| June 19, 2002 | Wednesday | Rabi-us-Sani 7, 1423 |
Pakistan made unholy mess of batting
WASIM AKRAM, superbly supported by Shoaib Akhtar and Shahid Afridi, had handed the second match of the Super Challenge, to Pakistan on a silver platter. Australia had been bowled out for 167 and Pakistan, had it chosen, could have got these runs in singles.
IT is heartening that Syed Hussamuddin Rashdi’s pre-1955 Urdu articles have been put together with the post-1955 articles, to help us form a gradual evaluation of his views on such important issues as the genesis of Urdu language, impact of partition on the socio-cultural life of Urdu poets of Sindh and other important literary and cultural issues.
Needless to say that Rashdi is one of the towering personalities of Sindhi, Persian and Urdu literatures. Author, editor and compiler of more than 40 books it would be a fair statement to make that he was a class by himself. One should shudder at the prospect of living in an age without scholars like Rashdi being respected and admired. Isn’t it a bit sad that the kind of dedicated scholars we were brought up to admire and emulate are on way to becoming extinct. The age of specialization has left us nowhere. I have heard some modern scholars sticking to their areas of specialization so religiously that an expert of the 16th-century English literature proudly maintains silence about the epochs prior or subsequent to his period of specialization.
This attitude is dubbed as the ‘more and more about less and less’ approach so beautifully explained by Will Durant in his Story of Philosophy. Rashdi belonged to a generation of scholars who didn’t believe in ‘sections’ or ‘parts’ of knowledge. They revelled in the ‘whole.’
As we all know Rashdi’s views on the genesis of Urdu were known to the first generation Pakistanis. A time came when his views about the real place of Urdu’s origin, ie, Sindh, were not politically favoured. His paper, read at the Khairpur Urdu Conference in 1951, was duly published in the Anjuman Taraqqui-i- Urdu’s journal Urdu. From 1955 onwards this article assumed the position of being a politically ‘explosive’ matter. May be the fervour, which led to the poem Urdu Ka Janaza Hai Zara Dhoom Se Nikle in 1954, betrayed the linguistic divide fuelled by Field Marshal Ayub Khan’s decision to impose Urdu as a medium of instruction in Sindhi-language schools, and the language riots of 1972 might have turned the milk sour. This is how even serious and well-researched pieces of scholarship have to recede in the shade of anonymity. Not only this article but Rashdi’s article Sindhi ke Urdu Shair also met the same fate. I remember having drawn Pir Sahib’s attention to these two articles. He patiently listened to me with a wry smile and said: “Baba, nothing is wrong with your statement, but think over how the tragic events overtook us.”
Yes, there is a tacit connection between the two. Sometimes events develop a line of thought which needs to be studied in their light, and sometimes it is a line of thought which gives birth to events validating that particular line of thought. However, there was an interesting development that in 1981 Pir Sahib issued a statement rejecting his thesis about Urdu’s genesis in Sindh. I think that the editor of the book should have also included this retract at the end of Pir Sahib’s article. However, the fact remains that there was a time when the whole of Muslim sub-continent or its sizable portion was situated on one mental wave-length. Maqalat-i-Rashdi, edited by Ghulam Mohammed Lakho and published by the Institute of Central and West Asian Studies, is a befitting publication containing most of the gems of Rashdi’s Urdu articles.
Rashdi’s article Fatawa-i-Alamgiri Ke Do Sindhi Muallifin Aur Unke Ajdad has an interesting episode about it. One does not know how someone included this article in Maulana Mujeebullah Nadvi’s book Fatawa-i-Alamgiri Aur Us Ke Mualiffin, recently published by the Idara-i-Tehqiq, Dayal Singh Trust, Lahore. Maulana Abu Zafar Nadvi has been shown as its writer. It is a pathetic case of denial of credit which is due to Pir Sahib. The publishers should rectify this deliberate or inadvertent lapse on their part.
Rashdi, way back in 1946-1947, set the record straight about the editors of Fatawa in the monthly journal Ma’arif, after Maulana Mujeebullah Nadvi’s articles appeared in that journal.
I am of the view that no student or scholar of Sindh, Central Asia, Iran and Urdu literature should miss this book, and both Ghulam Mohammed Lakho and Prof Dr Riazul Islam deserve our thanks for making us have a peep into an era which is growing hazier. Pir Sahib’s articles Punba Kuja Kuja Naham and Maulvi Mohammed Shafi are simply extraordinary. The former, especially. He expresses his joy over the fact that most of the literary and cultural stars of Muslim India, after having migrated from India, have made Sindh their home and some of them are enjoying their eternal sleep here (it is gratifying that Pir Sahib didn’t issue a retract to this statement of his).
I think that there are many more articles by Rashdi which need compilation. He had been contributing articles in pre-partition Urdu journals. The article on Fatawa Alamgiri is the only one from that period. A thorough search should be made in Urdu journals of that period for Rashdi’s writings. Another gold mine is the area of his stray writings; for example, introductions and prefaces and interviews which he gave in the post-1955 period. I believe that he had also read out papers in seminars and efforts should be made to dig out all those papers.
Lakho has rendered a great service and his work can well lead future scholars to do more.
Instead it made an unholy mess of its batting and the match went to the wire and Pakistan scraped through by the skin of its teeth.
In the first match Pakistan had been blown away and we rationalised that the team had not adjusted to the extra bounce of the Australian wickets, the batsmen had no clue where their off stump was and hung out their bats, as one hangs out the laundry and the bowlers bowled too short and gave too much width. The bowlers had learnt from the first match. Not so the batsmen.
Clearly much work needs to be done to bring some discipline in the batting.
A gutsy innings from Younis Khan saw Pakistan home but he had his share of luck because the Australians were not so sharp in the field, off-season blues, as one commentator described it.
Pakistan lost Saeed Anwar in the first over, run out when he backed up too far and was a little lazy in getting back. To our consternation, Azhar Mahmood was sent in next. It made no sense to change the batting order and if the order had to be changed Shahid Afridi who is an opening batsman, should have been sent.
To no one’s surprise Azhar had only a walk-on role to play and with Imran Nazir, out of sorts and all at sea, Pakistan was soon on the back foot. Inzamam did not look fit and was limping and he was out to a wild shot.
I was surprised that he had not asked for a runner unless he brought his injury to the match which should raise some eye-brows. I raise the question once more about Pakistan getting itself a fitness trainer. The trainer need not necessarily come from abroad.
In the seventies when Geoff Hunt ruled the squash world, we discovered that what separated him from a bevy of Pakistani champions was his supreme fitness. If we had to dethrone him, we could have to match his fitness.
Nur Khan arranged for a fitness trainer from the PAF. I still remember him as a very tall man, ramrod-straight and a no-nonsense man. I had nicknamed him ‘Commando’. He put the players through their paces and they howled in protest. He was too strict. But there was no let-up, no relaxation. Came the Irish Open in Dublin, Geoff Hunt was beaten and from then on, Pakistan reigned supreme in the squash world. I don’t ascribe all their success to the fitness-training. The Pakistanis were superb players but they had also become extremely fit.
Mark Waugh who has turned commentator rated Australia and Pakistan as the two best teams in the world. According to him, Australia had the edge in fielding and running-between-wickets. It seems a fair evaluation.
I think Pakistan was ‘unlucky’ with the umpiring in the second match. Damien Martyn was caught by Waqar Younis and Waqar claimed the catch. Darrel Hair who was standing only ten meters away and was in a position to judge himself whether it was a clean catch or not, chose to ask the third umpire. The moment this is done, some doubts are created in the minds of the third umpire and its almost a certainty that the benefit of doubt will go to the batsman.
I don’t think umpires should abdicate their responsibilities merely because technology is available. In the good, old days, a fielder’s word was enough whether he had caught the ball cleanly or not. Martyn should have asked Waqar. But these are not the good, old days.
Still, Pakistan go to Brisbane, one-all. This match will be played under open skies and Pakistan will have to brave the elements which includes the Australian winter. The ball seams a lot on the Brisbane (GABA) tracks.
I have fond memories of Brisbane which is one of the most beautiful cities in Australia. The going will be tough for Pakistan but Pakistan has the bowling to make life difficult for Australia.
It is the batting that is a matter of concern. Saeed Anwar has yet to face a ball in the Super Challenge. It would be great if he could get some big runs on his come-back and give Pakistan the start it hasn’t had so far.
With the group matches concluded in the football World Cup, the tournament as such has reached its fever-pitch. From here on, it’s do or die and there are no second chances.
It’s still a wide open World Cup and we may still find some upsets.
What the tournament has shown is that the standard of football is uninformally high but from here on, there will be no free lunches. England, much to our surprise, is looking very sharp and it left no doubt in anyone’s mind what it thought of Denmark’s challenge.
But it has been a wonderful fortnight and there’s more to come, right up to the final at the end of the month. In the meanwhile, come on Senegal, come on.