There was a time long ago, which now seems almost like a dream, when the sports pages of any daily newspaper held out the promise of an assured refuge from the dismaying stories of the main pages. A reader could always retreat into the peaceful and entertaining world of sports, and at times even feel elated at the exploits of our cricket, hockey and especially squash stars.
Not any more.
While the horrors around us have multiplied manifold and the sporting successes become just a cherished memory, the sports pages have assumed a dark aspect too, with their table of contents now competing menacingly with the mainstream news in spreading alarm and despondency among an already shaken people.
The latest controversy surrounding our resignation-prone and now apparently resigned ex-skipper Shahid Afridi and the PCB is a case in point. One of many instances, indeed, that have dogged this unique collection of superannuated incompetents and egoistic individuals from the outset.
The first thing that strikes one is the utter needlessness of the whole affair, its public impact being further worsened by all those concerned shooting off their mouths on prime time, in press conferences and in leaked tour reports. That is, all but the man who ought to be the most worried, the otherwise very vocal chairman of the PCB, who failed to stop the controversy from spreading in time. In fact, he became a catalyst by appearing on a talk show.
In this awkward matter, he seems to have adopted the tactics of his master, the patron, who at a time of acute national crisis is ‘not at home’, often in the literal and sometimes in the metaphorical sense. Getting a clear statement out of him on any issue of pressing national importance is like parting a miser from his money. When last reports came in the ‘genial Judas’ of the PCB was winging off to the capital for a one-on-one with monsieur le patron, no doubt hoping for enlightenment from the pearls of wisdom dropping from the mouth of that godfatherly sage, to cope with the new crisis afflicting national cricket.
The second is its timing. Coming hot on the heels of two very devastating incidents which showed up certain haughty professionals in a not too favourable light, and more suicide attacks, the management-player split which threatens to take a much more serious turn, was the last thing one could possibly have wanted for national morale. The fissures that were apparent on almost all the issues at the national level, have now surfaced in the cricketing sphere. The Code of Conduct might not have been signed or even been in existence, just as the much-touted Charter of Democracy was consigned to the dustbin at the first opportunity.
No doubt, the first casualties of mass commercialism of cricket have been chivalry and good conduct on and off the field. But this latest episode of Shahid Afridi versus The Rest seems to be getting out of hand by the unwelcome involvement of political parties and the matter being taken to court. As if the proceedings of the Southwark Crown Court in UK regarding our three musketeers were not enough to rub it in for us!
Through all the labyrinth of allegations and counter- accusations, the raging and ranting of the various antagonists, one incident stands out above all the others – so far. The reprehensible act of revoking Shahid Afridi’s NOC which prevented him from playing for the English county Hampshire, exposes the sheer pettiness of the pygmies heading the PCB. It clearly shows the vindictiveness of the formidable group arrayed against Afridi and the degree of their unmistakable hatred, as also revealed in their withholding of the dues legitimately due to the former captain.
It must be mentioned that Afridi’s last minute absence from Hampshire’s starting lineup understandably invited some comment and remark from the county (not to mention considerable financial loss to Afridi), bringing our cricket further into disrepute.
Whatever his faults, whether indiscipline, immaturity or irrepressible flamboyance, in the backdrop of his recent performances as skipper Afridi deserved better. And that too at the hands of those who are mere satellites, glowing on reflected or ‘borrowed’ light.