Sachin Tendulkar has called Nasser Hussain a “great tactician” and followed it up by saying that Hussain was one of the best captains he had played against. Tendulkar, on holiday in England, told BBC Radio that the cricket world would miss Hussain.Tendulkar also said there was nothing wrong with Hussain’s tactics of asking Ashley Giles to bowl a negative line during England’s last tour of India. “Whatever he did was within the regulations of the game — there was no stage where he broke any laws. He was a great tactician,” said Tendulkar. “He was one of the best captains I’ve played against and a tough character. I’m sure people in England, and all over the world, are going to miss a character like him.”Tendulkar is the latest in a long a long line of cricketers to pay tribute to Hussain. “He was one of those guys that fancied being in very tough situations, similar to Steve Waugh,” said Allan Donald. “Hussain was a tough opponent who never backed down from a challenge.” Donald also expressed surprise at Hussain’s decision to retire. “I must say it’s a bit of a shock. I thought he was going to finish the series against New Zealand and West Indies and finish on a high at the end of the summer.”The way he batted at Lord’s was typical of Hussain at his very best, and I think he’s in really good form at the moment,” said Donald. “But everybody comes to that crossroad. I’ve been there and maybe I didn’t finish in such a great way for myself. But he probably wanted to be seen finishing on a high.”Jimmy Adams, the former West Indian captain and a master of the barnacle-on-rock school of batsmanship, also expressed surprise at Hussain’s decision to call it quits. “I think it’s strange he’s retiring seeing as he’s just scored a Test hundred,” he said. “There must be reasons outside cricket because his cricket looks to be pretty good at the minute. Only Nasser knows how he feels and it can’t have been an easy decision considering his recent form. But what better way to leave Test cricket?” There’s no disputing that.
The just released findings of the Review Committee set up by the PCB to investigate the performance of the Pakistan team at the World up has done an excellent job – of ingeniously shifting the onus of failure away from the Board. That indeed may have been their unwritten mandate, but can shifting of the blame absolve the Board of any responsibility?To be fair to the PCB, and to General Tauqir, the problems with Pakistan cricket pre-date the recent World Cup, and indeed the present cricket set-up. It is not a question of one match, tournament or a series. The origins of present troubles date back to the match-fixing allegations that surfaced in the early and mid-90s. These sharply divided the team between the whistle-blowers and the accused. The fissures were deepened by lingering rivalries over the captaincy issue along the already existing fault lines and have hung over the team ever since. This is, of course, only part of the problem. The main problem is structural.Pakistan cricket has alternated between spurts of achievement and periods of stagnation and sterile performance, when either the team was in transition when talent shrank and dried up, or it under-achieved despite its capability.To an extent, this has been the story of most other cricket teams as well, that is until recently. But world cricket has changed beyond recognition. And Pakistan unfortunately has not kept pace with it, and this is the other half of the story of what happened at the World Cup, which, I am afraid, the Review Committee has missed entirely.Increasing pressures and opportunities of competitive cricket, the introduction of neutral umpires which has levelled the playing field, and enormous money brought by television and sponsorships is forcing as well as enabling cricket administrators everywhere to organize and run cricket on scientific, efficient and modern lines to stay in the game. It has involved multiple challenges – imaginative organization of domestic cricket, academies and grounds, the appointment of coaches, managers, analysts and physios, training of umpires, and the appointment of selection committees etc. And above all, what is most important, it has helped the delineation and demarcation of everyone’s precise and autonomous role to ensure effective coordination and to avoid over-stepping and intrusion of authority.On a symbolic level it is like all those countless names that scroll by at the end of a movie whose role in the direction, screen play, special-effects, musical score etc significantly contributes to the success or failure of the show. This is not meant to be an extended metaphor, but I am presenting it simply by way of illustration, to make the point.So how can the Board evade responsibility for what happened at the World Cup?I have said before, I am not holding General Tauqir personally accountable, some of whose actions have been good, but certainly a major responsibility for the World Cup debacle and what is wrong with our cricket lies at the door steps of the PCB, its set up and method of operation. But as Imran Khan wrote in his article, there does not seem be an adequate acknowledgement or self awareness of what has happened and that does not inspire much confidence about the future.Our cricket team has been having problems of varying degree ever since the departure of Imran and Miandad. They were extraordinary sportsmen who provided exceptional leadership to the team both with their superior achievement as well as exemplary inspiration and motivation. The team had potential for similar under achievement and infighting then as now but these individuals managed to overcome or transcend these weaknesses.But times were different. Modern cricket has become fierce and brutal. The ways Australians have used the technology to study weaknesses of the opposing players and launch a relentless attack on them virtually strips them naked and demolishes their confidence. After grinding the opponents psychologically, the battle is half won. The opponents are defeated even before they come to battle. The Australians have turned the game into warfare. It is significant that they themselves are very fond of comparing their approach to a surgical operation, as it has become fashionable with them to use the word `clinical’ in describing their match-winning strategy, indeed a term that is now beginning to be parroted by lesser teams as well though not equally convincingly.In Australia we do not hear the coach, selectors and the chief executive or the head of their cricket board giving statements every day. While in Pakistan, everyone is busy contradicting each other and speaking authoritatively or deciding about issues falling in other people’s areas of responsibility. Aussie cricket is being run on professional lines by those who know the game through long and active association. And there is a certain stability, continuity and predictability. Coaches and selection committees, for instance, do not change every day.It is not like in Pakistan where cricket administrators have always been appointed, as I have said before, on the strength of their personal connections with the political leadership of the day. They have always claimed to have great personal passion for the game, which in some cases has indeed been true. But that is where their qualifications begin and end. We all love the game, but does it qualify us to run the game?Since this is a piece about the organizational aspects of the game, I have refrained from discussing individuals, whether players or administrators.I would conclude with a suggestion and here again I am not pointing any fingers of blame or responsibility. I think now that we have had an enquiry into the performance of the team, we need a similar assessment of the PCB itself, especially whether the way it is organized and being run, is it fit to meet the challenges of modern cricket?The roles of all the constituent units and institutions, specially the chief executive, selection committee, the coach, the manager as well as the method of team selection, have to be examined and reformed, where necessary, and the competence of individual officials has to be appraised, and changes made where desirable.There is no better person better qualified to head this task than Imran Khan.Ed: Touqir Hussain is former Ambassador of Pakistan to Japan
Finally, after much hemming and hawing the BCCI has formally withdrawnfrom the Super Challenge one-day series in Australia in September. Itwas hardly a surprise ever since the Board committed itself in May tothe Asian Test Championship on overlapping dates. Exactly why they hadto tarry until today to intimate their Australian counterparts is moreenigmatic. The curtain thus comes down on an episode which began inApril when India were proferred an invitation for a three match seriesincluding two indoor games at Melbourne’s Colonial Stadium.Having begun the tradition of indoor cricket in August 2000 againstSouth Africa, the ACB turned to India in the second year. With the twonations slugging out one of the great Test series in history earlierthis year for the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, they were possibly keen tostoke the embers of that contest. A third match to be played at theGabba was to have broken fresh ground, being the first timeinternational cricket came to Brisbane outside the customary November-March period.Board Secretary Jaywant Lele confirmed having received the invite buthedged his bets on accepting. The cause for India’s ponderous reactionto the proposal became clear at the Asian Cricket Council meeting inLahore in May when the Board pulled a rabbit out of the hat byagreeing to take part in the Asian Test Championship. India was set toclash with Pakistan in Lahore from September 12-16, following whichthey would host Bangladesh in another one-off Test from September20-24.That should have really put a definite lid on the Super Challengeprospect but the ACB was given to believe that the BCCI was stillamenable to a change of heart. They were perhaps encouraged by thecontinued coyness of Indian officials who, as it turned out, could notget around the constraint of having committed their players to besimultaneously present in another location. No one can grudge theBoard’s preference for the Asian initiative over the Australian one.Cricketing ties between India and Pakistan have been suspended sinceMay 2000 which is already far longer than the patience of fans acrossthe Radcliffe line can endure.There is of course the minor hiccup of the Indian Government nothaving granted permission yet for their national team’s journey toLahore. Indeed when the ACC decision was announced in Lahore on May28, it had the effect of stirring a hornet’s nest in the form of theexcitable Union Minister for Sport, Uma Bharti.”The BCCI should not take the liberty of making such announcements. Toplay in Pakistan, the BCCI has to first give a written proposal to theSports Ministry which in turn would forward it to the Ministry ofExternal Affairs (MEA). The final decision rests with the MEA. No suchproposal of a tour of Pakistan in September has been received by theMinistry” reacted Ms.Bharti.In return, ACC Chairman Jagmohan Dalmiya brandished a letter from theSports Ministry which proposed the broad policy that ‘India willcontinue to play Pakistan in multilateral tournaments at regularvenues’ including those in either of the two countries. With bothparties still guardedly sizing each other up, there is the tantalisingprospect that, having had two birds in the bush, the Board couldconceivably end up with none in the hand.That would probably suit the Indian players down to the hilt. BoardPresident AC Muthiah’s fax statement to his ACB counterpart mentionsthat he took the decision after holding consultations with his playersand noting their concerns about a calendar chockful with engagements.Indeed, the team’s schedule over the next 13 months, comprising 22Tests and some 40 odd ODIs, is designed to make a stevedore faint.Perhaps it is just as well the Board has heeded that old maxim aboutgeese and golden eggs.
The season’s first Super Sunday did not disappoint with regard to providing a few sturdy talking points as West Ham made the short trip across London to face Arsenal at the Emirates.Admittedly goalmouth action was few and far between during the Hammers’ surprise 2-0 victory but the Premier League debut of Reece Oxford (just a sweet 16) and some truly terrifying goalkeeping (if you’re an Arsenal fan) meant that fans up and down the country will be debating exactly what went down at the Emirates Stadium.Buckle yourself in and enjoy our Three things we learned from Arsenal vs West Ham…
1. Pinning hopes on Petr Cech *may* have been a tad premature
So… it turns out that simply buying Petr Cech does not guarantee success after all.
With weeks of commenters suggesting that Cech was the missing piece of the jigsaw, destined to bring Premier League glory back to north London, that theory seems to have imploded rather spectacularly.
Of course, it will take Cech time to bed in. But this won’t quite be the fairytale combination Arsenal fans dreamed it may be.
2. Bilic’s West Ham could be a beautiful thing
Facing your first test as a Premier League gaffa at the Emirates isn’t an enviable position to be in, but Slaven Bilic passed with flying colours.
A compact and disciplined display from the Hammers rendered Arsenal’s kaleidoscope of attacking talents relatively redundant throughout the match. Including Reece Oxford from the off was a ballsy move, while Mauro Zárate and Sakho up top looked a dangerous combo.
Kudos too, to Bilic, for resting up most of his players going into this game. Only two first team players started for the Hammers in the Europa League midweek and, while they crashed out of the tournament, Bilic will be having the last laugh for sure.
3. The future’s bright for Reece Oxford
16 years old and straight in for your Premier League debut against Arsenal at the Emirates? We’re not sure we can think of too many more daunting experiences in the world of football.
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
But fair play to West Ham’s youngest ever player, he came through this one with great credit. A lung-bursting run alongside Sakho saw the striker too selfish to feed Oxford in around the 20 minute mark, while throughout Oxford marshalled his back four very well against the tiki-taka threat posed by the likes of Mesut Ozil and Aaron Ramsey.
The future’s bright indeed for Oxford but perhaps it’s for the best not too talk it up too early.
Manchester City striker Edin Dzeko must be enjoying his summer. Following helping guide his team to Premier League success after a 44 year wait, the Bosnian international then enjoyed a long holiday as his country failed to qualify for Euro 2012, and now he finds himself with a new Missus!
Bosnian model and actress Amra Silajdzic is Dzeko’s new girlfriend and both were spotted rubbing shoulders with Angelina Jolie at a Sarajevo film festival last week.
Having cost City £27 million in 2011, Dzeko began to fall out of favour at the Etihad towards the end of last season, and has since been linked to Bayern Munich and AC Milan, two popular European destinations, either of which will no doubt keep Silajdzic happy.
The new couple’s appearance in Sarajevo last week saw them covering the Bosnian tabloids, as Dzeko is the main man in national football and Silajdzic just as big a celebrity.
Click below to see Amra Silajdzic in action – it’s fair to say we think he’s done alright for himself!
Sochaux striker Modibo Maiga is refusing to play for the club according to Sky Sports, as he wants to move to Newcastle United.
The French club are refusing to do business with the Magpies after they submitted a £7 million bid for the Mali international.
Maiga was angered after learning that the club rebuffed Newcastle’s offer and refused to play against Caen at the weekend also stating he won’t play for Sochaux again.
The 23-year-old is desperate to play in the Premier League and is now trying force through a move to St James’ Park after rejecting a new contract.
Maiga said: “Yes [they have made me an offer], but before the Newcastle offer I have not been offered anything, but now I would like the chairman to consider my interest. I want to leave.
“I met everyone at Newcastle. They want me and it is not just any club. Premier League is a dream.
“That is the kind of game I like, it suits me and it is good for my career. I want to leave, he has to accept that and negotiate.” He added
“I told the coach I would play and respect my contract, but the chairman has to talk about my transfer first. I don’t want to annoy Sochaux, but I want it to be sorted out with Newcastle.”
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
The Malian joined the Ligue 1 club from Le Mans last summer and had a superb season scoring 15 goals and would join Demba Ba in the North East as Pardew continues to try and replace Andy Carroll.
With the exception of perhaps Howard Webb, I have never been one for ref bashing and believe they do their best in arguably one of sports’ toughest professions. It is a thankless task, although I don’t think the authorities help them.
Before you switch off and think I am going to join the masses who scream out for the need of video technology, I want to reassure you I am not and instead will be aiming my fury at the initiatives and guidelines that the referees are under instruction to follow. Only football could punish players for celebrating goals with a yellow card, while seeing scything challenges as just part of the game. The reason my frustrations have surfaced is having witnessed two red cards being branded against Tottenham in the past few days.
I’m not going to string up either referee on this occasion, because by the letter of the law they were both red card offences, but who writes these ridiculous laws in the first place?
I understand the need to clamp down on flying elbows, as the likes of John Fashanu and Ben Thatcher have both used theirs with violent intent, but can Jermain Defoe’s really have been deemed in the same league? I ask the question as to how Defoe was going to be able to challenge for that header with his arms by his side and equally where was the intent when his eyes were clearly on the ball the whole time? Surely the rule doesn’t state that players are able to raise their arms, just as long as it doesn’t catch anyone in the face; how is that workable in what is ultimately a contact sport? What did Defoe do differently to say what Kevin Davies does week in week out for Bolton?
It is the same with Kaboul’s sending off. We all called the red card the minute he moved in with his head, but who was the real perpetrator of this incident? It was Tiote who was the aggressor and while Kaboul was stupid to react to the provocation, what harm was actually done? Had he made contact then fair enough, but common sense would ensure that this incident wouldn’t really warrant anything other than a stern talking to. Unfortunately therein lays the problem as referees aren’t allowed to officiate with that and failure to send off Kaboul would have seen the ref reprimanded and maybe taken off the roster for a week. Is it any wonder that referees are so card happy these days?
That is what really boils my blood is that managers and fans continually berate referees but what chance have they got, given the rules in place? You get yellow cards for taking your shirt off, dissent; while getting red cards for raising your arms, or in Kaboul’s case touching eyebrows with an opponent. It kind of makes you sick when you see incidents like leg breaking tackles, cynical stamps, or kicks from behind often going unpunished, and yet this is what would actually do the most damage to the game. The rules need to be rewritten and quick, in order to bring a semblance of common sense back to the game.
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
[divider]
Holy Crap – it’s live fantasy football! Become part of Liverpool v Wolves and play Picklive for FREE Watch and bet live – spices up any game!
When the final whistle blew at the end of last season, few fans could’ve predicted how the following two months would go.
Admittedly, most of us expected a frustrating summer in regards to the usual let downs on the transfer front.
That followed by the same old explanations, but few predicted that we’d be discussing the possibility of a new owner come the start of July.
Unfortunately, this has only served to bring more frustration, as it is now three weeks since we were politely informed by the official site that there were people interested in investing into the future of Leeds.
There are only so many times anyone can get their hopes up over a rumour on Twitter or from somebody supposedly ‘In the know’, those days are now long gone, with almost anyone claiming to have any kind of information immediately dismissed as a wind up merchant.
Because of this there is a good chance that amongst all the fiction we may have missed the facts, with some rumours actually making sense when you give them more than a seconds thought.
The one in particular that I believe could actually have something in it, is that Leeds are currently going through the ‘due dilligence’ process. What this would mean is that the saga could well be coming to a close, as this process would not take place unless a deal looked to be agreed.
Another point worth remembering is that with major negotiations like the ones we hope have taken place at Leeds, there would be extremely strict rules regarding the confidentiality of the deal, so no news really could be good news.
Hopefully the end is in sight for us all, something really does have to give and it is clear that the fans are expecting something positive to come from the talks that have taken place. Most, it seems, would settle for literally anybody other than Ken Bates, and after seven years of lies who could honestly blame us?
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
In regards to the positive work Bates has done at Leeds, I am, as others are, in fact grateful to him for at least turning us into a profitable (if only via player sales) and seemingly well run club. Whilst I dont quite agree that he ‘saved us twice’ I do believe that it is completely in his interests to sell Leeds United this summer.
Ken, if you sell up, I’m more than happy to shake hands, call it quits and maybe even wave you off into the sunset. Maybe.
Arsene Wenger believes Manchester City’s 400 million-pound sponsorship deal is a threat to UEFA’s Financial Fair Play regulations.English Premier League club City’s commercial arrangement with Etihad Airways, which will see the City of Manchester Stadium rebranded, comes before the first season in which UEFA’s new regulations are implemented.
The Financial Fair Play regulations will require all clubs to break even by 2013/14, or risk exclusion from the Champions or Europa leagues.
Arsenal manager Wenger, a vocal critic of large cash injections into clubs by wealthy owners, is concerned deals such the one between City and Etihad will undermine the UEFA initiative.
“It raises the real question about the credibility of the Financial Fair Play,” Wenger said at a press conference in Kuala Lumpur as part of Arsenal’s tour of Malaysia.
“That is what it is all about. (City) give us the message they can get around it.”
“It means the Financial Fair Play will not come in. It is as simple as that. I can understand how they do it but it raises the real question – the difficulty and the credibility of Financial Fair Play is at stake.”
“Plus, normally the sponsorship has to be at the market price if the Financial Fair Play has to have a chance. It cannot be tripled or quadrupled because that means it is better we don’t do it and leave everybody free.”
“That can be defended, but if they bring the rules in they have to be respected.”
When asked if he would discuss his concerns with countryman and UEFA President Michel Platini, Wenger replied: “I don’t need to because it looks to me that he (Platini) is very strongly determined on that.”
“He’s not stupid, he knows as well that some clubs will try to get around that and at the moment I believe they are studying, behind closed doors, how they can really strongly check it.”
“That’s where the Financial Fair Play is at stake.”
First things first. Lee Bowyer can’t and should not be excused for his horrible challenge on Bacary Sagna during Birmingham’s recent defeat to Arsenal. It was sickening to watch Lee Bowyer carry on in the game, and continue to leave his boot in on Sagna at every available opportunity. Not for one minute is Alex McLeish defending his player’s behaviour, but has he landed on a point that shames the FA? Are the bigger clubs getting away with the same kind of challenges that the smaller clubs are being punished for?
It would be unfair to Birmingham if we highlighted all of the decisions Birmingham have had over the past two seasons and said that it is a case of swings and roundabouts. Lee Bowyer should have been sent off against Manchester United, something Sir Alex Ferguson stated after the game. Bowyer knew he was under the media spotlight, so why did he commit such a reckless crime? Against Arsenal, either Bowyer was looking for Sagna or the full back found himself at the wrong place at the wrong time. Hopefully Mcleish is not trying to gloss over three serious incidents, one against Manchester United and two against Arsenal, and try to deflect attention away from his player. Bowyer was handed the right punishment, he must accept that.
Alex McLeish wasn’t happy with Samir Nasri’s stud high challenge on Stephen Carr, and feels the bigger clubs are getting away with decisions.
“I don’t like to see trial by television,” said McLeish. “But, if we’re getting tried by it, then everybody has to be tried by television.
“We are just looking for fairness. We’re not defending anybody if they have made a bad decision (challenge) on the field. We’re not going to defend anybody.
“But that wasn’t slowed down by television. Slow that down, I’m sure you will think it looks a bad tackle.”
Personally, I feel McLeish has a point, but not with the Nasri challenge. Football is a contact sport, we hear it all the time, but if we slow down incidents we could condemn any challenge. As Andy Gray said a couple of weeks ago, every challenge can be perceived as dangerous. Lee Bowyer’s challenge was a red card in super fast motion or super slow motion. However, Alex McLeish does raise a point. There have been challenges this season that the top teams have got away with. Look at Jack Wilshere’s horror lunge on Nikola Zigic and Gary Neville’s slice on Matthew Etherington. Both players got away without punishment in these incidents, but had it been a player with a ‘reputation’ would managers have been more inclined to push the FA into action? We can cast our minds back to September and Arsene Wenger’s interview about tackles in the English game. Wilshere’s must have fallen into his ‘horror challenge category.’
It is definitely something that the FA must look at. Punishing players by television evidence will be good for the game. No longer can players make off the ball elbows, horror challenges or inflammatory gestures and get away with it. Granted, it is not a method of protection, as the player will not be sent off during the game, but it will hold players to account. Cricket has a similar system in place, and the game is played in a hard but fair manner. Football should continue to embrace these disciplinary measures but it must be on a fair playing field. Alex McLeish will lose Bowyer for three games, but Wenger could have lost Sagna for a great deal longer. The FA, in this case, have got it right.
The top managers get the most media coverage, that is something that we have to accept. So if a poor challenge is made on one of their players, they have a larger platform in which to call for action on such an incident. We just have to trust the FA that they do make the right calls on these incidents. The system may not be 100 per cent fair, but our game will be better with, rather than without it.
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
Like what you read? Comment below and follow me on twitter
[divider]
Holy Crap – it’s live fantasy football! Become part of Arsenal v Man City and play Picklive for FREE Watch and bet live – spices up any game!