“(Clemenceau) once said that war is too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, 50 years ago, he may have been right…but now, war is too important to be left to the politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought…” — Colonel Jack Ripper, (Peter Sellers) in Dr Strangelove.
Clemenceau’s original quotation, “War is too important a matter to be left to the generals” is a favourite with politicians, perhaps because the alternative dilutes their absolute power. Frankly however, Colonel Ripper has a point; whether by choice or whether through a series of catastrophes, faced with war, a nation is better off leaving it to the generals.
Another favourite of politicians, mostly when in government and pursuing privatisation, is, “It is not the business of government to be in business.” This one is as catchy as the generals’ one above, and also seems undeniably bona fide. But as the Keynesians point out, when the private sector royally messes (a better choice of word would most surely have been censored) business up, the government has to step in and do business. Predominantly, those guided by their own selfish motives and greed can never be relied upon to do what is good for the many, especially when it outweighs their own needs.
And the ever green of every government: the willingness of multilateral agencies to keep lending, coupled with the foreigners interest in buying Pakistan’s assets and an ever increasing stock index are proof that the country is on the right path.
“The problem is that borrowing money to pay back more borrowed money that will oblige you in the future to borrow even more money doesn’t sound kosher. Because it isn’t,” said John Podhoretz. Since nobody understands economics, hence there can never be any coherent opposition to political claims on the economy, except that the ‘have nothings’ continue to wonder when all these great happenings will finally alleviate their sufferings. To borrow from an all time favourite quotation from the movie, The Godfather: “Someday, and that day may never come.”
So what does all of the above have anything to do with cricket? Absolutely nothing!
Except that to be included in the ranks of the cerebral, it is fashionable to quote out of context and then try to blend it with the situation on the ground so as to appear plausibly lucid or at the very least, as the judicial system loves to point out, create reasonable doubt. Accordingly, since Pakistanis love cricket, and all of the above is critical for Pakistan, therefore they are associated. Elementary, my dear Watson!
“There is no reason why one should believe you should leave out politicians in cricket or any sport for that matter. There are ways and means in which government can assist in the management and development of players,” Roosevelt Skerrit said.
This was perhaps the inspiration behind the view that management of the game has nothing to do with knowing the game. The finesse with which phrases can be conjoined to support actions is indeed remarkable. What needs to be understood is that there is a fatalistic hurdle at the end of every such rhetorical statement, which is when desired results are not forthcoming. A bit of free advice at this point: it would be pretty useful to be prepared for all eventualities and have a scapegoat ready, and please, the term is not escape goat!
Frankly, a confession is also in order. Having never played cricket as such, and having lost interest in the game somewhere in the 1990s, one is quite clueless on the nitty gritty of Pakistan’s cricket scene today, except for the extremely painful awareness that it’s a mess-up (again not the preferred choice of phrase). Frankly, the way things are, pretty soon ‘cricket’ will itself be a dirty word in Pakistan. The brighter side is that one won’t feel alienated and lonely in social gatherings. After all, ignorance of the game is an unacceptable crime in Pakistan, at least till now.
So why cricket? Well, frustrated with the noise on domestic current affairs, cricket seemed a less disheartening alternative. As fate would have it, watching Pakistan get thrashed for 25 runs in the last over of the final one-day match with South Africa, was not the best time to revive interest in the game. Based on unsolicited feedback from cricket lovers on the team’s batting proficiency in recent times, it was logical to conclude at that point that all was lost and since watching Pakistan lose at anything is extremely torturous, shutting off the idiot box was the only alternative. Unfortunately, hope sometimes plays games, which was perhaps the reason to switch on the game again and watch ‘Boom Boom’ walking in; predictably, he lasted eight — or was it nine — balls.
The point is if a disinterested Pakistani can accurately predict, in a jiffy, an adverse outcome based on sporadic feedback, why do people at the helm of cricket affairs in the country continuingly miss the obvious? The strategy and policies adopted by the nation’s cricketing authorities are repeatedly missing the mark. Intermittent reports about political interference, nepotism, flogging of dead horses, sleeping with the bookies and a host of other issues can be classified as rumours, but only if the results prove otherwise. In fact, taking things to the other extreme, all of the aforestated headaches would be totally acceptable if the team was only winning!
In the golden days, a couple of decades ago, Pakistan were the leaders in squash, hockey and cricket, something all Pakistanis were ever so proud of. The former two sports are history, cricket might soon be. Someone is responsible for this decline; it cannot simply be relegated to chance. Absence of natural talent, in a nation of 180 million, is also not an admissible excuse; absence of policies for nurturing and developing this talent is the definitive culprit.
What the stakeholders of cricket should learn from the history of the other two sports is that losing has adverse economic consequences as well. Advertising contracts and hero worship is easily replaced by a passionate antagonism of the masses. On the international scene there will be less demand to see Pakistan’s team play. Eventually, the sport will be entangled in a downward spiral unable to attract further talent and will simply be history. Not being a lover of the game, one is not in a position to provide a blueprint for change. However, admitting ignorance and then empowering those, over and above political or other associations, who have the capacity and ability to bring in change is the obvious path. As in economics, so in cricket. Foreign Direct Instructions, i.e. foreign coaching, has not fostered the desired results. In a nation of 180 million, there are more than handfuls who understand cricket!
Farfetched and out of context statements can cloud the inevitable and fool everyone most of the time, but not forever. As in cricket, so in everything: results matter, winning is everything. Short-term gains are short-lived, long term gains are game changers.
Definitely, recovering all that is lost will take time and a lot of sincere and dedicated effort, but in the long run it will pay off. The nation has what it takes and will happily face all hardships, simply for the opportunity to once again stand up, in the near future, for its champions.
Like in cricket, so in golf: hitting matters.
The writer is a chartered accountant based in Islamabad. He can be reached at [email protected] and on twitter @leaccountant