Ex-selector urges Majid to show restraint (12 May 1997)

12 May 1997

Ex-selector urges Majid to show restraint

KARACHI, May 11: Salahuddin Ahmad, former national selector and Test all-rounder, has called upon Majid Khan to rise above subjective considerations in the larger interest of cricket and the country. He urged the cricket boss to show restraint and responsibility in a statement on the burning topic.

Salahuddin said:

Now that a compromise formula worked out at the instance of Mr Mushahid Hussain, Prime Minister's Adviser on Information and Sports, is likely to resolve the dispute between the PCB and noted opening batsman Aamir Sohail, it is time to analyse the factors that led to it. While the wild charges levelled by the latter against national cricketers cannot be condoned the conduct of Majid Khan, Chief Executive of the Board needs to be closely examined.

The ugly episode that has brought a bad name to Pakistan in the context of cricket was essentially a personal tiff between Majid Khan and Aamir Sohail that should have been sorted out amicably. That the feud was allowed to develop into a major crisis, is a sad reflection on the behaviour of both. But being the holder of the high office and as the avowed upholder of principles Majid should have shown greater restraint and responsibility.

Unfortunately, however, I am sorry to say, Majid's adamancy fouled up the matters. What is worse and even more regrettable is the fact that he used the incident to settle personal scores. In the name of discipline he put the career of a brilliant cricketer on the chopping block. Not only that he subordinated national interest to subjective considerations. And it was not the first time this unhealthy tendency was in evidence. A striking example of such partiality was the selection of his son Bazid Khan in the juniors team for England and South Africa when other more deserving youngsters pined for a place.

Discipline is no doubt a desirable thing but at the same time the demands of handling a player with care must also be met duly. After all if he is under pressure at the hands of his superiors he will not be able to concentrate on the game. And while on the theme of discipline why did Majid fail to act when his own councillors issued statements against the Board. A glaring instance is that of Aamir Rokri, the LCCA President. Majid and his Board kept mum at the time because they knew full well that if they took action against the councillors it will badly recoil on them.

Instead of enforcing discipline Majid thought it fit to woo the councillors. Whether he did it on his own or on the advice of others he sent them one after the other abroad as team managers. Asad Azeez of Railways, Mian Munir of LDCA, Ashraf Qureshi (a member of the Disciplinary Committee) and Yar Mohammad Solangi are names that readily come to mind in this context. The only person who spurned this offer was Basharat Shafi. Ironically enough these very members in the previous (Abbasi) regime dismissed Majid Khan, Pakistan team's manager and Mushtaq, the coach, on the plea of violating the discipline. But times have now changed and Majid's word is law for the council members. What can you expect from such a Council.

When a 30-day ban was clamped on Aamir Sohail, the Discipline Committee didn't take approval from the Council. Majid's bidding was done according to his wishes to please him. Of course the committee knew which way its bread was buttered. How Majid's mood and methods have changed! As Controller of Sports on TV and even otherwise he preferred professionals in cricket affairs. But non-professionals were accommodated by the same Majid when it suited him. What else is the double standards policy!

All said and done as far as I know he would have resigned his job by now but his advisers, with their seats at stake, restrained him. If Mushahid Husain, who is not a party, had not taken up the matter so seriously Majid and company would have succeeded in their plans.

Had Majid kept the larger interest in view he could have followed the pattern of policy adopted by the West Indies in respect of Brian Lara who of course is a greater player than Aamir Sohail but is much more undisciplined too. He was never banned but always fined - a wise step of the Caribbean authorities who never deprived their team of an invaluable asset.

Another dimension of Majid's policies is the `friendship factor' that is wrecking the teams' cohesive character. In fact he has broken an established opening partnership (Anwar Saeed and Aamir Sohail) that the best bowlers of the world found difficult to dislodge. If only Zafar Altaf had conceded his point and given a berth to Rameez Raja in place of Aamir or Anwar, on the London-bound squad he would still have been enjoying the position of selection committee chairman. But Zafar Altaf chose to leave his chair rather than his principles.

I have no grudge against Rameez; he remained in the team when I was a national selector. But I am nonetheless astounded that in the presence of such cricket brains as Saleem Malik, Saeed Anwar and Moin Khan Rameez was made captain presumably because of the friendship factor. Majid knows better that in one-day cricket fielding is very important. Rameez has obvious limitations in this department with a pronounced poor throw. If Rameez has been given the leadership role because of his better educational background, Majid should recall the disastrous tour of England captained by Javed Burki in preference to such world-class players as Fazal Mahmood and Hanif Muhammad. So academic qualifications too are a flimsy ground since Pakistan's cricket image sagged never so low as in that sorry series.

In conclusion I will earnestly appeal to Mr Mushahid Husain that he should impress upon Majid Khan and other office-bearers of the PCB to rise above subjective and personal considerations in the larger interests of cricket and the country. The services of such seasoned players and stars as Aamir Sohail, Rashid Latif or for that matter Basit Ali would have made a great difference on the current Indian tour where experience and expertise counted a lot. Authority ought to be exercised with circumspection as sweeping action in a fit of anger can wreck individual careers and inflict irreparable damage on institutions built over years.

Source:: Dawn (https://xiber.com/dawn/)