Saad Shafqat June 7, 2009

Great with the ball, not quite with the mike

It would be pleasing and fitting if Akram’s commentary career carried some of the same zest and punch as his cricket career
117

Wasim Akram was capable of bowling a truly nasty bouncer. Every now and then he would unleash it, targeting the center of the throat or the spot on the forehead right between the eyes. Even the most competent batsmen have acknowledged that there was no getting away from it. Like a guided missile, it just kept coming at you relentlessly.

Akram has now left the bowling crease and planted himself behind the commentator’s mike. One notes with a certain resignation that his commentary is not as penetrating or targeted as his bowling. I say ‘resignation’ and not disappointment, because it is impossible for Akram to disappoint. Even if he said nothing and just sat behind the mike and every so often we saw him smiling, that would make our day. Why? Because he’s Wasim Akram, that’s why.

Still, it would be pleasing and fitting if Akram’s commentary career carried some of the same zest and punch as his cricket career. In cricket, he moved the ball around as if he had it on a string and, when the mood was right, hit it miles with the bat. In contrast, his commentary seems the equivalent of gentle long hops delivered with an unmotivated, burdensome action.

To be fair, occasionally he will indeed say something quite insightful. He’ll scan the field and recommend an adjustment that leaves you fascinated. He will also occasionally entertain, saying something dismissive or curt in his signature Lahori drawl. More often, though, he shies from opinion and analysis and just passes on trivialities.

Of the three Pakistani ex-players currently on the international commentary circuit – Rameez Raja, Waqar Younis and Wasim Akram – Akram’s persona behind the mike is the most jarring and anomalous. Rameez’s commentary is pleasant and agreeable, more or less like his batting career. Waqar started out awkwardly as a commentator but somewhere along the way found his inner focus to deliver fluent and polished commentary peppered with zingers.

Even though Akram has been doing this for a while, he still seems an inhibited soul. It doesn’t help that he often gets partnered with Harsha Bhogle, a voluble man whose theoretical command of cricket is incisive as well as encyclopedic. This contrast with a more natural commentator makes Akram look even worse.

There is more to Wasim Akram than this. All of us who have followed his career and kept track of all the news he has generated and continues to generate, sense deep down that there is a far more interesting commentator in him yearning to break through. This inner commentator is more talkative, witty and opinionated. He is free of reserve and self-consciousness.

One possibility is that Akram isn’t adequately engaged in the commentator’s role, that he isn’t trying hard enough. The truth, I feel, is the reverse – he’s trying too hard. He’s not being himself. Someone needs to tell him to loosen up. Perhaps he’s been coached. If so, whoever has coached him has done him a disservice.

Unlike out in the middle, where there was a captain like Imran Khan to get the best out of him, behind the mike Akram is alone. Only he can pull himself out of this rut. He should get the sense of being in the spotlight out of his head and imagine he’s in a drawing room watching cricket on TV surrounded by friends. Wasim Akram was always at his best on the pitch when he let his natural flair and aggression come through. The commentators’ box is no different.

Saad Shafqat is a writer based in Karachi

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • blogs.espncricinfo.com on May 23, 2011, 12:13 GMT

    Great_with_the_ball_not_quite.. Outstanding :)

  • Shuja ur Rehman on June 26, 2009, 10:21 GMT

    No offenses, but seriously Akram is so horrible and biased commentator that i feel sorry for the person of his stature.Certainly he knows In and Out of cricket but I find his predictions and assessment weird.

  • Abdul Ala on June 25, 2009, 18:57 GMT

    Good player can't be good behind the mic but about W.Akram he not only good he is great living legend.Folks we all wanna enjoy good cricket is nothing to do with the voice or who and how thing are said but belive me if someone like Akram comments...can't ask more.But still its his early days one things is sure as he used to use new and old ball ...he will be great commentrator.

  • Saad on June 23, 2009, 18:30 GMT

    I think what Wasim lacks is a presence of mind in his commentary more than anything else. Most of the time he does not know whats going on and has to correct himself every now and then. His command on the English language is not really the best. I personally like the commentary of Nasser Hussain, Geoffery Boycott and Ramiz Raja. Ramiz is very good and blunt sometimes. I like when he said, "Its impossible to shut up an Aussie". LOL. That was hilarious coming from him during the one day series in dubai. Probably, was talking about the cocky attitude and a bit of an air the Aussies have about them, even when they are defeated.

  • Khurram on June 17, 2009, 7:30 GMT

    I think, its more of a fault of the TV channel management. Wasim Akram should play the role of 'expert' in the commentary box, and not that of the active cheerleading commentrator - thats where he is at his best. He was very good when he used to act as an expert - he looked natural and confident. But in this T20 cup, they use him as the main running commentrator, and of course - Wasim is not a cheer leader - he is an expert.

  • Vikram Maingi on June 17, 2009, 5:39 GMT

    Akram might not be a good commentator, but is certainly a very good expert commentator

  • Minhaj Ahmed on June 12, 2009, 5:58 GMT

    Wasim Akram was one of the finest fast bowlers the cricket world has ever seen. He was deadly accurate in his bowling. Now it is true that not everyone shines in every field. His commentating may not be as lethal as his bowling was but he is still the best.

  • Mansoor on June 8, 2009, 14:21 GMT

    Well i agree with the author. He is giving an honest opinion and this doesn't have to do anything with Wasim Akram being a legend or being liked by the south Asian community.

  • Muhammad Sohail on June 8, 2009, 14:09 GMT

    All praise for Wasim bhai as a cricketer, but keeping our love for his genius aside I would say his commentary most of the times makes no sense really, its something very natural like Mark Nicholas of Australia, your comments may add something extra to what you watch on the screen than keep repeating the scores and wickets.

  • hari krishna on June 8, 2009, 14:07 GMT

    I think it is unfair to judge Akram through his comentary alone.Akram is a thorough gentleman and i am sure any person listening to the comentary will very well appreciate what he comments about,He was not born as a commentator and i doubt anyone will see such a fantastic bowler in the near future and i am sure he will definitely make inroads as a great commentator which he already is

  • blogs.espncricinfo.com on May 23, 2011, 12:13 GMT

    Great_with_the_ball_not_quite.. Outstanding :)

  • Shuja ur Rehman on June 26, 2009, 10:21 GMT

    No offenses, but seriously Akram is so horrible and biased commentator that i feel sorry for the person of his stature.Certainly he knows In and Out of cricket but I find his predictions and assessment weird.

  • Abdul Ala on June 25, 2009, 18:57 GMT

    Good player can't be good behind the mic but about W.Akram he not only good he is great living legend.Folks we all wanna enjoy good cricket is nothing to do with the voice or who and how thing are said but belive me if someone like Akram comments...can't ask more.But still its his early days one things is sure as he used to use new and old ball ...he will be great commentrator.

  • Saad on June 23, 2009, 18:30 GMT

    I think what Wasim lacks is a presence of mind in his commentary more than anything else. Most of the time he does not know whats going on and has to correct himself every now and then. His command on the English language is not really the best. I personally like the commentary of Nasser Hussain, Geoffery Boycott and Ramiz Raja. Ramiz is very good and blunt sometimes. I like when he said, "Its impossible to shut up an Aussie". LOL. That was hilarious coming from him during the one day series in dubai. Probably, was talking about the cocky attitude and a bit of an air the Aussies have about them, even when they are defeated.

  • Khurram on June 17, 2009, 7:30 GMT

    I think, its more of a fault of the TV channel management. Wasim Akram should play the role of 'expert' in the commentary box, and not that of the active cheerleading commentrator - thats where he is at his best. He was very good when he used to act as an expert - he looked natural and confident. But in this T20 cup, they use him as the main running commentrator, and of course - Wasim is not a cheer leader - he is an expert.

  • Vikram Maingi on June 17, 2009, 5:39 GMT

    Akram might not be a good commentator, but is certainly a very good expert commentator

  • Minhaj Ahmed on June 12, 2009, 5:58 GMT

    Wasim Akram was one of the finest fast bowlers the cricket world has ever seen. He was deadly accurate in his bowling. Now it is true that not everyone shines in every field. His commentating may not be as lethal as his bowling was but he is still the best.

  • Mansoor on June 8, 2009, 14:21 GMT

    Well i agree with the author. He is giving an honest opinion and this doesn't have to do anything with Wasim Akram being a legend or being liked by the south Asian community.

  • Muhammad Sohail on June 8, 2009, 14:09 GMT

    All praise for Wasim bhai as a cricketer, but keeping our love for his genius aside I would say his commentary most of the times makes no sense really, its something very natural like Mark Nicholas of Australia, your comments may add something extra to what you watch on the screen than keep repeating the scores and wickets.

  • hari krishna on June 8, 2009, 14:07 GMT

    I think it is unfair to judge Akram through his comentary alone.Akram is a thorough gentleman and i am sure any person listening to the comentary will very well appreciate what he comments about,He was not born as a commentator and i doubt anyone will see such a fantastic bowler in the near future and i am sure he will definitely make inroads as a great commentator which he already is

  • Mfa Cbn on June 8, 2009, 13:25 GMT

    What the meaning = jarring and anomalous? Nothing Harsh! I listen well his comments, He need quite time to expertise this art. B4 no tool to evaluation, so old commentators got enough time to learn fluently.

  • Haroon Hashmi on June 8, 2009, 13:05 GMT

    I agree with the writer though I must say that I am pleased to only get a glimpse of this great man which brings back a million good memories from the past. These days watching him and Waqar commenting on the matches is much more pleasing than wathcing the Pakistan Cricket team play.

    I wonder if these two greats ever now think that had they had a better relationship while playing they would have performed some more miracles in the ground.....

  • dr.asad sadick on June 8, 2009, 13:01 GMT

    Very true, his comments as a comentator are pathetic and without any depth. He should go back and sponsor ads for sweet cold drinks as a diabetic.

  • Naveed on June 8, 2009, 12:54 GMT

    I think it was very unfair. Totaly disagree that Akram isnt good.

  • Rajan on June 8, 2009, 12:40 GMT

    Agreed ... he lacks an insight and he is no where close to his on-field skills .. My commentrators list would be :

    Bill Lawry Mark Nicholas Ravi Shastri Richie Beneaud Ian Chappell Sanjay Manjrekar ( i think he has improved heaps over a period of time .. better any time then Wasim Akram)

  • Rohit Sen on June 8, 2009, 12:39 GMT

    He is Wasim Akram... dont know whether is the best commentator or not.. quite certainly he is not! But i would rather hear him becoz he is Wasim Akram.. he has done more for cricket's popularity in moments than what journalists like you would do in a lifetime or more

  • Cricfan on June 8, 2009, 12:27 GMT

    Wasim and Ravi were a better team with their Shaz & Waz show, which was frivolous and somewhat entertaining. Ravi, with his carefree attitude, makes Wasim also relax in his role as commentator. They should get back as a team and swap their existing partners.

  • Vim on June 8, 2009, 12:24 GMT

    Wasim should always be with Shashtri - Shaz & Waz show - they are good! And apart from Rameez, WaqaR & Akram - where is the 'great' Aamir 'bhai' Sohail? - actually India-Pakistan should have Hindi-Urdu commentary and then lets have Moin Khan, Navjot Siddhu & Inzi (my favorite) on AIR! No one would care for the match!

  • Anshul on June 8, 2009, 12:15 GMT

    Hahaha this column is bang on target. Akram is a really nice guy and a legend in his own right but commentary is not his forte. And why are some people even comparing Harsha and Akram?...Pakistanis are funny really

  • adeel ahmed on June 8, 2009, 11:52 GMT

    I completely agree with the author. Wasim's commentary skills are poor. I mean i have heard him a thousand saying "thank god i m retired. i m not playing 20 20". i m fed up

  • benedict on June 8, 2009, 11:50 GMT

    we need to see good matches not a war on commentary.... be a fan... don't go to these minute details... just love the game... leave these things to mad experts.... be a true sports lover.....

  • adeel ahmed on June 8, 2009, 11:36 GMT

    I completely agree with the author. Wasim's commentary skills are poor. I mean i have heard him a thousand saying "thank god i m retired. i m not playing 20 20". i m fed up

  • Ranjan on June 8, 2009, 11:12 GMT

    I good player need not be a good commentator. Wasim was exceptional. but I don't agree with the author when he says that Wasim is mot analytical. Infact I think he understands the mentality of Asian players better than any of the other commentators. I remember he had once commented on Ajit Agarkar...'that with abowler like Ajit, the captain need sto kick him on the back before every match to get the best out of him.' In my view maybe the best assessment...

    So not entirly convinced by the article

  • Asef Ali on June 8, 2009, 10:52 GMT

    Guys... be honest. I am a die-hard blind fan of Wasim Akram. I love whatever he does but I have to agree with the writer. His comments are most of the time diplomatic, trying not to dis-please anyone. I agree with Saad Shafqat that his commentry needs swing, bounce and yorkers, life his bowling...

    Finally, I have to say even if is not the best commentrator, he is THE BEST (not just best left-handed) bowler the world have ever seen

  • Pranav on June 8, 2009, 10:48 GMT

    Wasim Akram comes across as a gentle bloke with a smiling face but honestly his commentary is not of the highest quality. He is not very opinionated and most of the times, it seems he is very reluctant to speak his mind. The amount of times he fumbles and mispronounces the names is not even funny. Especially for a guy who has been commentating for few years now, his commentary lacks imagination and insight.

  • nooruddin on June 8, 2009, 10:47 GMT

    i really enjoy the comments from all of you. Atleast we should give Saad some credit for his fare comments on Wasim's commentary. Almost all of us are Wasim's die hard fans but you should agree with me that now a days commentray is a full time job. You need to read a lot and should be update with all the hapenings arround. During commentary you are covering more than the match and when a seasoned player like Waseem is behind the mic one should expect from him a good performance according to his high standard, he sat during his playing career. BY the way my favrouite is Ian Chappel, he is like a school, one can learn many things from his commnetary. He is, i believe the most unbiased commentator, i have ever come accross. Wasim needs lot of home work. and, therefore, i am in agreement with Saad.........thanks

  • Ramesh on June 8, 2009, 10:43 GMT

    I completely disagree with author, stop writing such blog.. There is no comparision between wasim and rameez, both have different style. but Wasim is far better than Rameez.

  • dhchdh on June 8, 2009, 10:33 GMT

    Gentlemen please remember that english is not his first language, still he does make a good effort. Try getting one of our english/aussie commentator to talk in Hindi /Tamil/Urdu...and you will see my point. We should be welcoming to other cultures just like other cultures embrace us.

  • Moin on June 8, 2009, 10:16 GMT

    Wasim is not that bad as a commentator. He has great presence but he may not be as fluent as others as he is not a full time commentator. He is ma fav player, may be dats the reason I like him.

  • Azhar on June 8, 2009, 10:09 GMT

    Dude did you say that Rameez is more acceptable...? Did you read what the fakeipl guy had to say about him? I dont find him, but you annoying for comparing Wasim to him. Wasim is much better than Rameez

  • sanket on June 8, 2009, 9:59 GMT

    hey i really like wasim akram.....n no offence but harsha bhogle's voice irritates me ,he cant present emotion after a boundary r wicket same old lame voice..

  • Ankit on June 8, 2009, 9:57 GMT

    "Rameez’s commentary is pleasant and agreeable, more or less like his batting career." I can't believe it that somebody actually said that. Rameez raja is by far the worst commentator in fact I will prefer Arun Lal over Rameez Raja. Rameez Raja knows nothing about cricket and he can't separate his personal view and comment like a neutral party. In fact he is so bad that during IPL I used to put the television on mute. "Even if he said nothing and just sat behind the mike and every so often we saw him smiling, that would make our day." Sorry dude he has to do commentary because you might be in love with him most of us are not.

  • Asad Baig on June 8, 2009, 9:55 GMT

    I have been following cricket for over 30 years.I think Wasim is a good commentator. He needs to keep on improving. He may not be as fluent in English as Rameez, which sometimes makes it difficult for him to express himself. I hope with time, more experience and sitting in the company of greats like Ian Chappel and one of my favourites he will improve. Rameez Raja, Mark Nicholas of England, Harsha Bhogle, Sanjay Manjrekar and Ian Smith of New Zealand are very good commentators and are not biased in their views. Waqar is good and I hope he will get better with time. I Hope Waseem and Waqar can become a good pair in the commentary room too, just as they were on the cricket field.

  • Siddharth on June 8, 2009, 9:37 GMT

    I cannot believe some of you don't like Harsha. He is such a smooth talker and a master at the English language. His knowledge of the game is also commendable for someone who's never played profesionally. Pakistani commentators need to improve their English, big time!! Only Rameez Raja is well versed. Shamefull to hear the rest talking- Wasim, Waqar and Aamir. Commentating has nothing to do with their achievments as players, stop mixing up the two fields. They will remain great players whether they can commentate or not! Talk about straying from the issue. Good article though, I liked seeing who the most popular men are behind the mic. My personal fav's- David Lloyd, Shastri, N. Hussain, Robin Jackman, Harsha, Slater, Mark Nicholas, D. Morrison and Tony Greig

  • Hassan on June 8, 2009, 9:24 GMT

    How can u compare him with any other commentator. Just let us listen to the legend's commentary. Its a treat to listen to the comments of a person who was himself a great cricketer, rather than the one's who were average players and now keep criticizing on other players.

  • Rajiv Arvind on June 8, 2009, 9:20 GMT

    There are many like Wasim Akram, who are not good behind the mike. I just heard Anil Kumble yesterday and he sounds like he just woke up from sleep! Commentary is not everybody's cup of tea. Ranjit Fernando is another one who just agrees to his co-commentator and never seems to have a view of his own. I think Star Cricket could well do with Wasim Akram and Anil Kumble as "analysts" during the break or post match. For now, David Lloyd and Ian Chappell are still my favourites. And yes Harsha too.

  • Anonymous on June 8, 2009, 9:20 GMT

    There are many like Wasim Akram, who are not good behind the mike. I just heard Anil Kumble yesterday and he sounds like he just woke up from sleep! Commentary is not everybody's cup of tea. Ranjit Fernando is another one who just agrees to his co-commentator and never seems to have a view of his own. I think Star Cricket could well do with Wasim Akram and Anil Kumble as "analysts" during the break or post match. For now, David Lloyd and Ian Chappell are still my favourites. And yes Harsha too.

  • Harisankar on June 8, 2009, 9:11 GMT

    My favourite cricket analysist, expert and commentator is Imran, who is a true leader in all fields. Guys why have not you mentioned his name above ?

  • Anjum Amin Siddiqui on June 8, 2009, 8:31 GMT

    Best way to be counted is to give negative opinion about someone who is not considered as negative. Mr. Saad is getting all the imporatnce which ordinarily he will not get.

  • Chohdry Amir Ali Sandhu on June 8, 2009, 8:27 GMT

    I agree with the author that Wasim is perhaps being 'coached' in commentary by wrong people. Wasim, I feel, has been trying to deliver a running commentary, simply describing the obvious. The commentators from sub-continent forget at times that they are commentating on TV not radio. A viewer can see if the ball was on the off stump or not, "batsman played it through covers easily". I want to know how he was able to play it easily thorugh covers.

    what I want to know is 'why' and 'how' rather than 'what'. Discuss the batsman's technique, bowler's skill rather than the obvious. One would notice that the likes of Benaud and Chappell provide an insight to the game rather than describing the scene.

    Rameez Raja is admired in Pakistan because of his acceptable English. For me, he never has an opinion. His views are like a seesaw. One second 'batsman is pathetic', the next 'what a cricketer'.

    Improvement in Waqar's commentary is as noticeable as is his beard. He is no.1 out of the lot

  • Sudarshan on June 8, 2009, 8:25 GMT

    Completely disagree with the author, I find Wasim the best amongst the three Pakistani commentators on offer.

    Rameez has deteriorated and gone overly hyperbolic as Harsha has (in fact Harsha is quite awful right about now).

    The problem with Wasim is that he needs a good co commentator either to push him or to needle him. I love it when Wasim is in his full flow and virtually arguing with his co commentator regarding some subtilities of the game.

    Wasim brings insights especially regarding Asian teams and their thought processes which no one is able to present clearly barring Gavaskar. The good thing about Wasim is he does not use too many cliches or even tries to put on a accent.

  • Tarak on June 8, 2009, 8:21 GMT

    Akram's commentary is acceptable. Ramiz and Waqar are pathetic.

  • Ananth on June 8, 2009, 7:58 GMT

    Shafkat, Rameez and Harsha as commentators ?? If at all there was a popular vote and the viewers / listeners had a say, I'am sure they will be sent packing.One wonders how were they picked in the first place. It could just be that these two were the few who had a reasobale command over the language when there was a dire need for some one to fill the box. There probably was a time when some one needed to represent India and Pakistan and these two sneaked in. As regards Akram, I presume we all, including you, have a very high expectation of him as he was great bowler and are in hope he can bring the same to the box. Unfortunately, natural talent and an acquired one can never be compared.

  • kamaljit on June 8, 2009, 7:55 GMT

    We love listening akram. Harsha is too small a man before him, sanjay manjrakarn is small crickter than him. speaking english with some tough vocab. is not all about commentary. We love imran and akram and whatever they say is worth listening

  • vivek on June 8, 2009, 7:48 GMT

    i would say that i agree with the author of this article.. it is most annoying when wasim akram repeats the obvious facts for example rohit sharma is on 48 he just needs 2 more runs for a fifty.. or 5 balls up in the over one more to go.. mr akram dont worry about the counting we can do that too.. just tell us something we dont know.. i think all the english commentators are quite good.. especially david lloyd

  • Abbas on June 8, 2009, 7:45 GMT

    well, i do think so, you feel like that because may be i think Akram is not as good English speaker as Harsha. I agree that Harsha is the best, but he has a wast experience as a commentator, I am sure Wasim will get better with the time only. I agree that he is the best when he speaks in Hindi or Urdu. In my personal view,i really like Nasir Hussain as a commentator. Wasim is the best left arm fast bowler the crickiting world has ever produced. It matters when he speaks. All the should pay attention towards him when he tells anything about fast bowling while commentating. Akram is a genius and he deserves all the respect.

  • Usman Moorad on June 8, 2009, 7:37 GMT

    I guess wasim isn't too much of a great commentator, but on another note you forgot another pakistani commentator Aamer Sohail, possibly one of the most painful men to ever listen too. But even rameez and gavaskar can never hope to reach the level of the English commentators, nothing beats those guys.

  • T Hanumantha Rao on June 8, 2009, 7:29 GMT

    I still remember the rigorous and vigorous interview sessions that were conducted by ESPNSTAR for recruiting commentators(Dream Job). I am afraid if similar standards are applicable to cricketers turned commentators. Apparently and audibly it looks no especially when we hear people like Wasim Akram, Sanjay Manjrekar, Rameez Raza, Daryll Cullinan, to name few commentating. Playing game at the highest level is entirely different from analysing the game with rich language,witty anecdotes and more importantly the ability to recollect something similar from the past and aptly correlating it to the present. If playing cricket is the only criterion for becoming a commentator then every Tom, Dick and Hary can become one.Already we have many and many more are in the queue. In fact a nice plum cozy rehabilitation scheme envisaged by media houses for these cricketers. Excellent cricketers turned sub standard commentators have taken more intelligent and eloquent and analytical viewers for granted

  • masood on June 8, 2009, 7:17 GMT

    commentator should be very fair, and we found wasim vry good in that, bosle as a commentator no match to akram

  • giri on June 8, 2009, 7:12 GMT

    well, if u think akram is insufferable, then u obviously havent listened to set-max's blasphemy paraded as commentary in the IPL. i tell u pommie, coney, ramiz, ravi and morrison made ur life hell. i woke up screaming in the night for days after the IPL finished, nightmares in which their voices tormented me.

  • Ranbeer on June 8, 2009, 6:58 GMT

    Hi Peter

    I think Harsha is insightful, unlike England commentators who are just one dimensional. England this and England that....

  • Raj on June 8, 2009, 6:54 GMT

    Wasim is rubbish apart from when he's talking about the finer points of bowling.Heard a howler last night...." england have won teh game fair and square from pakistan single-handedly"...whatever that was supposed to men.Worse ,he was pertnering bumble,from whom i thought i heard a chuckle.

  • Nirmal on June 8, 2009, 6:54 GMT

    Whats ur take on Harsha Bhogle with uncharacteristic wig on his head? He looked very funny other day. Pls comment

  • Pranab on June 8, 2009, 6:53 GMT

    Wasim is by far the most insightful when it comes to commenting on fast bowling. I agree with Peter. Harsha is just very difficult to tolerate. He should understand that he is a anchor and not comment about technical aspects of cricket; unfortunately where is mostly abnoxious. Alan wilkins is by far a better anchor. He understand cricket, but goes back to the cricket biggies for their opinion on technical aspects by asking relevant questions. Warne, Ian Chappel, Boycott, are also very good because they are very direct and speak their minds. Bhogle; i cant stand. Mostly have to switch off or mute the tele when he is talking. He knows the stats; though not the game. Next time see how many times the anchor goes back to the technical expert like wasim to check on their views.

  • ASIF IQBAL on June 8, 2009, 6:46 GMT

    During his commeantry I doubt "is he a Pakistani / Indian ?"

  • Sachin on June 8, 2009, 6:32 GMT

    I am rather bemused reading most of the comments here which claim Ramiz to be a better commentator than Wasim....Wasim scores over Ramiz even if he is commenting during his sleep! Ramiz is probably the worst commentator i have ever heard.....and Harsha is simply the best, most articulate and insightful...Ravi comes next and he has the most balanced views on most things, Sunil can swing from being spectacular to outright stupid and no one can doubt his cricketing sense. All australian commentators are good, Richie, Deano, Slats and others. Wasim is a pleasant commentator, never one who annoys like Sanjay, Ramiz or Arunlal

  • siddharth on June 8, 2009, 6:29 GMT

    I agree that wasim is a far greater bowler than he is at commentating but give him time he will improve.He is insightfull and will learn to put it across to the viewer.

  • Samuel Mervyn on June 8, 2009, 6:23 GMT

    I'm a Sri Lankan but I always enjoy listening to all the three main Pakistani commentators. My favourite of the three may be Rameez Raja but that doesn't mean that Wasim is bad. In fact, I think he's better and more insightful than most other commentators out there. His understanding of bowling technique is second to almost no one. I believe he makes educated guesses more often than not and his analysis is rarely far off from the mark. Sure, he makes a few mistakes at times but I think every commentator makes them. I believe his knowledge and experience is far superior to Harsha, who is a "sitting room cricketer" at best with all due respect.

  • Anonymous on June 8, 2009, 6:11 GMT

    Man, if you consider Harsha Bhogle a good commentator I can understand you dissing Wasim bhai. Bhogle is self important and pedantic; Wasim is endearing if not polished or practised. And he is much better in Hindi/Urdu! On which note, I can understand the South Asian obsession with English as the language to conduct business in, but are we going to poke fun at our legends just because they can't speak it to a certain 'standard'? Would we have rather they skipped cricket practice to attend extra classes in English? From whom are we so desperately seeking approval?

  • patel on June 8, 2009, 6:09 GMT

    ya this is true,,,, Wasim, is Ok compared to Srilankan , and but the thing is he takes little bit to speak and as a listner you want to listen a pleasant thing and new thing abt the cricket and cricketer , bt he doesnt have this knowledge, he needs to spend some time to go and read some good biography of the cricketer and share it with us.

    but i just dont listen his and ranjit , and one avinayak or some things commentary they realy bad with this..

    ramij is good , but they talk partially to their nations so that is unfair to cricket.

    compare to indian commentators except arun lal all are good but beware dada is coming i think he will be just like wasim.

  • Suhaib on June 8, 2009, 5:53 GMT

    Wasim to me is the best man for the job, as he is all components of a good commentator, he has his own tome and voice which is totally recognizable and the best thing he has is a huge library of his own life experience and technical notes for the players, he can give much better analysis, then Waqar and Rameez (these two are also good in there own way). Sometime he do look little rusty with his commentary but keeping his schedule in view, that is absolutely ok.

  • Yas on June 8, 2009, 5:44 GMT

    What a farce of an article, Wasim Akram was a cricketer and English Language doesnt come naturally to him.

    Could you not find a better topic to write on? Its all about perception, as for me, I wouldprefer listening to Wasim than Sunil Gavaskar. Eventhough Gavaskar's command over English and cricket is good.

    This is a pathetic topic to qrite on, unless you lost your job because of Wasim

  • Vinod on June 8, 2009, 5:40 GMT

    i agree wasim is not a very good commentator. but please dont compare his commentary with his bowling. for those who do so, show me one commentator who can match the performance of wasim as a bowler. so please .......leave him to himself to get on with his business. he is not a person to attack on and i am very pleased with his presence in the commentary box. even if he doesnt utter a word.

  • Kailash on June 8, 2009, 5:34 GMT

    Oratory skills are inborne and not acquired. Given the fact that Pakistan cricket, although blessed with fantastic cricketers, with a few exceptions like Imran and Rameez, not many have command over English. Any fluent English speaker can guess that Wasim's command over English is not the best. However, it is presentable enough to hand him a microphone. I have never understood this subcontinental obsession to judge a person by his ability to speak good English when most of us are aware that the overwhelming majority gains basic education in local lingo and English pervades lives at the higher education level. Naturally this at times results in literal translations, etc while making English conversations. The intelligible subcontinental fan (who forms the majority of viewers/listeners) has no difficulty in understanding the true intent of the speaker. The irony is we pride ourselves based on our English speaking ability. Do you think the French, Spaniards or Arabs would do so?

  • Suhaas Paradkar on June 8, 2009, 5:32 GMT

    You are absolutely right, both Wasim & Waqar are not even passable. The only Pakistani ex-cricketer who fits the bill is Rameez Raja. Among the Indians its only Ravi Shastri, Siva & Arun Lal who're naturals - Sunil Gavaskar is too stiff while Sanjay Manjrekar hasn't improved with time. Harsha shouldn't qualify in the first place as he's not a former cricketer & lacks real knowledge. He should actually be confined to the studio as a moderator only.

    Among the foreigners - Robin Jackman, Jeremy Coney, Geoff Boycott, Nasser Hussain, David Gower, Mark Nicholas are very pleasant to listen to.

  • sagard on June 8, 2009, 5:25 GMT

    i think u r exactly right.........he should leave this post of a commentator before he earns a bad name.....his comments are awkward and at the end of the over.....he says "it is a good over so far" :(

  • Rohan on June 8, 2009, 5:23 GMT

    who all are there writing comments, most of 'em have don't even knowledge about cricket...If some1 here say 'Harsha make no sense to him' is a hopeless character...he is the most respected commentator in world cricket...he is a cricketer and more over he is the topper of IIM, Ahemadabad. The best management college in India. and probably in top 10 management institute of the world. And as far as Akram's commentary is concerned, he is a very good analyst as stated above by some1 that makes him special in the commentary box, does not matter a lot to have an excellent English vocab. Anyways ESPNSTAR ppl are not fool to keep him as a commentator if he does not have any quality.

  • donSilva on June 8, 2009, 5:15 GMT

    As per my personal perception there are three main ingredients to be a great commentator. First depth on the subject backed by experience and knowledge, open & constructive mind frame & thirdly the charisma or dominance gained through the core field or due to the background of success in another related area (Reputation). Wassim basically has all three components .he practices the "unbiased" approach appreciatly at the highest level. I could easily recall a comments made by so called best commentator (sitting along side Wasim) during recent Sri Lanka India Series. The umpiring mistakes made to India were repeated and criticized while errors to sri lanka seen as a general events and use only to show the low standards of the local umpires(SL) despite impact to the match. Time to greats like Wassim, Waquar and Ravi to take "cricketing responsibilities" from so called "biased" professional

  • R.Sankar on June 8, 2009, 5:07 GMT

    Sunil Gavsakar wears his patriotism on his sleevw and is broiling for a fight, in perpetual war mode, tilting at racist windmills and seeing ghosts where none exist. And never losing an opportunity to eulogise his "little champion".

  • Ashwath on June 8, 2009, 5:03 GMT

    I agree with the author and feel many past players have the problem with elucidating their ideas. This is however only a temporary problem as you can see with Mr. Manjarekar and Mr. Shastri. I feel that the time Mr. Akram spends in the commentary box with people like Harsha Bhogle and to an extent the rest of the commentary team for Espn Star will only serve him well. I am pretty confident he will soon become one of the most lucid commentators around. Or this might be a side effect of the adoration I have for him as a player.

  • bijish on June 8, 2009, 5:01 GMT

    I like his style ............... and I feel apart from the author and some exceptions majority love him for wot he is ..............

  • R.Sankar on June 8, 2009, 5:01 GMT

    All Asian commentators, without exception, are insufferable. If they are not boring and platitudinous, they try to drum up artifical excitement. Their poor command of Emglish (and in the case of Harsha, his childish attempts at puns and metaphors not to speak of his poor enunciation)makes them worse.

  • Aby Mathew on June 8, 2009, 4:28 GMT

    Harsha merely praises the players & talks about the past,the same boring crap that the sight or voice of him is enough to send you running for cover. and he doesnt talk (or know)about technique .Its just the media with all the shows involving him make it sound as if he was playing cricket a long time , when in fact he hardly played any cricket whatsoever. People like henry Blomfeld, Boycott, Holding, Chappel, Lawry , Benaud, Gavaskar, crowe, Mark Nicholas etc, Even Wasim is very good as compared to Harsha.Wasim was the greatest Left arm bowler of all time. , I doubt there will be any better than him ever.

  • saurabh on June 8, 2009, 4:21 GMT

    half the people have created their own colliquial words while providing their insightful opinion about the Wasim Akram debate and they think they are more intelligent than Wasim Bhai. I think Wasim Bhai is a good enough to do his bit behind the microphone, he will learn and become more eloquent as time passes by, give him a chance. As for other comments on the blog, the less said the better.

  • maani on June 8, 2009, 4:20 GMT

    this was a gud thorough analysis.i wud agree wid u as i wud like a change in wasim's speaking style, which shud b much more fluent n confident.thanks for your analysis.

  • Tittu Thomas on June 8, 2009, 4:11 GMT

    Wasim is not that bad in commenting Just that he need to impove in certian areas,he need to be little more enthusiatic while commenting...things will be back on track once he does that and Sultan of swing will one of the best.

  • Pradeep on June 8, 2009, 4:06 GMT

    You all talking about different persons, No body is commented so far about two guys Sanjay and Ranjith fernando, Sanjay is not done anything for Indian cricket when he was playing with the team Even though i am sure that he is technically perfect but modern day cricket he is useless!!!! So he cant judge to Dhoni or any Present Indian cricketers? but he comments a lot about to irritate viewers, renjith Fernando is not very professional to sit talk about cricketers, For me Wasim akram is far far better than these two guys

  • Ahmed Khan on June 8, 2009, 4:05 GMT

    Hi Doc,

    First time on your blog.

    If Wasim’s commentary is not so great, then your writing is also not something to be proud of ...

    It’s Mic. and not Mike for a (microphone), and it can not be a typo ;)

  • Rohit on June 8, 2009, 4:01 GMT

    Its very true that Akram is not that good when it comes to commentry. He uses a bunch of adjectives & reads out stats & nothing much. When people such as Ian Chappel & Harsha Bhogle are out there Akram is certainly not at his best.

  • Rocky on June 8, 2009, 3:56 GMT

    I think is another one those Pakistani articles that seeks to create a nothing story out of a nothing point! Wasim is being paid a handsome amount by a corporation to do a job. The last time I checked these media companies didn't just dole out the cash. So clearly his presence is what sells. Otherwise the best cricket commentators are actually some of the writers, supporters and even ground staff. So having Wasim fulfills a purpose and that is to have his personality and whatever insight he provides as a bonus segment during the match. Harsha is a fine commentator and analyst. His quality is different, so just as there is no comparision between a leg spinner and fast bowler, there is no comparisions between Wasim and others. As for Rameez Raja ..I think you have a serious inferiority complex if you are in awe of his views. His policy is to agree with everybody once the action has passed by. He just shouts and wails a lot harder than the greats because they have nothing to prove!

  • Abdur Razzak on June 8, 2009, 3:49 GMT

    may be this gentlemen is short of head lines and other stories. this is simply utter rubbish. what does harsha know compared to wasim. as the saying goes practise makes perfect. wasim possesses tones of those qualities. he was among the all time greats so he knows what he is delivering in side that tiny commentary box.

  • Sri on June 8, 2009, 3:40 GMT

    we want 2 c navjot siddhu back with d mic..with his everlating idioms.........

  • Ali Ammar on June 8, 2009, 3:23 GMT

    Yes, i felt the same yesterday, exactly the same, Wasim's commentary not only lacks the insight but also the nice little jokes, comments, funny jitters and the hip hop which could keep the listener's attention. May be this is because we have high expectation with Wasim. though every one can not every thing. May be commentary is not wasim's thing. or if Wasim wants to continue, he sould learn it fast or he wil be ousted.

  • Khurram on June 8, 2009, 2:57 GMT

    waqar and rameez r better than akram,wasim is more for PR ship than commnetry he tries to please everyone...........but the best ever commnetator is BILL LAWRY followed by richie, ian chappel ,martin crowe even SHANE Warne gives huge technical insight

  • Sanjay Tyagi on June 8, 2009, 2:38 GMT

    I am an Indian and a great fan of Akram, the Bowler, the Cricketer, the man. With all due respect to the comments, Akram remains my big favourite. He speaks his mind, his thoughts in a spontaneous manner. Akram Bhai, please do not change your style, just because some people think otherwise. You are doing a great job and we love you for that.

  • Sherlock on June 8, 2009, 1:58 GMT

    Agree - Harsha makes absolutely no sense. What period English does he speak?! Also whats his qualification to be an expert - sitting in the same box with Akram, Shastri and Chappel?!

    Akram's knowledge of cricket-strategy and quick bowling is incredible, maybe his articulation is not that great, but he surely is insightful and knows cricket.

  • Karan Singh on June 8, 2009, 1:39 GMT

    Well watching the Eng Pak match today i actually felt the same thing at one point. He kept saying things like let's see , we will see and the like. He was my favorite cricketer along with Sachin but must agree on this opinion. He seems to be uninterested on unexcited most of the time. Maybe it is because of the pak team's current form or maybe that he is just not very comfortable expressing himself in english. I think both.

  • Saptarshi on June 8, 2009, 1:24 GMT

    if u do not like it just hit the mute button. Simple. There are many who like it and will listen to it.

  • Aditya on June 8, 2009, 0:00 GMT

    I enjoy Wasim's commentary...I think he analyses the game very well, and is the king when he's talking about fast and swing bowling.

  • Avishek on June 7, 2009, 23:27 GMT

    What about Harsha, he even dont know how to comment when batsman hit a boundary or a bowler gets a wicket n I dont think Wasim is worse than him..

  • Amit on June 7, 2009, 23:12 GMT

    I agree with you on that. W Akram is not good on the commentry side compared to his Asian fellow commentators Harsha,Ravi Shastri, Rameez, or Gavaskar. I also want to point out specially when there is a four or six by a batsman, Akram tries to eluminate Tony Greig's excietment and I tell you his commentry make the shot look bad.I hope he relises that. I feel that he can be in studio giving expert comments after the game on cricket.

  • AE on June 7, 2009, 23:02 GMT

    Honestly, I could not agree more with the sentiments of this article.

    Anyone who heard his commentary today on the 20:20 Pak-Eng match will not have failed to recognise he is completely out of his depth behind the mic. He either needs to go and practice somewhere or completely change his persona. And yes, it's a great shame for Pakistanis to listen on in embarrassment at a person whom we just love so much.

    Sigh.

  • Cricket Buff on June 7, 2009, 23:01 GMT

    I think you are being a bit too harsh. Wasim Akram may lack some of the qualities of a good commentator. But he brings to the table a balanced approach and tremendous credibility as an expert of the game. I like to hear his views.

  • Akshay on June 7, 2009, 21:27 GMT

    I think that is true and quite unfortunate too. Wasim is far more knowledgable and insightful than Ramiz or other stupid commentators like Harsha, but reason why that is not visible is because he is not speaking in his mother tongue and as with most Pakistan players and commentators not having command over the English does not help when you are trying to put across your point. I for one cannot understand why we are so obsessed with English when players like Inzamam and Wasim can express themselvs more freely in Punjabi. Why not have Punjabi or Hindi version of commentatry available as well on Live matches?

  • faumi on June 7, 2009, 21:11 GMT

    wasim on the field did not give his best during his peak period as the best ever alrounder. off the field he is strugling to match the best

  • nadeem on June 7, 2009, 21:03 GMT

    I say give him some time. Harsha Bhogle has been commentating since he was 19 and Ravi Shastri has been commentating for about to two decades now.....

    I think Wasim will improve over time.

  • Tahir on June 7, 2009, 20:55 GMT

    Ram,s comment make sense. Not everone can be brilliant in every field. Its just nice to have different perspective from great player. I myself like Harsha very much, he make commentry and cricket very light and fun.

  • fahad on June 7, 2009, 20:51 GMT

    I completely agree. I can't stand listening to Wasim Akram. So inane ! Waqar I would say is the best pakistani commentator. Also a very interesting point about the influence of imran on wasim. I think if it wasn't for imran, he wouldn't have been half the bowler he ended up being.

  • Sakir patel on June 7, 2009, 20:41 GMT

    Before read this sigment I was telling my wife this afternoon about akram improvement as a comentator but my only advice to wasim akram what ever suggetion you make for pakistan behind mike you please help those indivisual so than can put better show next time on the field i always listen good commentator comment very carefully for me like ian chhaple mark nicholas tony greig and ravi shastri are best men in job when ever i listen to bbc commentator i get very impress about there honest comment on particulars point guy like nasir hussain david lloyd ian botham good these guys are not bias i really dont like ramiz raza as a commentator

  • XeeShaN on June 7, 2009, 20:33 GMT

    well you are totally wrong. rameez raja is no way near to waseem akram in commentary. rameez raja always criticize pakistani team, i still remember when he asked questions from inzi at the end of the match, and he was laughing at his english. he is totally insane. Waseem was a great player and soon he'll become the great commentator. you don't have any right to criticize on his commentary. you can't let the others think like you we all know what he is. so better to think before you speak in future.

  • Amrit Singh Dhillon on June 7, 2009, 20:27 GMT

    Wasim is my favourite player of all time. i admit tho that he isnt the most insightful commentator in the world but he is by no means the worst. so until we get rid off commentators like harsha bogle, ian bishop, sanjay manjrekar, rameez raja......wasim by all mean deserves to be commnetating based purely on the fact that he was one of the greatest of all time and not as bad as the aforementioned commentators.

    the good commentators are:

    benaud shastri ian chappel mbangwa david llyod mark nichlaus

    ps nasser hussain used to be poor and one dimensional with a limited knowledge of only english players but recently he has improved to become one of the best.

  • Rahil Arora on June 7, 2009, 20:06 GMT

    Harsha Bhogle is a bigger pain any day. He's been there for so long doling out the same boring crap that the sight or voice of him is enough to send you running for cover. Akram's tolerable, really.

  • Shankar on June 7, 2009, 20:04 GMT

    I think Akram is too kind when commentating, overreaching to be fair to everyone. Harsha Bhogle is insufferable and Ramiz very bland. Waqar is okay without being great. Earlier we got thrilled at commentators who had played the game;now one yearns for a commentator who knows how to commentate!

  • armughan on June 7, 2009, 19:54 GMT

    I dont know if he is good or not, but he is better then some of the most over rated ones like Ian Chappel. Atleast he doesnt argue like heck when a bowler is No bowled for bowling 2 bouncers in an ODI over like Chappel.

  • Ano on June 7, 2009, 19:45 GMT

    Not sure what this rant is about to be honest. Wasim may not be the brightest lamp in the store when it comes to commenting. But he certainly is better than Rameez and Waqar. Don't even bring sohail in this. He doesn't comment, he growls.

    Harsha might be versatile in his knowledge, but to be honest I find him annoying.

  • sam on June 7, 2009, 18:42 GMT

    peter: u don't like harsha bcoz yr english is not good.

  • Partyman on June 7, 2009, 18:17 GMT

    Mike? Do you mean Mic(rophone)? You must be joking if you believe Rameez Raja is acceptable. He is a complete clown. At least, Wasim carries his persona well! But then Wasim is in a long line of Asian commentators who are rather incomprehensible at the com box. Ravi Shastri, Sunil Gavaskar, Arun Lal, Rameez Raja ......... the list is rather long and boring like their commentary itself.

  • Huzz on June 7, 2009, 18:03 GMT

    Akram speaks his mind, especially when it comes to bowling. yes, i think he'd be better in his native language. Rameez sounds better cuz his english vocab is better. Waqar should just be coaching..

  • Akbar Asghar on June 7, 2009, 17:13 GMT

    I don't really agree with you, Wasim is more of a analyst than a commentator and he is not as bad as you think...

    Rather, to me he is better than many others around...

  • Tanul Thakur on June 7, 2009, 17:02 GMT

    I stopped reading this post the moment you said Rameez Raza is better as comapred to Akram wrt commentary. Dude, get a grip on yourself!

  • Alok on June 7, 2009, 16:29 GMT

    When Rameez Raja is compared favourably to you in the commentary field, it is time to a take a serious stock of your life and career.

  • Ram on June 7, 2009, 16:16 GMT

    Well, it can be agreed that Akram is not as insightful, but my opinion is that he is very likeable. I am an Indian who grew up watching Indo-Pak matches where Akram was always perceived the monster bowler who will destroy our favorite batsmen. But due to his commentary and TV media nowadays, I discovered that he is very lovable due to his earthy charm, he always spontaneously speaks his mind, he is just a very easy and cool guy, like one of your friends or elder brother to hang out with. It is great fun to listen to him. period. If I wanted insightful commentary I will listen to Ian Chappell, my favorite or even Richied Benaud. As we say in south asia, all five fingers are not the same. Wasim bhai is a unique finger in the commentary box and I love him for who he is.

  • piyush bakshi on June 7, 2009, 16:04 GMT

    i dont know if i agree with the author; akram's one of my favorite BUT when he's commentating in hindi and not english; he speaks his mind lucidly when he's uninhibited by language constraints... i can never forget wehn he said "yahan pe koi langda bhi bhaag ke do run le leta", i think this was india in bangladesh.

    his pointers on bowling and grips when commentating are too good. but i think he needs to commentate in hindi / urdu.

  • Tabraiz on June 7, 2009, 16:01 GMT

    I believe this is a totally non-sense opinion about wasim's commentary, he is a better commentator than Ian Bishop or Sanjay Manjrekar . . Give it a break propagandists ! !

  • Manzur Khan on June 7, 2009, 15:51 GMT

    i think you have been unfair....and too harsh...he has a pleasent voice,good sense of humor and above all the respect of all his peers and seniors of the game.......you should give him some time....he is second only to Rameez and far better than waqar and amir sohail......

  • frank on June 7, 2009, 15:35 GMT

    It should be Mic. (Microphone) and not Mike.

  • Peter on June 7, 2009, 15:34 GMT

    What about harsha? he makes no sense to me...

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Peter on June 7, 2009, 15:34 GMT

    What about harsha? he makes no sense to me...

  • frank on June 7, 2009, 15:35 GMT

    It should be Mic. (Microphone) and not Mike.

  • Manzur Khan on June 7, 2009, 15:51 GMT

    i think you have been unfair....and too harsh...he has a pleasent voice,good sense of humor and above all the respect of all his peers and seniors of the game.......you should give him some time....he is second only to Rameez and far better than waqar and amir sohail......

  • Tabraiz on June 7, 2009, 16:01 GMT

    I believe this is a totally non-sense opinion about wasim's commentary, he is a better commentator than Ian Bishop or Sanjay Manjrekar . . Give it a break propagandists ! !

  • piyush bakshi on June 7, 2009, 16:04 GMT

    i dont know if i agree with the author; akram's one of my favorite BUT when he's commentating in hindi and not english; he speaks his mind lucidly when he's uninhibited by language constraints... i can never forget wehn he said "yahan pe koi langda bhi bhaag ke do run le leta", i think this was india in bangladesh.

    his pointers on bowling and grips when commentating are too good. but i think he needs to commentate in hindi / urdu.

  • Ram on June 7, 2009, 16:16 GMT

    Well, it can be agreed that Akram is not as insightful, but my opinion is that he is very likeable. I am an Indian who grew up watching Indo-Pak matches where Akram was always perceived the monster bowler who will destroy our favorite batsmen. But due to his commentary and TV media nowadays, I discovered that he is very lovable due to his earthy charm, he always spontaneously speaks his mind, he is just a very easy and cool guy, like one of your friends or elder brother to hang out with. It is great fun to listen to him. period. If I wanted insightful commentary I will listen to Ian Chappell, my favorite or even Richied Benaud. As we say in south asia, all five fingers are not the same. Wasim bhai is a unique finger in the commentary box and I love him for who he is.

  • Alok on June 7, 2009, 16:29 GMT

    When Rameez Raja is compared favourably to you in the commentary field, it is time to a take a serious stock of your life and career.

  • Tanul Thakur on June 7, 2009, 17:02 GMT

    I stopped reading this post the moment you said Rameez Raza is better as comapred to Akram wrt commentary. Dude, get a grip on yourself!

  • Akbar Asghar on June 7, 2009, 17:13 GMT

    I don't really agree with you, Wasim is more of a analyst than a commentator and he is not as bad as you think...

    Rather, to me he is better than many others around...

  • Huzz on June 7, 2009, 18:03 GMT

    Akram speaks his mind, especially when it comes to bowling. yes, i think he'd be better in his native language. Rameez sounds better cuz his english vocab is better. Waqar should just be coaching..