Why Wasim Akram's omission would have been folly

Even in the often-convoluted context of Pakistan cricket, the call to drop Wasim Akram - arguably the greatest left-arm bowler of all time - from the tour of England was as ill-conceived as the thought that the Pakistan team would be complete without him.

Akram has suffered on many counts in recent years on and off the field, sometimes for reasons not entirely in his control. However, none could have been more galling than the "new found" realisation that, after almost 17 distinguished years in the international arena, his inclusion in the team would rest on a "selectorial" policy allegedly reliant on the whims of a new captain and not on his proven ability as the most complete fast bowler of his time.

There shouldn't ordinarily be anything new about a captain insisting on the inclusion or, as in this case, the exclusion of a certain player during the selection process: the over-riding consideration being the formation of the best possible team. But that would be in an ideal world, where the selectors would take recourse to the captain's opinion before deciding upon the odd berth left unfulfilled - other positions being more or less accounted for - and decide accordingly. In most such cases, the player(s) under review would have been fringe cases: a drop here and a push there would merely serve as encouragement no matter which way it is considered.

In Akram's case, a review such as this, if true, would amount to mere condemnation, a perception reinforced by what appears to be a concerted media campaign to discredit his playing ability, now that it is evident there is nothing off the field to hold against him. Still, it was diligently pursued by the print media, inspired, it would appear, by a misplaced, often hawkish belief in the strength it wields in moulding public opinion and, indeed, in forcing the board's hand to suit their own devices, whatever they may be.

They have been helped, in no small manner, by the new captain's surprising disposition for allowing his bias against this selection to be made public: first, via reports filtering through the increasingly porous PCB set-up and then, according to comments he made in an interview with a cricket web-site. It might have taken the PCB Chairman's veto power to restore Wasim to the touring squad but, and sadly, it'll take slightly more to erode Waqar's erroneous assumption that an actual playing eleven in a Test in England can get by without Akram's presence.

Experience in England's often fickle conditions is the key here. Waqar needn't look far for a history lesson. Terry Alderman distinguished himself during the 1981 English summer, when a certain Ian Botham's heroics overturned a promising Australian beginning to the six-test Ashes series into an astonishing loss, bagging 42 wickets. Eight years later, he was plucked from the bowling scrap heap by captain Allan Border, who had borne close witness to the swing bowler's amazing prowess from specialist catching positions in 1981 - and included in the squad for the 1989 Ashes. Alderman revelled in familiar conditions, making the ball seam and swing prodigiously as he captured 41 wickets; his efforts ensuring that this time, Australia won the rubber.

Akram's might be a different case - no relegation to the scrap heap for this class of bowler - but the same principle applies; a fact Waqar should be well aware of. Signed up by Lancashire during his first England tour in 1987, under the watchful tutelage of Imran Khan, Wasim Akram struggled with a groin injury that plagued him through his first season with the county a year later (and indeed for the next few years). But his talents, both as a bowler and a batsman, came to feature as the highlights of every subsequent season he played for that county.

In between were the visits with the Pakistan team, in 1992 and 1996. The first when, as the senior partner of the "W's" pairing, he and Waqar tore an unsuspecting England team asunder with extremely fast swing bowling and the second, when, as captain, he led his team to a 2-0 win in three tests. On both occasions, Waqar walked away with more acclaim, rightly by virtue of his quicker, surprisingly accurate bowling. Yet his successes might not have been possible without the relentless pressure applied by Wasim at the other end, restraining himself from going flat out while he concentrated, as only he could, on softening the opposition up with clever variations in pace and swing.

This, of course, is the hallmark of a truly great bowler. Just as Richard Hadlee when advanced in years cut down on his pace and concentrated on extracting the maximum from the seam. And Imran focused on keeping the shine on one side of the ball, enabling him to swing it at a reasonably nippy clip. More recently, Courtney Walsh has shown how pace, per se, has nothing to do with his 182 wickets in 39 Tests after attaining the age of 35. All he had to do was employ the technique perfected during almost two decades at international level: endless accuracy combined with an oh-so-subtle change in pace and the ability to make the ball dart around off the pitch.

Wasim exhibited all these traits much before he'd reached twenty-five. Of course, he had recourse, just as Waqar did later, to Imran's ready advice through his years of apprenticeship. But unlike Waqar - about whom Mike Selvey wrote in 1993 after he'd devastated Surrey with another fearsome display of quick bowling, that he didn't need a particular surface to help him benefit because he was so quick through the air - Akram's unique ability to make the ball do disconcertingly different tricks off a short run-up promises a much brighter future than any misdirected press reports would have us believe, especially in England. Waqar would do well to pay heed.