AS I write these lines, Pakistan is already out of contention in the Asia Cup, the final of which will be played the day you get to read them. There is little to write about the way the team played during the tournament, as its characteristic inconsistency continued to be its greatest attribute, and about that we have discussed enough.
However, what amused me was the intensity with which various Pakistan officials chose to lambaste the bonus point regulation after failing to deny it to India in that make-or-break match. The rule, naturally, was the same for both the sides, in fact all the sides that were part of the outing, and it was known to all, including Pakistan, much before the tournament actually got under way. Why, then, should it be a matter of surprise and disgust now? A casual one-off remark would have been perfectly acceptable and understandable, but even four days after the match one can still see some statement in this regard either by the coach or the captain. As if that was not enough, even the PCB Chairman has spoken out on the matter. Passing the buck? Sour grapes? Whatever.
During the match also, there was no point for the leading Pakistani commentator to repeatedly question Indian tactics of playing for the bonus point once an outright victory was taken out of the equation. It was clearly in bad taste, and reflected badly on Pakistan’s own level of professionalism. After all the commentator happens to be a key PCB official, and his comments suggested that had Pakistan been in Indian shoes, he would have preferred his side to go for an improbable victory even at the cost of losing out on the bonus point and a chance to play the final. Did he really want to suggest that? I doubt, and that is why his repeated questioning of the Indian strategy was in bad taste.
As for the Asia Cup itself, it really came alive during the second stage, with key matches involving Pakistan, India and, of course, Sri Lanka. The contests between India and Sri Lanka during the tournament have been of high quality and turned out to be the main feature, and it is only fit and proper that the final is being played between the two best sides of the tournament.
Regardless of which way the final goes, it was a great feeling to see Sanath Jaisuriya coming good in the tournament after a rather lengthy lean patch, which had made his critics go for the jugular. Sanath is a remarkable cricketer and a wonderful person. For someone who changed the face of international cricket with his exploits, he is too humble a fellow. And that is something really exceptional.
Before he set the trend, One Day cricket was mostly about slogging in the last few overs. It was in the mid-1990s when Jaisuriya and Romesh Kaluwitherna started using the long handle in the opening overs of the game, making perfect use of the fielding restrictions and consistently scoring over hundred runs in the first fifteen overs. Neither of the two was a copy-book slogger. In fact, they were both clean hitters, and that is why they were consistent. It was a trend that every other team adopted without any waste of time, and it has by now become the established thing. The element of pinch-hitter is only an extension of that strategy.
For his exploits, everyone wants Jaisuriya to go out on a high. His back-to-back centuries against Bangladesh and India suggest he is beginning to get his eye in once again, and may well be a thorn in the Indian flesh in the final. Let’s see.
AS I write these lines, Pakistan is already out of contention in the Asia Cup, the final of which will be played the day you get to read them. There is little to write about the way the team played during the tournament, as its characteristic inconsistency continued to be its greatest attribute, and about that we have discussed enough.
