• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Shoaib and a piece of advise from the 19th century !!

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
I am currently reading one of the oldest (the prefatory note is dated August 1897) cricket books I have come across and easily one of the most engrossing - The Jubilee Book of Cricket by Prince Ranjitsinhji.

It is amazing how much of what was written more than a hundred years ago is still valid.

Here is a bit from the bowling section that should be a source of ‘moral’ support to Inzemam and well meaning advise to the talented but immature Shoaib.

“A bowler must understand that he owes implicit obedience to his captain, under whose guidance he has voluntarily placed himself. He may, in his mind, dissent from his captain’s views or disapprove of his generalship, but he must not show the slightest sign of open disobedience. On the contrary, he must make the best of things as they are. It has been proved beyond dispute that every side should be led by one man, and one man only, and that it is far better to accept without murmur any mistakes entailed by the fallibility of one man, than to introduce any form of co-operative captaincy. The captain, of course, should consult the bowler, and do all he can to work with him. But in any case, the bowler must take everything as done for the best.”
......
“Nothing is more upsetting to an entire side than a bowler’s loss of temper or tendency to sulk. The sulky bowler may be known by various signs. He takes a long time to get into his place in the field when not bowling; after fielding the ball, he throws it in needlessly hard, to the detriment of someone’s hands and at the risk of overthrows; if he misses the ball he will be reluctant to run after it; often he bowls too fast and too short. and generally gives the impression that he does not care. Bowling misfortunes often test a man’s temper ; but he must remember that, as a mere matter of expediency, it is essential that he should keep a complete control over himself, and also that an even temper is an indispensable qualification for a good sportsman.”
......
“Indeed he must learn to regard himself as part of an organism for whose god as a whole, in his sphere, he is working. He is playing for his side and not for himself. When everyman in an eleven fosters this spirit of mutual cohesion between himself and his comrades, the side is be a good one to meet and a bad one to beat-a joy to itself and all the world besides.”


Clearly the Shoaibs' of the cricketing world haven’t changed over time; nor has the content of the well meaning advise to them !!
 

Choora

State Regular
Enough have been said on Akhtar, people just like to paint him as the devil and Inzi as an angel. Frankly that's sickening coz Inzi himself is alot to be blamed for the situation Pakistan is at today.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
No, I think they both have their rights and wrongs.
Inzamam-Ul-Haq is certainly not the worst captain Pakistan have ever had, while obviously not in the Imran\Wasim league, and he has IMO handled the situation pretty well.
Shoaib, meanwhile, has always been a hothead and I don't, sadly, think we're ever going to change that. Even if someone read him that passage from the great Ranji himself.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
No, I think they both have their rights and wrongs.
Inzamam-Ul-Haq is certainly not the worst captain Pakistan have ever had, while obviously not in the Imran\Wasim league, and he has IMO handled the situation pretty well.
Shoaib, meanwhile, has always been a hothead and I don't, sadly, think we're ever going to change that. Even if someone read him that passage from the great Ranji himself.
You know Richard, there are a couple of things I particularly like from what Ranji says.

1.it is far better to accept without murmur any mistakes entailed by the fallibility of one man, than to introduce any form of co-operative captaincy He is not saying that the captain wont make a mistake but his point is that if the other team members started dissenting on the field of play or during a game, it would be chaos. A captain erring may be the lesser of the two evils. This is very pertinent to those who point out that Inzemam is wrong. I dont know if they have, ever, in their line of work been captains. They will know what it means.

2. the bowler must take everything as done for the best.” Forget dissent, the bowler must tell himself that whatever the captain is doing, is for the best.

The best teams of all times have had captains who have had no dissent on the field of play and during their rein. This does not mean they did not do what THEY thought was the best for the team and did only what the others wanted them to do which is impossible to manage as any captain will tell you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Choora said:
Enough have been said on Akhtar, people just like to paint him as the devil and Inzi as an angel. Frankly that's sickening coz Inzi himself is alot to be blamed for the situation Pakistan is at today.
i agree, inzi for the chop
 

Top