Punishment on Harbhajan was too harsh: Qamar Ahmad
Veteran cricket journalist Qamar Ahmad has seen ups and downs in world cricket from close range. He has covered 711 ODIs, a record in the history of cricket journalism. In an encounter with TwoCircles.net, he assesses Sydney cricket disaster: poor umpiring, Australians’ behaviour and Harbhajan’s case.
TCN: You have covered more cricket matches than any other journalist in the world. How many test matches have you covered? What are your future plans?
QA: I have covered 711 ODIs, more than anyone else, and 363 Tests, second to John Woodcock of The Times, London.
My future plan is to write books on cricket.
TCN: You have seen cricket and cricketers for very long time. What changes have you noticed?
QA: I have been in the game for all my life. First as school cricketer and then as captain of my college team in Pakistan and Sind University. I played first class cricket for Sindh Province and captained Hyderabad in Pakistan in first-class cricket. I also played League cricket in England and coached in Holland.
Cricket is now a business and has become thoroughly professional. Coloured clothing in one-day games, white ball, day and night cricket in floodlight,Twenty/20 cricket, all these have come in to revolutionise the game. And of course the panel of Elite Umpires. It is also an addition to the game.
TCN: Tell us something about your next book?
QA: I have written eight books and worked on Oxford Biographical Dictionary of Cricket published in England by Oxford Press about ten years ago. I am working on my autobiography which could be useful for students of journalism and also intend to write a book on the definitive history of Pakistan cricket.
TCN: How do you assess the drama unfolded around the Sydney Test?
QA: I think the way Australia and India have been playing against each other for some time, the controversy was very much on the card. The umpiring was atrocious to say the least and so was the behaviour of some of the Australian players.
TCN: How do you assess Australian players’ on-field behaviour?
In my experience of watching the Australians, they seem to be a happy lot but some of them do get worked up and at times nasty to upset the opposition by using foul language, but that is in their character and culture which date backs to their ancestors who came to Australia as convicts.
TCN: How much responsible is Ponting for Sydney disaster?
QA: A captain is responsible for the behaviour of his team and Ponting from the very young age has been provocative and in forefront of sledging at players.
TCN: To err is human, to forgive, divine, said 18th century poet Alexander Pope. Should world cricket practise the line in Bucknor’s case?
QA: If you don’t err then you are not human. Bucknor I suppose has passed his selling date. I covered his Test debut at Sabina Park in Jamaica in 1989 when I went to West Indies with India and Mohammad Azharuddin as captain. He was a FIFA qualified football referee before he entered cricket arena. I considered him as the top empire but in the last few years he started to make lot of mistakes and I suppose maybe his eyesight is not the same.
There was no other way out for ICC but to shove him aside on India’s request though quite unprecedented. This because India has a big stake in cricket and ICC financially.
Bucknor should now bow out honourably before being told to quit.
TCN: Don’t you think Australian media deliberately highlighted Bucknor and forgot another officiating umpire Mark Benson? Doesn’t Benson also have a share in the disaster?
QA: Yes, both umpires were below standard in the Sydney Test but the main grievance was against Bucknor. I do not think there was any racism involved in this. Benson too is sub-standard umpire. Problem is that present day umpires rely too much on technology, the reason why their standard is going down.
TCN: How do you see ICC’s chief match refree Ranjan Madugalle’s role in cooling tension between India and Australia?
QA: I think Madugalle is a very articulate character and I know him from his playing days. The referee Mike Proctor has got to take more blame for what happened at Sydney.
TCN: How do you assess the three-Test match ban against Harbhajan Singh for allegedly making a racial attack on Andrew Symonds?
QA: I think the punishment on Harbhajan was too harsh.
TCN: Has Harbhajan Singh’s ban anything to do with what Symonds faced from crowds in India recently?
QA: I do not think so.
TCN: To keep R word away from cricket, ICC should ban sledging on the field. Do you agree?
QA: As long as it is not rude I do not think sledging does any harm.
TCN: Don’t you think cricket lost more at Sydney than team India?
QA: Cricket has become a tough and highly competitive game and there is plenty at stake. There were even uglier incidents in the game in the past and this was just one of them.
TCN: How far reaching will be the consequences of the Sydney disaster?
QA: Memories are short and Sydney incident, with passing of time, will be taken as another incident in the game. It cannot be called a disaster but certainly a blot on so called a noble game.
TCN: Has Pakistan’s move to appeal ICC to change official result of the Oval Test it played against England in 2006 anything to do with BCCI’s partial victory in Sydney episode? (Pakistan did not play on the fourth day of the Oval Test in protest on umpire Darrel Hair’s decision to penalize them for alleged ball tampering. ICC has dropped ball tampering charge against Pakistan.)
QA: Nothing to do with Indian episode in Sydney Test. Pakistan’s case is too weak and I do not see result of The Oval Test would change.