Politics June 12, 2007

To sue or not to sue, an unworthy question

Now that the Jamaican police have reversed their verdict on Bob Woolmer's death his family can complete the mourning process

Speculation about the possible cause of a high-profile death never ends and it my just be the trigger for a legal dispute--take the example of Princess Diana whose family endured a further television documentary this week. Unreasonable media intrusion or reasonable public interest? It is a debate that forces polarisation.

Now that the Jamaican police have reversed their verdict on Bob Woolmer's death his family can complete the mourning process. And if anybody should sue for damages it should be them, although you suspect they will have too much dignity to begin down that road.

This blog doesn't have a great record of agreeing with Nasim Ashraf and disagreeing with Imran Khan but on this occasion I say Chairman Ashraf has made the right call. While a gut reaction does urge some kind of retribution for the way Pakistan's players were publicly vilified--and the British media, even some 'thoughtful' broadsheet writers, were some of the worst--the sensible response is to let the matter rest. If nothing else then out of respect for Bob's family.

Pakistan cricket needs to move on and those writers who spent a merry few weeks publicly maligning Pakistan cricketers, their character, and their country owe Pakistan cricket an apology. But I guess that is as likely as Cricinfo being bought by Disney--oops, miracles do happen.

Kamran Abbasi is an editor, writer and broadcaster. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • testli5504537 on June 21, 2007, 10:54 GMT

    Whatmore do you want? I have a feeling that a stage has been set to appoint Dav Whatmore especially after reading his post interview comments on cricinfo and the way he was treated and interviewed last by the PCB officials and now he is going to meet the King of the PCB in Islamabad ..... its a sign of the inevitable and a predictable result unfolding so, whatelse or whatmore do you expect from a pied piper?

  • testli5504537 on June 21, 2007, 9:20 GMT

    Kamran, you have a point, but a point that seldom counts out here. It is another case of how we were humiliated throughout the world and now that we have been proved to be clean, its high time that we get it out as rigorously as the initial propaganda was propagated.

    But i know its Pakistan and we have the great PCB another symbol of ADHCOISM in Pakistan!!

  • testli5504537 on June 20, 2007, 15:08 GMT

    To sue OR not to sue is an issue related to pride & prejudice, izzat & honour. BUT, the issue of selecting or not selecting a foreign coach for the national team by breaking and bending the rules is another matter. Its a shame that the PCB can do this very openly and so boldly assuming that the people of Pakistan are dumb, naive, ignorant and simpleton.

    The point that Javed Miandad is raising now upon Geoff Lawson's interview that, Lawson did not apply for the post and was approached by the PCB, which is not only true but, it is a straight forward violation of the PCB's own policies, rules and the framework which it has announced recently that, "only those candidates will be considered for an interview who have applied for the post." Miandad and Intikhab Alam did not apply under protest hence they were ruled out and not called for an interview. Whereas, the PCB has another set of rule for a foreign coach. Wow, this so bureaucratic and diplomatic, in other words its called her ami pun or so over pun but, in any case you cannot call it a pun or a joke, because this is a serious matter and serious people are involved innit and that too in a very serious manner.

    The other thing that I am unable to understand is the role of the ad-hoc committee. How long will this country be running on the basis of ad hoc·ism? There is a Chinese expression that: "if you have pebbles in your shoes, you cannot look at the stars" i.e., at a time when you are supposed to be looking inwards you are looking outwards! Until and unless they sort out their internal petty problems how can they solve the other problems? Mr. Nasim Ashraf thinks that there is too much politics internally, so to neutralize it, he needs a foreign coach. Thats his imagination and "fishful' thinking that all the problems would be solved instantly, its not that simple, there is no magic wand and there is no fairy God mother accompanying the foreign coach. The foreign coach has other issues to tackle with and his biggest problem would be "communication." They are assuming that by appointing a coach from the short list of three FC's, IF any one of them is selected, he can not only manage well but, will transform the team into a winning combo. This is an assumption based on Dav Whatmore's previous jobs in handling Sri Lanka and Bangladesh teams. I think there is a big difference between those players and that of Pakistan team in understanding English with a heavy Australian accent. Probably he will have to take Urdu and Punjabi lessons and that would be a better option.

    The next problem the foreign coach would be facing is about his lack of awareness of the players' performance especially in selecting the new, young, upcoming and budding players at the domestic level. How is he going to evaluate them and select them or induct them in to the national side? Will he be having so much time at his disposal OR the PCB or any other sub-committee or a new ad hoc committee be spoon feeding the coach or backseat mothering him to choose a player from the new and raw talent or will they simply be issuing orders? I think there will always be a tug of war, push and pull tactics and petty politics based on jingoism and regionalism if the coach is not independent also, if the PCB is not run independently. When are they going to make a constitution which is being promised for the last so many years?

  • testli5504537 on June 20, 2007, 14:57 GMT

    Big scores are responsible for one-sided contests & lack of interest even in one day cricket. Its right time to remove the field restrictions. Cricket is about bat, ball & wicket(pitch). Nowadays the balance has tilted in favour of batsmen. Limited overs cricket started to have a result on the same day. In Test cricket batsmen used to spend as much time as possible on the crease because the psyche was that the more time you spend on crease the more runs you will score. So in the begining we saw two restrictions for bowlers in favour of batsmen: one, Restriction of overs per bowler; two, field restriction for a one-third of total overs. Now the limited overs cricket is matured so one should atleast reomove the field restriction, since the batsmen have adapted themselves to limited overs cricket very well. One should have good balance between bat & ball to have a fair contest & good cricket.

  • testli5504537 on June 20, 2007, 13:50 GMT

    you take 4's and 6's out of the game then no one will come to watch Gavaskars and Miandads playing for singles

  • testli5504537 on June 20, 2007, 9:23 GMT

    Pra Muhammad Asaf - what a shot ! What a beauty. "I am agree you" this 4x6 is like, Penulty corners hacking the beauty. And you are right, there are too many corners in hockey thats why they say, plenty corners 'nowadys'. You are absolutely right in saying; cricket is like a sheep on Hockey's path and one day they too will climb up the wall and, like Hockey's fall, cricket will come tumbling after!

    Save this blog from dying ......... oops I mean save the beauty ....

  • testli5504537 on June 19, 2007, 15:46 GMT

    Cricket is following the same path as Hockey's Fall. Field Goals & Dribbling was Hockey's beauty. But the abundance of Penulty corners hacked its beauty, Nowadys players moto is to get a plenty corner to score a Goal. The same thing is happening with cricket. The abundance of 4's & 6's are hacking the beauty of cricket. Nowadys bowlers moto is not get hit a 4/6. So we are missing some good cricket. Save the cricket from dying.......

  • testli5504537 on June 18, 2007, 21:09 GMT

    Quite interesting observations in his posting by Gulab Khan.

    I mentioned in my earlier posting that litigation by PCB would achieve nothing as it would end up losing and filling lawyers’ boots. I mentioned suspicion or “damage to honour” alone is no grounds for a court case. The police never said in clear cut terms “we suspect Pakistan Team”, only said “we can rule no one out”. Isn’t that normal in a suspected murder case botched however it may be?

    Some bloggers, even the learned regulars, are harping about “let’s sue them”. Someone wrongly mentioned earlier “……but the only ones whose finger prints and DNA samples were taken were from the [Pakistan] team….” Not so. Irish Team was DNA tested and so were people staying in the hotel floor where Woolmer was; including Brian Lara and perhaps many others. Unfortunately, biased journalists only concentrated on reporting what they thought was newsworthy. Maligning Pakistan team was more fun for them. The fact is all people closely associated with “suspected murder” are naturally suspected. As I previously mentioned spouses are prime suspects in a homicide unless ruled out. If I were Inspector Clouseau, I might suspect, say for example, Kamran Abbasi has committed a heinous crime ;-). Neither can I charge Mr Abbasi on that basis alone nor can he sue me for suspecting. Should I wrongly charge him though and the court decides he is innocent then there might be a case for him on the basis of wrongfulness and damage to his reputation, stress etc. The reason Imran took Botham and Lamb to court was when the duo did not succeed in a defamation lawsuit and Imran in turn sued them for wrongful accusation, damages etc. A completely different situation. Further, if a defamation case such as this failed then what are the chances of PCB succeeding in fighting a court case for “wrongful suspicion or damage to honour”?

    Where there could be a case then it perhaps is against certain journalists for their salacious reporting and hideous innuendos against the Pak team. I read that Dr “Error” (aka Dr Death) is still adamant that he was right. Because of his sheer bloody minded arrogance, he wouldn’t accept that he screwed it up. That is where PCB should infact take a stance and if necessary sue him. After all three other pathologists from three different countries have said it was a natural death.

    I wonder why Salman Butt has been named a vice captain? Isn’t it likely that in the current crop of players he is perhaps most competent to communicate in English with the imminent appointment of a foreign coach? Definitely not because he is an automatic choice for an opener.

  • testli5504537 on June 18, 2007, 13:02 GMT

    Another step inright direction:

    Organisers pledge 'spectator-friendly' 2011 World Cup


  • testli5504537 on June 18, 2007, 13:00 GMT


    I refer to Shields and that obstinate pathologist as Cluseau and Cato; however even that may be too flattering because Cluseau always got his man in the end!

  • No featured comments at the moment.