Appointments in Pakistan cricket

I REQUEST the chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board not to appoint former cricketers on any important administrative job.

Instead they should appoint highly-educated individuals with proper accountability.

I suggest appointing non-cricketers chief selector so the team might work under him with responsibility and accountability. This will help avoid blunders like selecting Mohammad Sami (having a bowling average of over 50) and Faisal Iqbal (who has been tried and tested many times) over deserving youngsters.

We saw former cricketers settling scores against their opponents without considering the image of the country. We as a nation have developed an insatiable appetite for controversies, and TV channels are fuelling it to an alarming proportion.


DAWN_VIDEO - /1029551/DAWN-RM-1x1

LARGE_RECTANGLE_BOTTOM - /1029551/Dawn_ASA_Unit_670x280

Comments (3) Closed

Jul 17, 2012 04:26pm
Mohd Sami had mostly played on dead and flat wickets on top of Kamran Akmal having his keeper. Have you have any idea of drops on Mohd Sami bowling? If our fielding was at Australian level and he had an average of 50, then you would think. Look at our fielding and then comment.
Mahmood A Minhas
Jul 17, 2012 03:32pm
The richest department of the poorest country and why not they appoint their favourities.
Jul 17, 2012 09:22pm
I agree with the notion that highly educated staff should bear the administrative responsibilities in the top office of PCB. However, players should be part of selection committee who are selecting all players on a set criterion – excluding their skills to spot technically matured players would not benefit Pakistan cricket. The committee should follow a set criterion for selection, the criterion that should be measured by the top administrators on an annual basis. No nepotism, selection regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, city affiliation etc should be the basic principle of this criterion policy. The committee should be judged based on the performance of the selected players. The committee members that had failed repeatedly to deliver positive results should not be part of the selection committee. Is that too much to ask?