousuf's exclusion is bathed in innuendo, with reporters winking, nudging and whispering, as no doubt will many followers © AFP

Osman Samiuddin

Nothing illustrates more lucidly the mysterious, whimsical workings of Pakistan selection committees than the decision not to select Mohammad Yousuf in the 15-man squad for the Twenty20 World Championship in South Africa.

They tried, bless 'em, to justify the decision to drop him but they came up empty. Yousuf was, in the words today of Salahuddin Ahmed, the chief selector, "a world-class player, no two ways about it." He is also currently Pakistan's best batsman and, as Ricky Ponting proves every day, a good batsman is a good batsman is a good batsman, be it over five days, 50 overs or 20. Yet, Yousuf did not make it into a 15-man squad with only two specialist middle-order batsmen.

First the selectors claimed they wanted to give him a rest, disregarding that he, unlike a number of senior players globally, wanted no such thing. They then admitted they wanted - no, needed - "one batsman who can stay at the wicket, because, whether it is a Test, an ODI or a 20-over game, you have to have one who can stick around and build."

From this they took a not inconsiderable leap and concluded - on what basis is still not clear - that Misbah-ul-Haq (ostensibly the replacement) might do the job better than Yousuf has been doing over the last year. Perhaps Misbah's impressive domestic Twenty20 average (just under 50) got him the nod over a man with over 14,000 international runs, 35 international hundreds and just off a patch so purple, popstar Prince would have been jealous.

No? Okay, then try this one: "We are trying out new and fresh names." At 33, Misbah is a few months older than Yousuf, so even if you give him more benefit than doubt (as noted commentator Omar Kureishi used to say of dodgy decisions), his best years are likely already lost to Pakistan. He last played an international for Pakistan nearly three years ago; after averaging 13 from five Tests and 33 from 13 ODIs, there was a reason he was not selected again. In short, he is as fresh as last month's pizza.

Were the selectors really serious about younger legs, a new spirit and all that, then any of Khurram Manzoor, Khalid Latif or Shahid Yousuf - all of whom impressed in spurts during the practice matches - made more sensible replacements. Even if they had not impressed, at least the selectors could have shielded themselves behind the mantra of giving youth its day.

Assurances obviously were given for his future. "This is not the end of his career, let me assure everyone," said Salahuddin. "We haven't treated him with any disrespect by dropping him and he is a great asset to the Pakistan team. It shouldn't be made into an issue of pride, because we haven't dropped him as such,"

True enough, his future in not in any serious doubt. But given that Yousuf was naturally unhappy at his omission - his weak proclamations otherwise notwithstanding - can Pakistan really afford to treat him this shabbily, especially given that Inzamam might no longer be on the scene either soon enough? Is Pakistan really blessed with that much batting talent?

'At his best, Twenty20 cricket is to Abdur Razzaq what water is to fish' © Getty Images

No other decision ruffled as many feathers as this one. Not even, sadly it must be said, the dropping of Abdul Razzaq. At his best, Twenty20 cricket is to Razzaq what water is to fish. A few overs of brisk, constricting and attacking medium-pace and a solid lower-order guarantee of boundaries; as Kamran Abbasi notes in this post Razzaq's decline has meant what was once unthinkable is now reality.

Ultimately, though, in the absence of any solid logic, it is Yousuf's exclusion that bathes in innuendo, reporters winking, nudging and whispering, as no doubt will many followers. Here was further proof, some muttered, that the board was bent on cleansing the team of the religiosity it had been engulfed in.

No, others countered, it was aimed solely at diluting the hold of Inzamam-ul-Haq on this team, thus giving Shoaib Malik a greater chance to mould his own side. Wait a minute, some said, Misbah's was a pressure inclusion, instigated by the board and one not all selectors agreed to. Pakistanis love a conspiracy theory, it was noted once in The Economist. Probably, it concluded, because they have an uncanny way of coming true in Pakistan.

Inzamam-ul-Haq's run as Pakistan came to an abrupt and traumatic conclusion © Getty Images

Osman Samiuddin

It's a new dawn,
it's a new day,
it's a new life
For me
and I'm feeling good

'Feeling Good' - Eunice Waymon aka Nina Simone, 1965

A brief dawn in Lahore gave way to the rising of the sun at 5.53am PST today. Six hours and seven minutes later, at Gaddafi Stadium, one day ended in Pakistan cricket with Inzamam-ul-Haq's heated press conference. An hour after that, a new day began with the chairman's press conference.

Four years ago, another new dawn greeted Pakistan's cricket and yet it appears in no better shape today than when Waqar Younis's dysfunctional rabble was dumped out of South Africa. Possibly worse, some contend. Cynicism in these times comes cheap and easy. There is no captain, no coach, no selectors and a chairman who was waiting to resign but now hasn't. Yet hope must be found somewhere.

Well, unlike 2003 axing over half the squad is unlikely and on balance, unnecessary. A changing of the guard felt natural then, in a team still carrying Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis and Saeed Anwar, all of whom had seen better decades.

This Pakistan side, in contrast, is still young; officially (birth records being the imposters that they are here) only three of Pakistan's 15 in the Caribbean are over 30. Outside, Mohammad Asif and Abdul Razzaq also remain twenty-somethings.

The captaincy need not be such a thorny decision either. As leader, the succession plan points to Younis Khan to assume a position he, and everyone else, has been expecting for some time. That is something not oft-said in Pakistan.

Yet, there exists hesitancy within the PCB, also evidenced by the chairman's willingness to defer an appointment for at least a month (though he remains, personally, in favour). Younis appears a widely-backed choice and the logical one too, his Champions Trophy tantrum notwithstanding. Given how rare consensus is locally, should it not be seized upon immediately?

As leader, the succession plan points to Younis Khan to assume a position he, and everyone else, has been expecting for some time

Replacing Inzamam's middle-order presence will take some doing. Pakistan dithered between grooming a middle-order bat and playing an all-rounder in recent times. The uncertainty was without beneficiaries; Asim Kamal was lost, Faisal Iqbal persevered with without feeling, Yasir Hameed sidelined and neither Shahid Afridi nor Razzaq provided any lasting security. Who is to come through? No obvious batting prodigy lies undiscovered.

Domestic cricket is not shielding any exceptional openers either, though if the new selection committee perseveres with one pair for longer than the last one did with any, they might reap some reward. The bowling, when healthy, is in ruder health but there should be concern at the National Cricket Academy that only one player from two successive U-19 World Cup winning sides has managed to play for Pakistan. And Riaz Afridi only played one Test over two years ago.

Within the grand red bricks and plush offices of Gaddafi Stadium, more needs doing. Nasim Ashraf stays on, to the chagrin of many, but also with the defense plea that he had been handed charge of a sinking ship only six months before the World Cup; he maintained throughout that his work was to begin after and now is his chance. People can shout till they're blue that he shouldn't be there at all, but he is now and that can only be changed by the President. With him comes a new management team altogether.

It is unlikely to be so, but the first task should be to find and implement the constitution. It is now, apparently, in "legal vetting" with the Attorney General but whatever the phrase, there is little question that it is something that has been deliberately and persistently sidelined administration after administration. No more. Pakistan has been ad-hoc from 1999, since when un-coincidentally, cricket has been at its maddest.

Nasim Ashraf continues as PCB chairman despite offering his resignation © AFP

The new coach will likely speak the same language as the players, though the criteria should be skills rather than language. Ramiz Raja, who was instrumental in bringing Bob Woolmer to Pakistan, said recently that Pakistan may be able to operate without a coach by giving the captain more power. Given Pakistan's familiarity with dictatorial captains and their failings, the idea is a risky one. Aaqib Javed has been spoken of, and he has valuable junior experience, but he is newly-responsible at the NCA and with Mudassar Nazar, his brief to discover and develop young talent may suit him better.

Even by the exceptionally broad parameters of sanity within which Pakistan cricket operates, these last eight months have been something else; not just traumatic and volatile but ultimately, macabre and disturbing. But it is darkest before dawn, humans love repeating. Pakistan cricket has seen numerous new dawns, but it has not seen this much darkness. The hope, as it now must be, is that it will give way to a dawn that has never before been seen either.

Bob Woolmer

'Inzamam-ul-Haq created probably the defining moment of the game, an innings which proved that experience is something you cannot just buy off the shelf' © AFP

A thesis I have been reading recently reveals a statistic that says Pakistan had a 5% chance of winning a Test match in South Africa, while South Africa has a 56% chance of winning a Test in Pakistan. Statistics do tell a story though they sometimes don't tell the whole story: as luck would have it, Pakistan has now increased the percentage of winning in South Africa.

Include India's win at the Wanderers and there is definitely an effort from the subcontinent to improve their cricket on the harder, bouncier pitches of the Southern Hemisphere. One swallow doesn't make a summer but two means getting there.

Pakistan's terrific team effort was a truly special win, one that rewarded hard work and application, one that included some strong individual efforts and one that had a great team spirit about it, when it was really needed. Such results are built on key moments. Here are mine.

Flipside of the coin

The toss proved a good one to lose. The pitch looked good and both sides would have batted, but there was bounce in it. Some of the dismissals looked poor and some South African batsmen might have thought they were unlucky. Hashim Amla was caught behind down the leg side, AB de Villiers edged a wide bouncer and Graeme Smith was caught at slip off the keeper's gloves. Still, it was difficult to see how people were getting out. Admittedly, Shoaib Akhtar, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Sami bowled really well and Danish Kaneria had a strong breeze to help his leg-spinners curve and dip as well. Getting them out for only 124 was the key.

The strike back

As expected, South Africa fought back with the ball. Younis Khan and Kamran Akmal were both fighting hard at the end of the first day, but of the 16 wickets that fell, the two most crucial appeared to be that of Younis and Kamran both falling, within minutes, in the day's last two overs. That was 1-1 for the day: I asked Jacques Kallis at the end of the day how he assessed the day and the pitch. He replied simply, "Bob, the game is going forward." Go forward it did.

The Masterpiece: as scripted by Inzamam-ul-Haq

The second day witnessed an absolutely magnificent exhibition of batting with the tail, of farming the strike. With his unbeaten 92, Inzamam-ul-Haq created probably the defining moment of the game, an innings which proved that experience is something you cannot just buy off the shelf. Inzi calculated it beautifully and only with Mohammad Asif did he really begin protecting him. In most of the 20 overs they batted, Asif had to face a maximum of two balls, Inzi not only controlling the strike but also playing some fantastic shots. The lead he got eventually proved vital.

Murphy's Law inverted: A good one from Kamran Akmal was due, especially after some serious lapses behind the wicket © AFP

A long way from Faisalabad

When South Africa batted again they were buoyed by the fact that Shoaib was unfit to bowl. It was a defining moment for South Africa. It was also one for Pakistan for it meant someone had to stand up and be counted in what was a three-man attack. Sure enough, they all responded and Asif was exceptional, along with Kaneria and Sami as all went beyond the call of duty.

On a day of twists, their contributions were vital: South Africa played well, with Kallis and then Mark Boucher and Shaun Pollock taking the game away from Pakistan. But just after each session break, we struck, Asif getting Herschelle Gibbs and Kallis after lunch and then Kaneria dismissing Pollock just after tea. Even then Makhaya Ntini and Andre Nel's bravado meant Pakistan were faced with an interesting total. I saw Pollock at the bar that evening and he reminded me of Faisalabad in 1997-98, when South Africa bowled out Pakistan for 92, chasing only 146. I said there are two differences: one, I was South Africa coach at Faisalabad and two, we're a long way from Faisalabad.

The Endgame

The final moment came when Inzi was undone by a ball that did not bounce and was adjudged leg before off Ntini while chasing the target. Immediately, visions of Faisalabad swirled in my head. But there was a nagging, positive thought at the back of my mind: Kamran Akmal, who had been criticised for a missed stumping (extremely tough) and for two dropped chances might make amends with the bat. He started fortuitously, but the secret of captaincy is always to put the fielders in the gaps. After it, he was fantastic, batting with the Pathan tiger, Younis, who fought like only a tribesman from the north of Pakistan can fight. Ironic that their 99-run partnership ended the game, as it was those two who had been involved at the end of the first day too.

It is of small consolation to the losing side, but it capped a very fine Test match, one that offered the connoisseur everything. It was tense on the last afternoon but in the end the difference was that cameo of pure genius by Inzi. Deservedly, he was presented with both "his best win" and the match award.

Shoaib Akhtar said he was fit but he has been left out of the tour squad to South Africa © AFP

Osman Samiuddin

If every Pakistani had a paisa for every time they heard "Shoaib Akhtar has not been considered because he is not fit", then the percentage of the entire population deemed to be below the poverty line might not be as high as 35%. We could probably be a first world country now.

Mind you, it isn't always the truth: like explaining flight delays with the time-honoured "We are experiencing technical difficulties", the line that "Shoaib is unfit" actually is often a convenient way of masking all sorts of troublesome issues.

He is "not match fit" again apparently for South Africa, even though he said
recently that he was. Given that his fitness and form were judged on the evidence
presented from three Twenty20 games, one four-day domestic match where he bowled 21
overs and a three-day training camp (as proof, that is about as passable as that
used to justify the invasion of Iraq) you have to think that there must be something
more to it than just fitness. How else can you really explain not taking Shoaib (it
isn't the doping taint either, for then Mohammad Asif wouldn't be going)?

Pakistan are going to South Africa, where pitches are still quicker and bouncier
than most places. Pakistan have also seen India's pace attack repeatedly trouble the
host's fragile top order. Pakistan also know that their batsmen are likely to
struggle so they will be ever more reliant on their fast bowlers to produce results.

Naturally then the best fast bowlers are to be taken and if you have as many as
Pakistan do, then you can afford to gamble on one who is not fully fit. Especially so if you can afford to give Mohammad Sami another chance, who even when he is fully fit, is a bigger gamble altogether. Rana Naved-ul-Hasan is back in ODI form, but apart from
two Tests against England, the jury is still out over how successful a Test bowler
he can be. And who would the desperately out of touch Graeme Smith and Herschelle
Gibb rather face first up: Shoaib or Sami?

If nothing else, surely Shoaib's experience counts for something. We justifiably
bitch about the measly number of Tests he has played in what will soon be a decade
of international cricket, but at 42, it is still only 27 appearances less than the
five fast bowlers going to South Africa put together. Sami apart, he is the only
bowler with experience of those conditions.

The speculation doesn't appear to be entirely unfounded either and there are suggestions that the captain was adamant about not taking him

So it must be, as plentiful speculation in newspapers for much of this week that
Shoaib would not be picked suggested, because officials and team-mates alike are
again unhappy with his attitude. The speculation doesn't appear to be entirely
unfounded either and there are suggestions that the captain was adamant about not
taking him.

If so, then this is a new development, for Shoaib seemed to have been rehabilitated
last year, while helping Pakistan win a series against England and a Test against
India. He had even, very publicly, made up with Inzamam. What has changed since
then, seeing as he has only played four matches for Pakistan in that time? And is he
now that much of a hindrance to the team that his attitude cannot be dealt with if
it helps win a Test series, as it did last winter?

If he has become that problematic, then does it not make more sense for the board
and the team management to just come out and say it, rather than trot out tiresome
and barely plausible excuses? That would mean, of course, that they be honest and
open and because we've had a paisa for each time they did that, it explains
why there is so much poverty in Pakistan. It also explains why Pakistan will never
be able to fully resolve its complex relationship with Shoaib.

Bob Woolmer

	Mohammad Yousuf, Woolmer says, is now calculating in his shot selection, deadly in its execution and determined in its application © AFP

When I started my stint with Pakistan Mohammad Yousuf was Yousuf Youhana, a very fine player whom I admired, who timed the ball well and was an obvious choice for the Pakistan team - though judging from the feedback on my website not everyone agreed. He was, in fact, the first player I bumped into as he religiously (excuse me) came to the gym at the academy where I was and still am billeted.

Yousuf is a quiet man, a dedicated professional when it comes to batting and training. I always begin discussions with batsmen by asking questions to find out their likes and dislikes, what they consider important. When I threw those questions at him he was immediately receptive and willing to discuss his technique.

He is having a dream year: eight centuries (and counting) and breaking Viv Richards's record of most Test runs. Absolutely amazing, which leads to the obvious question: Why?

There were two areas that Yousuf and I have worked on technically - his balance and the ability to play the left arm in-swing bowler - and in both cases I think we have been successful. I say 'we' because the coach and player create a partnership. Interestingly, he has the high bat-lift that Sehwag, Lara and Ponting use. It is a technique that Ted Dexter shared with me when he was advising me before a series against West Indies many moons ago.

I didn't last long enough to test it, unfortunately, but I now understand why it works. The key is not to hold the bat firmly with the bottom hand; by having it raised, the bat speed increases in the impact area, which gives the impression of superior timing. It is a wonderful gift.

Like all great players he plays under his eyes - also known as playing late - and, if it could be measured, it would be interesting to see how well he watches the ball.

He still has weaknesses, as do all batsmen, but his main one is when he takes his pads off. I compare it to him stepping out of a Ferrari and then, as he goes in to field, driving a farm truck and changing his pace alarmingly. When he is batting so well perhaps you can forgive him. Perhaps.

There were two areas that Yousuf and I have worked on technically - his balance and the ability to play the left arm in-swing bowler - and in both cases I think we have been successful

However his fielding is more a mental problem; Yousuf is very quick over 20 metres and has run out many a player from mid-on. Like most run-machines I have met, the smile on the face fades a touch when the fielding sessions start - I believe he could be brilliant in the field if he just put his mind to it.

Yousuf is on record as crediting his conversion to Islam for being a major factor in his recent successes. His conversion initially caused him problems and he stalled as a player, losing some form as he wrestled with the enormity of the change. There was a period when the new Yousuf was so distraught that that he even saw his batting shoes as a factor in his mini-slump.

Gradually, though, Islam has helped him focus on his skills and has shaped the way he practices and the way he trains. There is no doubt that his religion has encouraged a new serenity at the crease, where he is calculating in his shot selection, deadly in its execution and determined in its application.

His religion has also influenced the way that he handles his life generally, which proves that when you are at peace with the world you can focus on work, family and sport with time to spare. It is, in fact, an interesting study of the effect of religion on an individual.

Oh by the way and as a footnote I suspect the search for the perfect batting shoe has ended.

Yousuf now works with our trainer Murray Stevenson every day in the gym, partly to strengthen his right (throwing) shoulder. He also practices avariciously on a marble slab for 40 minutes working on the bouncing ball and, when it is angled, dealing with the ball that nips back and nips away. He bats sensibly in the nets, which has been the hallmark of most great batsmen. His hunger for runs and desire to score big are similar to all the great players of any era and certainly Yousuf now moves into the great player category.

I look forward to seeing him continue as there are few better sights in cricket when "Mo Yo" is in full flow.