Quote of the day

He (Michael Ballack) always gives a contribution to the team and not everyone can say the same, so he can feel at least pride and honour.

Jose Mourinho. Hmmm, I wonder who the target of that thinly-veiled jibe is. Call me crazy, but I think it's the guy whose name rhymes with Devchenko. Let the speculation on Mourinho's future begin. Early call: somewhere in Italy.

How Do You Know When A Columnist Has Run Out Of Things To Say?

When he starts talking about what he's been eating the last couple of months.

The eating binge started when my host Ijazul Hasan picked me up from the airport and drove me straight to lunch at Shahid Amjad’s farm. There, in very picturesque surroundings on a glorious winter day, we tucked into saag, seekh kebabs and a delicious pulao.

Worse was to follow: I had come to attend young Jafar Ali’s wedding, and the food at the mehndi was seriously good. There, Anis Hyder Shah mentioned a place he knew that, according to him, served the best meat in Lahore. Having lived many years in the city, I wanted to check out the joint that had escaped my carnivorous attention for all this time. And as Anis knows his desi food, I promptly accepted his invitation to go there for lunch the next day. It took us 40 minutes of awful traffic to get to Neela Gumbud, and I was starving by the time we walked into the lane off the square where Ghafoor cooks his legendary mutton-chholas. A few beat-up metal tables were scattered about the sidewalk, and we asked Ghafoor for his best cuts of meat. Imagine our disappointment when he informed us that after the blood-letting over Eid, his meat supplies had not been resumed. But as a consolation, he offered us chicken-chholas instead. While the dish was good, it wasn’t up to Abbot Road standards. I will have to return one day to verify Anis’s claim.

A brief diversion here about the humble chhola or chickpea: when I first arrived in Lahore around 40 years ago and began my long, cholesterol-laden relationship with gurda-kapuras, friends urged me to try the chicken-chholas (or chickur-chholas), but I turned up my nose at this seemingly vulgar combination. The truth is that the chickpea does not figure prominently in Mughlai or Lucknavi cuisines, and I assumed the dish was peasant fare not to be taken seriously. How young and foolish I was. The chhola, when lovingly cooked, absorbs the flavours and juices of the spices and meat with which it is simmered, and releases them when you bite into it. When properly prepared, it offers a slight resistance to the teeth before giving up its essence. A steaming bowl of chicken-chholas accompanied with hot roti from the oven has few equals among Lahore’s splendid array of street food.

The next day we drove to Ijaz’s farm in Sheikhupura where, again among bucolic surroundings, we had an excellent lunch featuring saag and a chicken curry, using desi fowl naturally. It must be said that the company and the setting can make or mar a meal. And at the farm, both were of the very highest quality. Dinner that evening was at Javed Masood’s where I encountered beef in a meltingly tender shab-degh for the first time.

I think it's safe to say that I'm going to be ordering desi take out for lunch. Yeah, Devon Avenue.

Ahsan Is A Complete Fucking Jackass And Doesn't Deserve To Write About The Game And Is Able To Do So Only Because His Friend Started A Blog

I would have written a post with this heading at the end of the series but a reader issued a friendly reminder and requested I do it now, so I'm doing it now. As some of you may recall, this is what I wrote in a post at the conclusion of the home series against the Windies:

Before I move off Pakistan, I want to talk about Imran the Terrible. His flashy, lucky batting has just guaranteed him three tests in South Africa. I've never been good with predictions, but mark my words. Print this post out, underline it, highlight it in pink, yellow and green, do whatever the hell you want. My prediction is this: Imran the Terrible will be a complete, unmitigated disaster in South Africa. I'm talking Agarkar-in-Australia-in-2000 type disaster. I'm talking Atapattu-in-his-debut-series disaster. If he averages more than 15 in South Africa, I promise to write a post with the heading "Ahsan is a complete fucking jackass and doesn't deserve to write about the game and is able to do so only because his friend started a blog". You can hold me to this. I will hold myself to this. 15 is the magic number. Remember this.

Since Imran the Terrible has already scored 26 and 68 in this Test, it means he can't possibly average less than 15. So there you go.

Just once, just one measly time, I want one of my predictions to come out right. How can I know so much about the game and never, I mean never, get one right? What sort of horrible curse is this? Oh, well. Actually, if you think about it, I am actually helping all eleven of our readers in a roundabout way. See, if any of you want to gamble on sports, just read this blog and then pick the opposite of whatever I say. At this rate, you'll be a millionaire by June.

Comparison to Multan continues...

In addition to the three points raised in the post below, you can now add these two:

4. England's target in Multan: 198. South Africa's target at Centurion: 199.

5. Chasing their target, England's second wicket fell at 64 in the 20th over. South Africa's second wicket fell at 67 in the 18th over.

Eerie coincidences aside, I actually don't think we're going to win tomorrow (and I'm not just using the age-old "saying something when you actually want the opposite to happen" trick). The reason is that South Africa's batting lineup is much better, and much deeper, than England's was in Multan. Plus, they recently chased a very similar total against India, so they know how to go about it. Be that as it may, I'm proud of our team. We're missing our best bowler of last year (Gully) and our best batsman of last year (Yousuf), our diamond in the rough (Asif) is returning after a long lay off, our team has gone through all sorts of turmoil recently, and we've still fought these guys tooth and nail. Yes, some of our top order batsmen could have gone on after making starts (they've combined for three 60's, a 40 and two 30's and exactly 0 hundreds) but I think that's missing the bigger picture: we're seriously undermanned in this Test, in a country where we've had very little success, against a team on a high, and we've made it close. That's a good thing.

Déjà vu?

Unfortunately, living where I do, it's next to impossible to watch any of the First Test against South Africa. The time difference between Chicago and South Africa means the game starts at 2:30 a.m and ends some time around 9:30 a.m, so at best, I'd get an hour or so, which is why I haven't coughed up the cash to get the feed on my computer. Nevertheless, just reading about what's happening, this test, at least so far, is starting to remind me of Multan 2005.

Now normally I would never compare an ongoing match to a past win because of my perpetual fear of jinxing us. But seeing as how my anti-jinxing tactics never work anyway, I'm just going to go ahead and point out the comparison. Consider:

1. Both times we batted first and ended up with a decent but below-par score. In Multan it was 274, here it was 313.

2. Both times, the opposition managed a significant lead (144 at Multan, 104 here) on the back of a big hundred by a left-hander (Trescothick with 193, Prince with 138).

3. Both times, Day 3 saw a solid batting effort by us, keeping us in the game. In Multan, we ended the day 19 behind with 8 wickets in hand. Here, we're 1 behind with 8 wickets in hand. In addition, both times, one of the overnight batsman on Day 3 was a left-handed opener with a solid score to his name (Butt 53 not out in Multan, Farhat 41 not out here).

Tell me I'm wrong.

Quote of the day

The cretins rule in “Alpha Dog,” which has much the same entertainment value you get from watching monkeys fling scat at one another in a zoo or reading the latest issue of Star magazine.

Man, I love reading movie reviews. Is there a more scathing, brutal bunch of people than movie critics? What would it be like to have dinner with five of these people? For me, the experience would rate somewhere between "Captaining Pakistan with Asif, Shoaib, Gul and Kaneria at my disposal" and "Watching 30 straight episodes of The Office (the American one)".

Mukherjee's Visit to Pakistan

The Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee is visiting Pakistan for the first time this weekend. With all the lead-up to this visit (Musharraf's "We'll give up our claim to Kashmir" and Manmohan's "Breakfast in Amritsar, lunch in Lahore, dinner in Kabul" comments, to name just two seminal moments in the last month), I can't help but feel something substantive is on the cards. Even if they don't announce anything, I'm sure sufficient progress is going to be made on certain issues (joint mechanisms in Kashmir, Siachen, consulates in Mumbai/Karachi etc) for an announcement to be possible on the sidelines of the Saarc summit in April. The BBC is not so sure, however, saying "nothing spectacular" is expected and no agreements will be signed. On the other hand, the Daily Times carries a story saying the Asian Age is reporting that differences on certain issues have been "narrowed" and that "certain mechanisms appear to be taking shape." Who's right? Don't know, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.

For whatever it's worth, Musharraf sees "light at the end of the tunnel" for India-Pakistan relations. The timing of such a statement is certainly interesting though I would be prudent and not read too much into what he says, given his proclivity for overly optimistic statements in the past.

What's Weird About This Picture?


Younis Khan finally has a bat sponsor, that's what. Good for him.

Photo credit: AFP

Le génocide? C'est une bonne chose

Deeply disturbing article in the Guardian today on France's role countenancing, even outright supporting, the genocide in Rwanda. The article talks about France's leading anti-terrorism judge heading an inquiry into the genocide and concluding that the Tutsis essentially brought it upon themselves since they - according to the judge - were responsible for the assassination of the then President Habyarimana, which set off the mass killing. The present government, headed by Tutsis, rejected the findings and in turn set up its own inquiry to look at France's support for the Hutu militias and death squads before and during the massacre, turning up with some fairly damning evidence.

When the genocide started, Paris made no secret of where its loyalties lay. The French military flew in ammunition for government forces and, in the following weeks, a stream of Hutu officials travelled to Paris, including Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza, who was later convicted of genocide by the international tribunal, for meetings with President François Mitterrand and the French prime minister. Even as the mass graves filled across Rwanda, Paris engineered the delivery of millions of dollars' worth of weapons to the Hutu regime from Egypt and South Africa.

Africa has traditionally been considered such a special case in Paris that France's policy is run out of the presidency. At the time, the "Africa cell" was headed by Mitterrand's son, Jean-Christophe, a close friend of the Habyarimanas. He later said that there could not have been a genocide because "Africans are not that organised". France's president did not deny what had happened, but took a view no less racist: "In such countries, genocide is not too important."

By the way, French disdain for human life was not restricted to mere words. I had heard this story elsewhere too, and am glad this article mentions it which saves me from trying to find a reliable source on google.

The French army turned its back on many others, including the French embassy's Tutsi staff, who were mostly abandoned to their deaths despite desperate pleas to diplomats they had worked with for years. The French soldiers did rescue some Rwandans. They took the assassinated president's wife (a notorious anti-Tutsi extremist in her own right), and various Hutu politicians who helped organise the genocide. They also remembered the French embassy dog, which was carefully loaded on to an army lorry while a Tutsi man who ran up to beg for help was turned away.

Why, you might ask, did the French train and arm the Hutu militias with machetes, against the minority Tutsis, who literally had just sticks and stones? The claim is made that it was a question of language and culture. Apparently, the French would rather support Francophones over Anglophones, consequences be damned. A French historian is quoted in the piece:

Gérard Prunier, a French historian who advised the French government during the later stages of its intervention in Rwanda, has characterised Paris's view of its former African colonies not as foreign countries but as "part of the family". Paris's African "back yard", he wrote in a history of the Rwandan genocide - in which he made clear his disaffection with French support for the Hutu regime - "remains its back yard because all the chicks cackle in French. There is a high degree of symbiosis between French and Francophone African political elites. It is a mixture of many things: old memories, shared material interests, delusions of grandeur, gossip, sexual peccadilloes."

He added: "Of course, the arch-enemy in this cosy relationship, the hissing snake in the Garden of Eden, is the 'Anglo-Saxon'." Prunier said French governments viewed "the whole world as a cultural, political and economic battlefield between France and the Anglo-Saxons ... It is the main reason - and practically the only one - why Paris intervened so quickly and so deeply in the growing Rwandan crisis."

Somehow, I find dubious the claim that the French went through all this trouble only because they wanted Rwanda in the control of people who spoke French and not English. Surely 800,000 deaths were not worth a cultural sphere of influence? Then again, I know next to nothing about the region or its politics (though lately I've been developing an interest), so it could well be true.

AI in (Powder) Blue

I watched my first Nuggets game since Allen Iverson, the greatest basketball player in history, got traded from Philly. It was so...weird. There's no other word for it. Following him for so long, as a Sixer, in that arena, in that city, and now it's all changed. Don't get me wrong; I think it's great he got out of there, even if he didn't end up where I (along with every other NBA fan) wanted him - in Minnesota, where him and KG would have formed the greatest 1-2 punch since Michael and Scottie. The atmosphere, the team, the fans, everything in Philly had gotten to the point where it was best for all parties for him to just leave. But just because it was good for him to leave doesn't mean it's not strange to see him in another uniform. Like Chris Webber said, Allen Iverson is Philly.

Anyways, AI played a great game, shot 15-25, and his team still lost because they put up bad shots in the 3rd and 4th quarters when the Spurs made their run. No biggie. One loss here or there right now is not going to hurt them. But when Melo gets back, they better figure out things quickly. By figuring out, I mean:
1. Denver's down by one, 12 seconds to go, who does Karl draw up the play for?
2. Who's going to take fewer shots than they're used to: AI, Melo, J.R. Smith, or Earl Boykins? All of them? Some combination of them? One of them?
2a. How will the person taking fewer shots react to said development?
3. What's the crunch time lineup? With Najera and Camby in there, one of Smith or Boykins has to sit. Which one will it be? How will Smith/Boykins react?

Whatever happens, it's sure to be interesting, which is a lot more than you could say about the situation in Philly over the last couple of years. But enough bitching about Philly. Here are my personal five favourite moments/games from the Allen Iverson era in Philadelphia, in reverse order. Three are from the same season, but that's understandable given the season it was.

5. It was a game in Orlando, some time during the 2004-05 season (the year the Webber trade happened, though this game was before the trade). Anyways I'm not absolutely sure how the play started; it was either a long rebound or a steal by AI in the backcourt. Either way, he was off and running. And I mean running. AI on the break, in his glory years, was a true sight to behold. Anyways, so there he is sprinting down the court, on a 3-on-2 break, with Kenny Thomas trailing the play to his right and some random dude to his left. And he's got a Magic defender back-pedalling. Uh, oh.

Now, in this situation, you'd normally expect one of two things. First, he could probably cross over the guy in front and at least get a couple of free throws, if not the and-one. Second, he could probably hit the guy on his left with a behind the back pass, one he used a lot on the break. And for a moment, it looks like he's going for option no. 2. AI wraps the ball behind his back with his right hand and makes like he's going to give it to the guy on his left (remember, he's sprinting, just haring down at this point). Instead, he takes his left hand behind his back (so now, for a split second, both his hands are behind his back, like he's hugging someone behind him), switches hands, and throws a behind-the-back pass with his left hand to Kenny Thomas on his right, who gets it in perfect stride and dunks it.

I wish youtube had a clip of this play so you could see for yourself. When I first watched this play, I didn't understand what had happened. I honestly didn't know what he did. I had to watch two replays, in slow-motion, to see what he had done. In essence, he bounced the ball of his left hand, behind his back, and found the guy trailing the play. Running. At full speed. Without travelling. I'm shaking my head as I'm writing this.

4. Playoffs, 2001. The MVP year. Eastern Conference Finals vs. Milwaukee, a team, truth be told, that was better than Philly. Game 4, on the Bucks' home floor, Philly down 2-1 with AI missing the previous game through injury (for the record, he was playing with about 12 different injuries at the same time...I swear that's not an exaggeration). The game is close, both teams scrapping, AI has been knocked all over the place the whole game. Late in the fourth, AI gets hit by an elbow on his mouth. Starts bleeding. Doesn't come out of the game. Hits the free throws. Scores 7 in a row, actually, and gets Philly the win.

Now for those who're not familiar with the NBA, you should know this: the league has a rule (affectionately known as the Magic Johnson rule) that says you can't be in a game if you're bleeding, because of health risks (no one wants to get AIDS on the basketball floor, you see). So usually what happens is, in the event that someone is fouled and has to shoot free throws, but is bleeding, the team will take a time-out, patch up the bleeding, and then get the player to shoot free throws after the time-out. This is easy enough if it's your leg or arm; you can put a band-aid on it and you're good to go. But your mouth? Have you ever put a band-aid in your mouth? Right, you haven't.

Why is this important? Because if you can't patch it up within 100 seconds (the length of the time-out), and therefore you can't shoot the free-throws, you're not allowed to re-enter the game at any point. So AI had to get his mouth to stop bleeding within 100 seconds, or he would miss the rest of the game. What did he do? Well, why don't we ask the man himself?

I didn't think the refs were going to let me back in the game because I was spitting up so much blood. I was trying to stop the bleeding, but it wouldn't stop, so I kept my mouth closed and swallowed the blood when it filled up.

Say it with me: Pound-for-pound, the toughest player to ever play the game.

3. Playoffs, 2003. First round vs the New Orleans Hornets. Game 1, in Philly. The First Union Center (or as it was known among NBA circles, the F.U. Center because of the noise in the building) was rocking. Loud as hell before the game even started. During the game? Louder still.

In one of the greatest shooting clinics I've ever seen, AI torched the Hornets for 55 on 21-32 shooting. He shot 9-11 in the fourth quarter, when defenses ostensibly take it up a notch. He also added 8 assists. His 21 field goals and 8 assists meant he was directly responsible for 29 of the Sixers' 36 field goals. Please read that sentence again.

It wasn't even a usual AI game. Normally when he would score big, he'd have a ton of trips to the line and a lot of layups and drives. Not this game. Most of it was mid-range jumpers. He kept hitting them, hand in his face or not. There was absolutely nothing anyone, least of all the Hornets, could do.

I'll always remember one play from that game. It was in the fourth, and the game was still pretty close. AI had Stacey Augmon on him, the type of long-armed defender (Augmon's 6'8") who supposedly gave AI trouble. Behind the three point line on the right wing, AI shaped like he was going to go baseline, and gave a vicious head-fake to go along with it. Augmon moved to his left to cover the drive, and on a dime, AI brought the ball back between his legs, and did it so quickly that Augmon lost his balance and fell down. AI paused for a split second, as if savoring the moment, then went up for a three. I still remember Marv Albert's voice: "Iiiverson...for threee...yesss!!" The crowd exploded. Gives me goosebumps, to the day. To the day, bro, to the day.

2. Playoffs, 2001. Round 2, vs Vince Carter's Toronto Raptors. Game 5, series tied 2-2. After AI scored 54 in Philly's Game 2 win, Toronto enforcer Charles Oakley said something to the effect of "That won't happen again. We won't let it happen." Well, guess what? It happened. AI shot 21-32 (eerie how it was the same as the Hornets game) and scored 47 in the first three quarters before slowing down in the fourth of a blowout game, ending with 52. He hit 8 three-pointers. Eight! Uff, you just had to be there.

1. Finals, 2001. Game 1 vs the hated Lakers, who were 11-0 in the playoffs up to that point. They had swept everyone, including the Spurs who had the league's best record and home court advantage. They looked invincible. Meanwhile the Sixers were banged up, missing players due to injuries. Even the guys who were playing were playing hurt, not least of all AI. In comparison to the Lakers' 11, Philly had taken 18 games just to get to the Finals, and that too from the decidedly weaker conference. But for one night, David went mano-a-mano with Goliath and, well, put it this way: it wouldn't make my number 1 AI moment if Goliath had won, would it?

The stage was this: Lakers came out on fire, Philly fell behind quickly. AI caught fire, scored something like 30 points in the first half, as the Sixers took the lead into halftime. Early third was more of the same, as Philly showed everyone they meant business, eventually going up by 15. Then Tyronne Lue came into the game, started grabbing and holding on to AI, who went cold. So did the Sixers, and slowly but surely, the Lakers worked their way back. Fourth quarter was crazy, neither team could get ahead by more than 3-4 points, and eventually the game went into overtime. In the extra session, the Lakers found their groove again, and went up 99-94 on the Sixers, who couldn't find a bucket from anywhere. AI had been completely shut off, he had scored something like 3 points in 15 minutes or something. I have watched this game about 12 times, which is why I remember Marv Albert saying, "It has become desperation time...for the Philadelphia 76ers." It really was. Anyways Raja Bell hit a miraculous scoop shot to bring the Sixers within 3 with something like 2 minutes left. Then:

Lakers miss a shot, AI finally (finally) gets free for a second. He gets the ball and races up the floor and gets fouled. It was the first daylight he had seen for about 20 minutes of basketball. Anyways, he buries the free throws. Sixers within one, 99-98. At the other end, Lue (the villain) drives and throws up an off-balance prayer of a shot, which misses badly as he falls to the floor. Once again, AI has daylight for a second as the Lakers figure out who's guarding the MVP. By the time they do, it's too late. McKie (great glue guy, by the way) finds AI in rhythm on the left wing, and AI buries the three. Marv Albert: "Iiiverson...for three...yess!! Allen Iiiverson...has given the Sixers...a 101-99 lead!" AI pumps his fists. Lakers throw away the ball trying to get the ball into the post to Shaq. Suddenly, with about 50 seconds left, the Sixers have a 2 point lead and the ball. But the game's not over yet, not by a long shot. They need a score here desperately. Raja Bell brings it up. Him and AI are the only Sixers on the right-hand side of the floor. AI's in the corner, near the sideline. Bell throws it to him, gets the hell out of the way. Lue (the villain) is on him. Marv Albert: "Iiverson...bothered by Lue." AI keeps the ball above his head, brings his arms down and back up. Still hasn't dribbled. He moves basline. Takes one dribble to his right. Lue moves to his left. AI, in the blink of an eye, brings the ball back between his legs, goes up for the jumper, right in front of the Laker bench. Nothin' but net. Lue (the villain), in an attempt to cover the cross-over, lost his balance and fell down, right next to where AI landed after burying the J. AI steps over him, has a word or two to him, scowls at the Laker bench, and gets back on defense. Game.

Youtube clip of moment number 1, right here. Watch it from 5:30 on. By the way, I paid 17 Euros for a DVD of this game. I would have spent 170.

But They Still Drink More Than Everyone Else, Right?

Currency notes in Ireland carry traces of cocaine. All currency notes in Ireland carry traces of cocaine. Good times.

He Probably Went to the George W. Bush School of Science

The Chief Economist of car manufaturer DaimlerChrysler essentially thinks global warming is not happening. I kid you not. In his words, "the problem is way, way into the future, with a high degree of uncertainty." I would actually laugh at idiots like this if their ignorance didn't affect all of humanity for the next few hundred years. Oh, well. At least my family doesn't live in a coastal city or anything. Oh, wait.

If you haven't seen Al Gore's movie, I highly recommend it. The one thing that struck me the most (and is extremely relevant to this jackass' comments) is the spin and innuendo related to global warming which make the science seem more "uncertain" than it actually is. In the movie, Gore talked about how in a random review of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals (not sure how many articles, could have been dozens, could have been hundreds), not one of them spoke of global warming as a doubtful proposition. Not one. On the other hand, something like 50 percent of articles in newspapers, magazines and the popular press spoke of global warming as something that wasn't a certainty. 50 percent! Something is happening to the message as it gets from the scientific community to the lay person. And that something is entirely due to the deliberate and willful manipulation of science by bastards like Van Jolissaint for their personal and professional gain.

For the record, the best place to cut through the hype about global warming is realclimate.org. Check it out when you have the time.

Ah, the Middle East

Should I feel bad that I couldn't stop laughing while watching this video?

Link courtesy Andrew Sullivan

Apple of Everyone's Eye (sorry for the obvious heading)

I remember asking a few months ago, somewhat facetiously, if Apple was planning on coming out with an iFridge. Now I'm beginning to think an iFridge probably isn't that far off. Is there a cooler company in the world right now?

Quote of the day

I dream of a day, while retaining our respective national identities, one can have breakfast in Amritsar, lunch in Lahore and dinner in Kabul. That is how my forefathers lived. That is how I want our grandchildren to live.

Ufff, what a line, yaar. By the way, Manmohan, let's chill out on the dinner in Kabul thing and get the lunch in Lahore thing down first, eh? Meanwhile, C Raja Mohan gives advice on how India should conduct its foreign policy towards its West. From the Prime Minister's speech and Raja Mohan's analysis, it seems clear to me that India is looking to play a bigger role in the downward spiral that is Pakistan-Afghanistan relations. Here's one of his nine suggestions:

The sixth is an enduring commitment to stability in Afghanistan. Preventing a destabilisation of Kabul by the Taliban has already emerged as one of the highest priorities for India’s national security strategy. As Pak-Afghan ties sink to lower depths, India faces a new tension between improving ties with Pakistan and strengthening the Karzai regime. The answer must necessarily lie in New Delhi taking the initiative for a triangular political and economic cooperation and encouraging Islamabad and Kabul to limit their conflict.

Interesting stuff, read the whole thing.

Waqar, gone

Waqar Younis resigned as Pakistan's bowling coach a few days ago. I read a story on the BBC website today that confirms the separation was even more acrimonious than I had initially thought. This is what he had to say:

Respect is something that the PCB needs to learn. I am a bowling coach and not a clerk. The improvement in Pakistan bowlers is there to be seen. I took time out from my family commitments to help youngsters but it is better to quit when you don't get the respect.

You know what? He's absolutely right, even if his comment about taking time out from family commitments was a bit disingenuous (he was, after all, paid to do a job). Respect is something the PCB needs to learn (for cricketers, coaches, and doping regulations among others). The improvement in our bowlers is there to be seen. I'm not 100 percent sure what role a bowling coach has in a bowler's development, all I know is that Gully was suddenly bowling inswinging yorkers against the Windies with the old ball and that Asif kept on improving throughout the year, and that Waqar clearly had something do with these developments. He will be missed, especially since it seemed, at least from a distance, that he had a good rapport with all of our quick bowlers.

Even though his absence from a purely cricketing point of view is worrying enough, it's actually the circumstances of this episode that bother me more. At the end of the day, a bowling coach is a bowling coach, and we should hopefully be able to find a suitable replacement (no, Mushtaq, I don't mean you). But what about the bigger picture? What does this say about the way the PCB is run? What does this say about Pakistan cricket? What sort of nonsensical statement is "The management feels that Waqar has (had) very little contribution in the past as far as the shorter version of the game is concerned"? Waqar's contributions are to the bowlers, not to a particular version of the game. How is it possible to help someone be a better bowler, but only in Test matches? Given the farcical nature of the explanation the PCB has given, it's clear that there is more to this than meets the eye. Perhaps it is not a coincidence that Waqar was to be in South Africa for just the Tests and Shoaib for just the ODIs. Perhaps it is. Perhaps it is not a coincidence that this episode was concurrent with Mushy being brought back into the fold. Perhaps it is. One can only speculate.

The only thing I'm sure about is that I'm getting tired of Dr. Nasim Ashraf, and he hasn't even been there that long. The reason why I absolutely loved the Shahrayar Khan/Bob Woolmer/Inzamam team was that it was so stable, there were no controversies for the best part of two years, problems were taken care of behind closed doors and Pakistan cricket only benefited from the harmony. On the other hand, this Ashraf fellow has, in something like three months on the job, brought back Younis Khan as captain after he had patently disrespected the Pakistan shirt (you don't decline the captaincy of the national team, an unbelievable honor, because someone made you wait outside their office), had the whole religion-in-public spat with Inzi in the papers, completely and utterly mishandled the doping affair (actually, "mishandled" is being charitable), fired Mushy only to bring him back, and is now responsible, at least indirectly, for Pakistan losing the services of Waqar.

I'm just so, so tired of this shit. Can you imagine how good our team would be if we didn't have to deal with this stuff on a consistent basis? Conversely, can you imagine what would happen to the Australias and South Africas and Englands of the world if they went through something like this every six weeks? These things are so avoidable. I mean, they don't just happen. You actively have to be looking for trouble for things like this to transpire. And with us, they always do. Oh, well. I know no one wants to hear bitch on and on so I'll stop now.

Note: When I was recently in Pakistan, I discovered that the "Comment" link below every post was inaccessible. If any of our readers in Pakistan want to comment on any particular issue, then please don't hesitate in emailing me at ahsanib@gmail.com.

The World's Craziest Arenas

Everybody knows how psycho Gilbert Arenas is. Well, he just celebrated his 25th birthday with a party that cost $1 million, was hosted by Puff Daddy (or P Diddy or Diddy or whatever the hell his name is) and actually has its own website. I've seen some weird websites in my life, but I don't think I've ever come across one dedicated to a party. Anyways, the Washington Post has pictures. I have no idea why this fascinates me.

I-had-no-idea-about-this fact of the day

Did you know that "in general, it's safer to leave your hands unwashed than to leave them wet"? All these years, I've been privately disgusted at the dirty bastards who use the toilet and then don't wash their hands; turns out, they should be disgusted at me for not drying mine.

Girls = Commodities

A drought in Afghanistan (probably Pakistan's fault, right President Cry-zai?) has forced families to sell their daughters to buy food. If you think that's bad, a tribesman in Peshawar is handing over his 16-year old daughter as settlement in a dispute (somebody killed somebody else over some land, and so a jirga decided that the killer has to give his daughter away to the victim's family). By the way, I'm completely open to suggestions as to what I should do the next time someone in Pakistan tut-tuts about the "objectifying" of women in the West.

A Question of Language

I came across a story in Dawn today talking about which language(s) should be used in schools. This is a subject that is of course more than just about schools and education - it is also about Center/Province relations and cultural plurality. I recently wrote a paper on language policy in Pakistan and had a couple of recommendations, one of which dealt with language(s) in schools. I won't bore you with the entire paper, I'll just reproduce the relevant section here.

It is difficult to have a meaningful discussion on education in Pakistan because the country lacks a standard syllabus and curriculum. Be that as it may, I call for a greater freedom in selecting languages at school by allowing parents to choose two out of three of English, Urdu and a regional language to be taught to their children until the age of 7, or the end of Class 2, whichever comes first. From that point onwards, parents must choose one of English or Urdu as language of instruction for subjects like History and Geography and must choose another language – which is not the medium of instruction – to learn. Under this system, students will be fluent in two languages but will not have any one particular language forced upon them. For instance, until the cutoff point, a set of Sindhi parents may decide to have their child learn English and Sindhi. After the cutoff point, the parents may decide to use English as the language of instruction and Sindhi as a ‘second’ language, which the child will study as any other subject like Mathematics. This system would allow the parents to prioritize employability in urban areas, an affinity for national unity, or cultural heritage, while also ensuring that the child learns at least one ‘practical’ language – English or Urdu. This arrangement would not be entirely dissimilar to India’s 3+1 formula, where English, Hindi and the state language are required, along with the option for minority students to study their language.

Now what does the story in Dawn say? This:

It recommends that the medium of instruction up to Class-V be left to the provincial governments. But it categorically states that “the medium of instruction for the first three years of the child’s education should be the mother tongue wherever possible.” Where Urdu is not the medium of instruction it should be taught as a compulsory subject from Class-I. English should be introduced as a compulsory subject in all schools from Class-III starting with the year 2008 by when sufficient number of qualified and trained teachers be prepared.

From Class-VI onwards the medium of instruction should be Urdu for social sciences and English for mathematics and the natural sciences. The regional languages where desired by the provincial governments should be taught as a compulsory subject up to Class-VIII. The medium of instruction in higher education may be English.

Tolerance of regional languages? A division of labour between Urdu and English? Surely, surely, there cannot be someone in the Pakistan government who actually thinks like me. This obviously means that we must brace ourselves for one of the following three possibilities: (a) the apocalypse, (b) Imran Farhat holding on to a catch, or (c) Farooq not responding with an inane comment to this post. Let's see what happens.

Hilarious one-liner from the Cricinfo commentary team of the day

In a tense finish, Sehwag bowled one over for 8. This is what Cricinfo had to say:

With the ball too Sehwag lasts just one over. In comes Sreesanth.

Quote of the day

Early this year the Bush administration is to ask Congress to approve an additional $100bn for the onerous task of making life intolerable for the Iraqis. This will bring the total spent on the White House's current obsession with war to almost $500bn - enough to have given every US citizen $1,600 each. I wonder which the voters would have gone for if given the choice: shall we (a) give every American $1,600 or (b) spend the money on bombing a country in the Middle East that doesn't use lavatory paper?

Of course, there's another thing that George Bush could have done with the money: he could have given every Iraqi $18,700. I imagine that would have reduced the threat of international terrorism somewhat. Call me old-fashioned, but I can't help thinking that giving someone $18,700 brings them round to your side more quickly than bombing the hell out of them. They could certainly buy a lot of lavatory paper with it.

From a column in the Guardian today.

Ayaz Amir

If the last five years of Ayaz Amir's columns prove anything, it's that you shouldn't treat the whole "my enemy's enemy is my friend" argument as your Holy Grail. Before 9/11, this poor fellow was a relatively reasonable analyst who had a number of cogent things to say. Since then, however, he's gone a little batty. Because he hates America so much, he sides with anyone and anything who oppose it. In yesterday's column, he had this to say:

Saddam Hussein of brave Tikrit did not think so when he went to the gallows, his many sins washed away by his calmness and courage in the face of death.

and

Two hundred years from now, Saddam’s cruelty and mistakes will be forgotten. The legend of his bravery will survive.

Just to be clear, Ayaz Amir is suggesting that because Saddam didn't cringe before being hanged, people will no longer recall his crimes. Really? I wonder how many Kurds he spoke to before writing that one. Or Iranians. Or Iraqi Shias. Or anyone else belonging to a group that was persecuted, attacked, jailed, beaten, tortured or killed by Saddam and his henchmen. If Ayaz Amir had been around to witness Hitler's death, and it had been "honourable", would he believe Jews and Gypsies would forget Nazi crimes? What about Pol Pot? If he had been hanged and didn't cringe, would Cambodians forget that he wiped out one-fourth of that country's population, including anyone who wore glasses because intellectuals were ostensibly dangerous? In fact, forget Hitler and Pol Pot, who were responsible for millions of deaths. Let's just take someone who's responsible for thousands, like Pinochet. If he had actually faced a trial for his crimes, and been hanged and didn't cringe, would Ayaz Amir believe that Chileans would forget everything he did?

I shouldn't be that surprised, I guess. This is the same guy who calls Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "dignified" and Osama bin Laden a "hero". He's not alone there, either. Countless numbers in the Muslim world have such a hatred for the U.S. that they support anyone who purports to stand against it. This is despite, at least in Saddam's and Osama's case, these actors' many, many crimes against Muslims all over the world.

Supporting people like Saddam and Osama for Ayaz Amir is easy enough because their crimes, by and large, weren't/aren't against Pakistanis or Pakistan, and so any possible cognitive dissonance is precluded. Ayaz Amir can simply ignore their "sins" and focus on their opposition to the U.S., which he obviously favours. Things get a little messier, however, when talk turns to the Taliban in Afghanistan. Here, Pakistan's interests suddenly assume a greater significance because what the Taliban do and don't do affects Pakistan a lot more than Osama's or Saddam's actions, and thus blindly supporting any enemy of the U.S. is a little dicier, intellectually speaking. For the longest time, Ayaz Amir has railed against Musharraf's support of the U.S. and our fighting "America's war". Yet at the same time, he recognizes that the Taliban are hardly role models. This is from a column a couple of months ago:

Encouraging or assisting the Taliban is not in our interest. We have enough bigotry and extremism of our own. We can do without any contribution that the Taliban can make in this regard. We should curb the cross-border movement of militant elements wherever we can. If there are training camps of any sort on our soil we should do what we can to uproot them.

Fancy footwork, eh? In essence, he doesn't want us to "encourage" or "assist" the Taliban but at the same time he doesn't want us to fight "America's war" against them. We shouldn't be doing America's "dirty work" for it but at the same time we should "curb the cross-border movement of militant elements" and "do what we can to uproot" terrorist training camps. How exactly would this balancing act work? I wish I could tell you. I wish Ayaz Amir could tell you. But he never does, because I suspect he knows the precariousness of his intellectual position. He loves it when people stand up to the U.S. but he knows that the Taliban and its allies are a collection of obscurantist, women-hating, land-cruiser driving, gun-toting, hateful bastards. So what does he do? He just complains about the course of action we (rightfully) took after 9/11 and devotes column after column to attacking Musharraf and his support of the U.S., even sometimes going to the extent of praising the heroic "resistance" in Afghanistan. How can the same group of people be "heroes" and extremists/bigots at the same time? I don't know, but emailing ayaz.amir@dawn.com might provide answers.

Public Service Announcement

Amazon has a 30 day price guarantee. If you buy something from Amazon and the price of that thing falls in the next 30 days, Amazon will refund the difference. They don't, of course, publicize this, as if they want to keep it secret. Don't they know that there are no secrets in this age? They of all people should know the power of the internet. Anyways, spread the word, tell your family, friends, co-workers, whatever. Your welcome, by the way.

Sorry for being away, but I was away

All I'll say about PIA is that you know you're flying a great airline when your hands actually smell worse after using the soap in the toilet.

Five Rupees is now back on its feet after a three-week break. Crazy three weeks, huh? Before I left for home, Saddam was alive, the Indians couldn't handle South Africa's pace, AI was a Sixer and my neighbors in Karachi didn't have 4000 goats keeping me awake at night. Anyways, since I just got back, I can't spend an eternity blogging but am merely posting the day's most interesting stories.

Ahmed Rashid says people are telling him that Musharraf will be elected by the existing assemblies at the end of 2007 (while maintaining his role as COAS), will then dissolve said assemblies, set up a caretaker government that will hold free and fair elections and then attempt another endorsement as President from the new assemblies in the spring of 2008 (BB's and the PPP's role in all this is unclear, at least to me). Brent Scowcroft says that as part of trying to find peace in Iraq, the U.S. should push harder for a solution to the Israel-Palestine issue (remember, before the Iraq war started, when neocons said that the road to Jerusalem runs through Baghdad and everyone else in the world said, no, it's the other way around? Where are those neocons now?). Hussain Haqqani, everyone's favourite Bhutto-phile, talks about the contrasting deaths of Saddam and Gerald Ford. A guy in Multan had his ears and nose cut off because he married a woman for love, a woman who unfortunately happened to belong to one of those wonderful tribes that pays visits to people wielding axes. George Will says the minimum wage should be $0. For some strange reason, I actually found myself agreeing with him. Shaukat Aziz says there's no deal being made between the government and the PPP with the delightfully ambigous phrase "I want to make it clear here that the PML will contest the next general elections along with its coalition partners, and get success on the basis of its policies" while, of course, refusing to explicitly state who those coalition partners will be. For whatever it's worth, Sher Afghan says talks between the government and the PPP have reached the "decisive stage". (By the way, for non-Pakistani readers, I should mention that this is a time-honoured tactic peculiar to Pakistan: people from the same institution often say completely contradictory things, hoping the mixed messages throw off opponents who don't know what to expect. The PCB, the Army, the government, industralists, KESC, you name it, they all do it. I love Pakistan). Finally, a Daily Times columnist writes about the poor guy who got his shalwar taken off and got thrashed by the police (picture here) simply because he was protesting the disappearance of his father. Good times.