IT was one peach of a career that lasted 16 years, starting way back in November 1991 when he made his ODI debut against the visiting West Indians at Lahore.

The manner of Izamamul Haq’s exit, however, has somewhat tainted what otherwise would have been a truly rich and sublime legacy. Regardless of what the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) and the man himself say in public, the manufactured sendoff, especially the financial part of it, has only tarnished the very image that the so-called ‘deal’ tried to salvage.

The pace at which the modern game is played, 16 years is a pretty long time and the lengthy span indicates Inzamam’s ability to deliver in all forms of the game, against all kinds of opponents, on all types of surfaces, under varying conditions and situations, and all this with an enviable degree of consistency. It’s a pity that such a legacy now stands a bit stained.

Though the PCB has categorically denied having offered Rs10million to Inzamam to bring down the curtain on his career, those close to the happenings insist otherwise, citing former Pakistan captain Saeed Anwar as the man who made it all happen after he was approached by the PCB bosses in view of his close association with Inzamam. More than that, the way the episode unfolded itself clearly tells a tale that is much different from the official version.

When the news of the ‘deal’ first appeared in the media, those who contacted Inzamam for a confirmation testify that the former captain did not have a direct contradiction. Instead, he simply tried to parry such queries.

An official PCB statement the next day attempted to deny the existence of any ‘deal’, but only ended up confirming the perception when it said that the board would be ‘announcing a decision on Inzamam’s future in the next few days’ and that whatever it may decide, it would be ‘in the larger interest of Pakistan cricket’s future.’

As is public knowledge, the PCB, or, for that matter, any cricketing establishment worldwide, has no business to decide the retirement plans of an individual; it is a decision that every player has to make individually. The board can take a policy decision not to select the individual for whatever good or bad, valid or invalid, reasons, but it just cannot force or arrange a retirement for anyone.

If the statements coming out of the PCB headquarters in the last few months are anything to go by, no interest was indicated to pick up Inzamam for national duty anytime soon. It must have heaved a sigh of relief when he chose to sign up for the Indian Cricket League for it gave the PCB one more reason to sideline the individual.

As a matter of publicly stated policy, the PCB had announced an immediate ban on anyone joining the rebel ICL. So adamant and firm was the PCB in its stand that it actually said in as many words that the ban will remain in force for life, and the player concerned would not be considered even if he later opts for ICL disconnection.

Insiders believe the ‘few days’ that the PCB statement mentioned were required by the board to work out some linguistic jugglery to explain such a quick U-turn on its policy related to the ICL and those signing up for it. The spin doctors, however, could not do an effective job if the press conference addressed by PCB chief Dr Nasim Ashraf is taken as the yardstick to judge their performance.

The PCB boss was totally unconvincing when he denied having ever said that the board would ban anyone who signs up for the ICL, insisting that he had talked of banning players who actually ‘played’ in the ICL. The argument was that mere signing up does not invoke the ban. This was nothing but hair-splitting on the part of the PCB chairman, and that too of the laughable variety. On his part, Inzamam confirmed a couple of days after the said press conference his intention to be part of the ICL, and not of the rival Indian Premier League as was suggested by the PCB chief.

The second part of the initial PCB statement is also interesting, assuring everyone that every decision will be ‘in the larger interest’ of Pakistan cricket. This ‘larger’ or ‘national’ interest remains something that begs a definition. People have been, and continue to be, dumped in the ‘larger’ interest, and then brought back and elevated, again, in ‘national’ interest.

There have been many, like Rameez Raja, Moin Khan, Rashid Latif and others who were sidelined and dropped before being brought back and handed over the captaincy on similar grounds. Inzamam himself has been a beneficiary of this approach. He was dropped after the 2003 World Cup because the then PCB management wanted a fresh start in the larger national interest, but a few months later, he was brought back and elevated as the captain because the country needed him!

Now again he has benefited from the undefined term. He was pushed out with much disgrace after the 2007 World Cup debacle, but has now been brought back to set the precedent of ‘national heroes retiring on their own.’

The worth of the ‘national’ interest in this case is the mere desire of the PCB to have one less critic of its policies. While the PCB was moving to sideline the player after the World Cup, Inzamam had till recently been voicing his firm intention to vie for a place in the Test squad. He was keeping himself fit and even had a brief stint with English county Yorkshire to make a public statement of his plans.

The PCB wanted to close the chapter once and for all so that it may not have to face criticism every time the national team failed to deliver, which, it knew, would be more often than not. Burying the Inzi ghost was of prime importance, and that is why he was offered a way out which has led to the sudden realisation on the part of the player that he is too old to fit into a young dressing room.

Inzamam first made himself unavailable for the first Test, and when the deal was struck, he announced his retirement in Karachi. Within a matter of hours, his name was included in the Pakistan squad for the second Test at Lahore.

Regardless of what he may or may not do at Lahore in his last Test, one wished he could have left with some grace rather than through some dubious, underhand arrangement. His cricketing skills were never under any kind of doubt, but the manner of his exit means history may only give a qualified verdict on him. But, then, foresight has never been a strong point of Pakistanis, be they cricketers or anyone else.