"No one knows the art of exploiting the new ball better than me" : Mohammad Asif

[Junaids]

So it was something just made up by you and there is nothing at all to it except that's what you think.

It was a jury at Southwark Crown Court.

That means that the jury consisted of the urban poor from Camberwell and Peckham, West Africans from Brixton and Denmark Hill and some more well-heeled people from Dulwich.

I'd be astonished if more than 2 of them could explain the no ball rule. I'd be even more amazed if, 5 years later, any of them could remember which one was Mohammad Asif and which one was Mohammad Amir.

It's a bit like the OJ Simpson trial. A disaster waiting to happen.

There are lots of good things about jury trials, but they are not great for 2 defendants from an ethnic minority with near-identical foreign names, one of whom has pleaded guilty and is not in the dock and one of whom has pleaded not guilty.

And it's even worse when the other defendant who has pleaded guilty has a foreign name almost identical to that of the chief prosecution witness.

And that's how you end up convicted of a crime when the prosecution hasn't even put forward any evidence to suggest that you did it.

 

[Gilly]

It was a jury at Southwark Crown Court.

That means that the jury consisted of the urban poor from Camberwell and Peckham, West Africans from Brixton and Denmark Hill and some more well-heeled people from Dulwich.

I'd be astonished if more than 2 of them could explain the no ball rule. I'd be even more amazed if, 5 years later, any of them could remember which one was Mohammad Asif and which one was Mohammad Amir.

It's a bit like the OJ Simpson trial. A disaster waiting to happen.

There are lots of good things about jury trials, but they are not great for 2 defendants from an ethnic minority with near-identical foreign names, one of whom has pleaded guilty and is not in the dock and one of whom has pleaded not guilty.

And it's even worse when the other defendant who has pleaded guilty has a foreign name almost identical to that of the chief prosecution witness.

And that's how you end up convicted of a crime when the prosecution hasn't even put forward any evidence to suggest that you did it.

So you think the jury were too stupid to work out from the evidence that Asif bowled a no ball so Mazhar would make money from the deal. Instead they just all sat there confused and were to dumb to even know that Amir and Asif were different people. Oh and for the finale they returned a guilty verdict based on the defendants ethnicity. OK

 

[Speedster777]

Asif remains a top bowler with the new ball but he still has to play more domestic cricket for consideration: Inzamam on TV

 

[Abdullah719]

How do you know about food poisoning?? - Was that in news or inside story??

Kismat itni bhiee Kharab na ho banday key *

Commentators said during the broadcast that he had a 'stomach problem' yesterday.

 

[Speedster777]

Asif was suffering from food poisoning. Akmal has a back injury and another one of WAPDA's bowlers got injured yesterday.

 

[Cryin Out Loud]

It was a jury at Southwark Crown Court.

That means that the jury consisted of the urban poor from Camberwell and Peckham, West Africans from Brixton and Denmark Hill and some more well-heeled people from Dulwich.

I'd be astonished if more than 2 of them could explain the no ball rule. I'd be even more amazed if, 5 years later, any of them could remember which one was Mohammad Asif and which one was Mohammad Amir.

It's a bit like the OJ Simpson trial. A disaster waiting to happen.

There are lots of good things about jury trials, but they are not great for 2 defendants from an ethnic minority with near-identical foreign names, one of whom has pleaded guilty and is not in the dock and one of whom has pleaded not guilty.

And it's even worse when the other defendant who has pleaded guilty has a foreign name almost identical to that of the chief prosecution witness.

And that's how you end up convicted of a crime when the prosecution hasn't even put forward any evidence to suggest that you did it.

You are comparing this to the OJ Simpson trial, blaming the jury ( they're lower class! Some 'well-heeled' though!), blaming the names that the player's parents gave them.

My god man, I'm almost embarrassed for you.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Asif remains a top bowler with the new ball but he still has to play more domestic cricket for consideration: Inzamam on TV

Sportsman ki aik zindagi hoti hai. jub mar jaey phir kisi kaam ka nahi.

Agla Fc season aik saal baad hai. List A mein bohat se bowler ooper houn ge Asif se aor phir kahein ge k Asif ki form aor fitness gher mayari hai.


In Case any pacer gets injured Asif must fly for Australia.

 

[Hitman]

No one either knows the art of disgracing their country more than Mohammad Asif either.

 

[Junaids]

You are comparing this to the OJ Simpson trial, blaming the jury ( they're lower class! Some 'well-heeled' though!), blaming the names that the player's parents gave them.

My god man, I'm almost embarrassed for you.

I'm not blaming the jury at all.

I'm blaming the system for not giving the players separate trials.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Pakistan is missing Asif with the pink ball.

When the main issue is new ball bowling CS is more interested in bowler's ability to strike with old ball.

#Bring back M Asif

 

[TalhaSyed]

Again, I agree with almost everything you've written.

The thing is, do you remember a few days ago I gave [MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION] an attack of apoplexy by comparing his style with Josh Hazlewood?

I think that Asif - the old Asif - was always a brilliant tall medium-fast line-and-length bowler who nibbled the ball a tiny bit each way off the seam and in the air.

But that means that his style is most effective in Australia, England, New Zealand, South Africa and Sri Lanka.

That's why his lifetime QEA figures are worse than his 2016-17 QEA figures. And it's why I wouldn't even select him in the UAE.

Different bowlers have different strengths and weaknesses and styles. Some are great in a variety of conditions while some are brilliant in some conditions and not in others.

The sniping at Asif for his second innings performance in the QEA Final has left me baffled. I wrote a couple of days ago that in Pakistan I wouldn't expect much of him once the pitch flattens out and the grass dies. At least outside Asia he still gets bounce at that point in the game, but in Asia he gets nothing. Just like Josh Hazlewood would on this pitch.

Sure - like most pace bowlers, specially those who depend on seam & swing rather then pure pace - bowling friendly conditions like Aus, Eng, NZ etc. will be much more effective for them. If Asif gets a chance to play in these parts of the world, he may very well perform well.

However, the only reason to give him an opportunity to play in these conditions is his past international performance from over 6 years ago - nothing that he has done now since his return IMO.

I get the logic you are using with regards to Asif being mediocre in QeA back in 2010 and brilliant and international. At the moment he is decent in QeA so he should be able to replicate his brilliance on international level from 2010, however, that is just an assumption in my opinion & hoping he can recreate the same trend as 6 years ago.

Look at it this way - if we didn't know anything about Asif, he has not done anything at all since his return to warrant a call up to the international team. However, since we know he has international experience & bowled very well at international level, it can be argued that he possibly deserves a recall (as far as the talent side of things are concerned which have never really been questioned - not his character).

 

[BDwarriors]

In Case any pacer gets injured Asif must fly for Australia.

Le halwa, amir is injured. Asif must fly!

 

[TalhaSyed]

My first post to this thread# 134 contains the line Asif 'refused to take any money.'

I couldn't have been clearer or more upfront with what I was arguing.

I politely submit that it was easier for you to argue with a strawman of your own design.

Why can't you just calm down and stop the heckling?

To your question, in so far as he did not take money, Asif couldn't be said to have sold anything.

Yes but in #163 you could not answer a simple yes or no question which makes it tricky to figure out where you stand. Instead it post #179 - you once again just referred to one of Junaid's post rather than answer the questions, and then you vanished when I responded in post #177 and didn't bother commenting on that.

Grow a thick skin and stop complaining about being heckled when someone questions your opinion on an online forum. These threads are made for discussions and if you aren't gonna be able to answer some simple yes/no questions and complain about being heckled, maybe you shouldn't make posts in threads regarding sensitive topics.

As for your logic of "Asif didn't take money so it can't be said that he sold anything".

In my opinion that's garbage.

I - just like the jury on the case - concluded that he definitely had a cut of the money, however, it was never found. Majeed was given £150,000 for the no balls, however, there was a large chunk of the money not found.

In a sting operation that was secretly filmed by a NoW reporter, Majeed - who represented Amir, Asif and Butt - was seen proposing to arrange for no-balls to be bowled at specific moments in the fourth Test between England and Pakistan at Lord's in 2010.

In return he was seen accepting a payment of £150,000 - a large part of which was never recovered, it later emerged in court.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-15160226

To think that it is impossible for Asif to have received between £1000-£2500 (that's how much was found on Amir & Butt respectively) however, he hid it well or spent it before it could be found is extremely naive.

Forgetting my opinion and your opinion - your logic of "he didn't take money so he didn't sell anything" is rubbish in itself. Lets work to your presumption that he didn't take the money and just bowled the no balls to make Majeed and/or Butt happy. He still sold his country but instead of selling it for money, he simply sold his country to make his manager and/or captain happy. Strop trying to sugar coat it and defend a man regarding selling your country when he blatantly accepts it.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Le halwa, amir is injured. Asif must fly!

I am Amir's fan. I did not want him to get injured.

My Assessment was based on the fact that most australian grounds have rock solid truff near boundary and softer truff in areas of bowlers runup so it does take alot of toll on hamstrings and lower back. Sohail Khan would have been most susceptible to getting injured.

I did not want anyone to get unfit. I just said that incase there is an injury Asif must fly for Aus.


I have yet again followed QEA trophy deeply this year.

Out of 4 best spells of QEA bowled this year 3 have been bowled by Mohammed Asif and it was expected. The buddy who bowled 1 out of top 4 spells got unfit.


So I am not bothered by the Stats and statsguru's in such Case.


# Asif must fly for Australia ASAP

 

[Statsman]

I am Amir's fan. I did not want him to get injured.

My Assessment was based on the fact that most australian grounds have rock solid truff near boundary and softer truff in areas of bowlers runup so it does take alot of toll on hamstrings and lower back. Sohail Khan would have been most susceptible to getting injured.

I did not want anyone to get unfit. I just said that incase there is an injury Asif must fly for Aus.


I have yet again followed QEA trophy deeply this year.

Out of 4 best spells of QEA bowled this year 3 have been bowled by Mohammed Asif and it was expected. The buddy who bowled 1 out of top 4 spells got unfit.


So I am not bothered by the Stats and statsguru's in such Case.


# Asif must fly for Australia ASAP

What's with top spells? You don't bundle teams out by bowling an economical spell taking a few wickets and then going wicketless for the rest of the match, else Ishant Sharma is a GOAT bowler.

Asif failed to take a single wicket in the second innings and allowed the opposition to make 400/1 just like he allowed Stuart Broad to make 169.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

What's with top spells? You don't bundle teams out by bowling an economical spell taking a few wickets and then going wicketless for the rest of the match, else Ishant Sharma is a GOAT bowler.

Asif failed to take a single wicket in the second innings and allowed the opposition to make 400/1 just like he allowed Stuart Broad to make 169.

Asif got food poisoning during match. Pre-food poisoning he showed his mettle once again.


It is a blasphemy to compare Asif's Cricketing Skills with Ishant Sharma.

 

[Abid Z]

It is also a fact this his Test record was 6 years ago.

It escapes your mind, because you want to believe he is good.

There is no rule that any bowler who was once good 6 years ago, will be equally good 6 years after a sojourn into wilderness.

However, mass hysteria that you created seems to make it so.

I only hope you have enough ammunition to feed these delusions if Asif gets selected and does not perform somewhere down the line.

But seeing your creative skills, I am sure you could blame Asif's lack of success (provided it happens further down the line) on wrong format, wrong use of his skills, wrong use of pitch, Misbah's inability or Younis Khan's problem etc etc.

Firstly i think you miss the point on all the posts re Asif. Asif doesn't have to be particularly good or as good as Mcgrath or Pollock or any other medium pacer. What Junaids and many others have said is that he needs to be put in the same batch as the best ten pacers/seamers in the country, then we need to select the best 5 from them for the squad. From this squad a final 11 can be drafted. End of.

On this premise alone, Asif currently deserves a look in especially given the tours of newzealand and Australia. (his supporters have been saying this for many months) He deserves to be put into the selection process. Other right armers are just not cutting it..Imran Khan perhaps, Sohail Khan maybe, Ehsan Adil is a long way off..so Asif needs to be tested against these 3/4 bowlers first.

I am an asif supporter but that doesn't make me hysterical or delusional. I am not even referring to his record of 6 years ago, this is simply the naysayers creating strawmen arguments to make themselves look convincing.

My support for Asif is based on two simple facts.

1) there is no current bowler in the current pakistani squad that can test the oppositions batsmans off stump in the way that a tall right armer like asif ca across 20 overs. Australia has always been a place where a stiffling right armer bowling with a tight spinner or another wicket taker at the other end has prospered. Get him in the squad.

2) Even if Asif doesn't make it to the playing 11, he has immense utility as a net bowler giving great practice to our batsmen that love to fish outside off. Time and time again our batsmen are gonna be tested outside the off stump and time and time again they will fail as the window for learning is too short. Get Asif in the nets!!

Bob woolmer used to practice with Tennis balls to simulate the Australian bounce back in 2004. Asifs big flaw in 2004 was that he was too slow. Batsmen could adjust to his movement. But even today he is better and quicker than the 2004 version so... get him in!!

Now you could say but a player playing domestic one min cant be flown last min to a foreign country and thrown into the middle of the tour but you know, this is pakistan cricket. Anything can be done. Just think of the disastrous 2010 tour and how Yousuf and hameed were flown in in desperation.

 

[Abid Z]

It was a jury at Southwark Crown Court.

That means that the jury consisted of the urban poor from Camberwell and Peckham, West Africans from Brixton and Denmark Hill and some more well-heeled people from Dulwich.

I'd be astonished if more than 2 of them could explain the no ball rule. I'd be even more amazed if, 5 years later, any of them could remember which one was Mohammad Asif and which one was Mohammad Amir.

It's a bit like the OJ Simpson trial. A disaster waiting to happen.

There are lots of good things about jury trials, but they are not great for 2 defendants from an ethnic minority with near-identical foreign names, one of whom has pleaded guilty and is not in the dock and one of whom has pleaded not guilty.

And it's even worse when the other defendant who has pleaded guilty has a foreign name almost identical to that of the chief prosecution witness.

And that's how you end up convicted of a crime when the prosecution hasn't even put forward any evidence to suggest that you did it.

This aspect of your otherwise insightful posts is very presumptuous. There was a lot of momentum leading up to this case, many months infact, it was a test case in many respects with immense attention from media and analysts alike. Like always it was a case of a judgment "beyond all reasonable doubt" I followed every aspect of the case and it was not mentioned in any statement that the jury were not aware of what a no ball was or they didnt know who asif and amir were. Conspiring to defraud was the charge..bowling no balls was just the method..it was proven beyond doubt that they conspired to defraud. bowling no balls and spot betting procedures were tangential to the case.

Of course I disagree with the verdict and there were many holes in the judgements but getting the names mixed up and the jury not knowing about no ball or other cricketing rules or betting procedures is (with respect) just a red herring and pure speculation by you.

 

[Abid Z]

Let's go through theses responses one by one."

Can I please butt in..rather belatedly

1)

He bowled a pre determined no ball - that is spot fixing. Therefore he was involved in spot fixing. Please do it try to cover it up or sugar coat it.

The issue here wasn't the no-ball for money or spot fixing. The issue was conspiring to defraud the public/cricketing authorities. It was put to the jury to prove beyond doubt that this fraud was planned but the Jury of 12 could not be convinced and failed to reach a unanimous verdict. So the judge changed the goal posts and said he would accept a majority verdict the next day owing to the time the trial was taking. I think it was a slim majority but have to check exactly what the numbers were.

This verdict and judgement hinged on connections with known bookmakers and most importantly the few phonecalls placed between Asif and another person abroad (I think it was an Asian country but I cant remember Dubai, India or Thailand) during crucial days leading up to the lords test. All the evidence presented was in the days between Oval Test and Lords. Asif had more than one phone and more than one sim card that he used for these calls. This clinched it for the jury! Nothing to do with having the name mohammed or understanding no ball rule. It was the fact that official phones were monitored but unoffical or second phones couldn't be. Why would an international cricket have a secret second sim to make private unmonitored calls to known bookies?

The money was irrelavant, the point was it could be shown beyond doubt that he intended to receive some benefit by defrauding. i.e intent and consideration were proven beyond doubt.


2)

Asif and Akhtar were not found "not guilty", their bans were simply overturned by a spineless PCB much to the disman of WAPDA and the ICC. However, since it was the PCB who caught the two players the ICC couldn't do much. Again please do not try to sugar coat it

I think this is not quite correct. Firstly, cricket or at least Pak cricket and the IPL hadn't quite finalised being signed up to WAPDA so when they found nandrolone from an IPL sample Shohaib and Asif were back in Pakistan and it fell to Pakistan authorities to come up with a ban. Due to the sample size and the marginal levels and the fact that the testing for Nandrolone itself has been dubious (see Linford Christie) a ban 12 month was given but this was overturned by a tribunal. This was 2006 and in 2007 the testing procedure for nandrolone was improved. Asif cant be criminialised for this.

3)

Yes the bat fight with Akhtar is exactly what I mean. But I guess over here we are assuming that Asif was standing in a corner quietly and Akhtar decided to hit him with a bat for the fun of it?

I think the story goes Akhtar and a certain leg spinning allrounder in the dressing room were having a chat and Akhtar said to him I am more famous today than even Imran Khan was in his time. To which the leg spinning allrounder laughed and relayed it to Asif who was innocently sitting there. The both split their sides laughing at this comment and in a rush of blood Akhtar whacked Asif with a bat nearby. Asif was quite innocent actually.

4)

The charges were with regards to the UAE case were withdrawn due to "insignificance". The prosecutor, Mohammad Al Nuaimi, was quoted as saying, "It is definite that he committed the crime as he was caught red-handed ... however in certain cases and for a faster litigation process the Public Prosecution drops a case due to insignificance and deports the suspect."

This is a little disingenuous if i may say so. You are in Scotland and I am in Manchester. We could go outside now, walk the streets and come across at least 20% of people that may have an insignificant amount of illicit substances on their person and Asif was guilty of this. But he certainly wasn't Muling dope across borders hidden where the sun don't shine, so lets just say it for what it is. He got caught with a bit of dope in his wallet in a country that is very strict on these matters. There was no blood sample to indicate he is a user and the amount was "insignificant" yes they threw the rule book at him but this is Dubai and we know that from time to time, international pressure allows them to bend the rules. How many English people in Dubai do you know that have been caught red handed doing something illegal but then suddenly are let off to an international outcry. The newspapers are littered with stories of drinking on the beach, occasional immoral acts on beaches to which the authorities routinely turn a blind eye? Why should Asif be any different due to an insignificant amount of dope??

So all of this amounts to Asif being a bit of a Twit. The only really incriminating aspect during his cricketing career is those few days of phonecalls in July 2010 to a known bookie. But they could be innocent calls as well. Their contents were not known. Yet he paid a price of 5 years in the wilderness. If the rules of cricket i.e admitting your fault even if you know you are not guilty just for the sake of demonstrating rehabilitation and making a comeback were not so stringent, i am sure he would have continued fighting and been vindicated as Mazhar Mahmood has just been done for entrapment. In the end i think he reasoned that it was better to just accept guilt as he couldn't afford to keep on fighting in the courts of Europe. The financial costs alone were in the hundreds of thousands let alone the emotional strains.

Now the guy has no other trade. His family milk cows in a village so I guess he could do that. Or he could just grab a ball and try his best to show he has still got it. But he's gotta beat down the door of selection or the door has got to miraculously fling open somehow and in Pak cricket miracles do happen. Sohail and Imran arent exactly lighting the world on fire but Rahat's spot looks particularly vulnerable.

I think he has done enough that a neutral person would make it to the squad and get a sniff. But hes not a neutral person, he is always viewed with suspicion. Wily on the field, wily off it. But lets put our judgements to one side and see that he really does deserve to be in Australia right now, even if he has to carry drinks.

 

[TalhaSyed]

Can I please butt in..rather belatedly

1)

The issue here wasn't the no-ball for money or spot fixing. The issue was conspiring to defraud the public/cricketing authorities. It was put to the jury to prove beyond doubt that this fraud was planned but the Jury of 12 could not be convinced and failed to reach a unanimous verdict. So the judge changed the goal posts and said he would accept a majority verdict the next day owing to the time the trial was taking. I think it was a slim majority but have to check exactly what the numbers were.

This verdict and judgement hinged on connections with known bookmakers and most importantly the few phonecalls placed between Asif and another person abroad (I think it was an Asian country but I cant remember Dubai, India or Thailand) during crucial days leading up to the lords test. All the evidence presented was in the days between Oval Test and Lords. Asif had more than one phone and more than one sim card that he used for these calls. This clinched it for the jury! Nothing to do with having the name mohammed or understanding no ball rule. It was the fact that official phones were monitored but unoffical or second phones couldn't be. Why would an international cricket have a secret second sim to make private unmonitored calls to known bookies?

The money was irrelavant, the point was it could be shown beyond doubt that he intended to receive some benefit by defrauding. i.e intent and consideration were proven beyond doubt.


2)

I think this is not quite correct. Firstly, cricket or at least Pak cricket and the IPL hadn't quite finalised being signed up to WAPDA so when they found nandrolone from an IPL sample Shohaib and Asif were back in Pakistan and it fell to Pakistan authorities to come up with a ban. Due to the sample size and the marginal levels and the fact that the testing for Nandrolone itself has been dubious (see Linford Christie) a ban 12 month was given but this was overturned by a tribunal. This was 2006 and in 2007 the testing procedure for nandrolone was improved. Asif cant be criminialised for this.

3)


I think the story goes Akhtar and a certain leg spinning allrounder in the dressing room were having a chat and Akhtar said to him I am more famous today than even Imran Khan was in his time. To which the leg spinning allrounder laughed and relayed it to Asif who was innocently sitting there. The both split their sides laughing at this comment and in a rush of blood Akhtar whacked Asif with a bat nearby. Asif was quite innocent actually.

4)

This is a little disingenuous if i may say so. You are in Scotland and I am in Manchester. We could go outside now, walk the streets and come across at least 20% of people that may have an insignificant amount of illicit substances on their person and Asif was guilty of this. But he certainly wasn't Muling dope across borders hidden where the sun don't shine, so lets just say it for what it is. He got caught with a bit of dope in his wallet in a country that is very strict on these matters. There was no blood sample to indicate he is a user and the amount was "insignificant" yes they threw the rule book at him but this is Dubai and we know that from time to time, international pressure allows them to bend the rules. How many English people in Dubai do you know that have been caught red handed doing something illegal but then suddenly are let off to an international outcry. The newspapers are littered with stories of drinking on the beach, occasional immoral acts on beaches to which the authorities routinely turn a blind eye? Why should Asif be any different due to an insignificant amount of dope??

So all of this amounts to Asif being a bit of a Twit. The only really incriminating aspect during his cricketing career is those few days of phonecalls in July 2010 to a known bookie. But they could be innocent calls as well. Their contents were not known. Yet he paid a price of 5 years in the wilderness. If the rules of cricket i.e admitting your fault even if you know you are not guilty just for the sake of demonstrating rehabilitation and making a comeback were not so stringent, i am sure he would have continued fighting and been vindicated as Mazhar Mahmood has just been done for entrapment. In the end i think he reasoned that it was better to just accept guilt as he couldn't afford to keep on fighting in the courts of Europe. The financial costs alone were in the hundreds of thousands let alone the emotional strains.

Now the guy has no other trade. His family milk cows in a village so I guess he could do that. Or he could just grab a ball and try his best to show he has still got it. But he's gotta beat down the door of selection or the door has got to miraculously fling open somehow and in Pak cricket miracles do happen. Sohail and Imran arent exactly lighting the world on fire but Rahat's spot looks particularly vulnerable.

I think he has done enough that a neutral person would make it to the squad and get a sniff. But hes not a neutral person, he is always viewed with suspicion. Wily on the field, wily off it. But lets put our judgements to one side and see that he really does deserve to be in Australia right now, even if he has to carry drinks.

Welcome to the party

So to summarise:

> Asif just happened to bowl the no ball at the exact time that Majeed predicted in the videos without being aaware of spot fixing. The judge simply moveed the goal posts and Asif wasn't trying to defraud the public or the cricketing authorities - is tht correct? He just also happened to call Majeed a few times in the lead up to the incident for some general chit chat?

> Asif and Akhtar were caught by dope tests carried out internally by the PCB and consequently pulled out of the Champions Trophy in 2006. However, due to the steroids level being marginal and ofcourse the testing methods bright faulty - Asif is innocent of this as well and didn't actually take a banned substance - is that what we are saying? Also are we saying that WAPDA and ICC were happy with the way PCB dealt with the issue?

> Ok so Afridi and Asif laughed and Akhtar soaked Asif with bat because he felt he's more famous then Imran Khan. Let's say Asif was innocent of this and he was in the wrong place at the wrong time

> So Asif was found with some drugs however in your opinion 20% of people are carrying that so that's fine. He wasn't smuggling drugs across the border and there were no blood tests to prove that he had taken the drugs either, so he was basically just carrying around some drugs (whilst travelling to play professional cricket) for a bit of a laugh and the fun of it?

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Can I please butt in..rather belatedly

1)

The issue here wasn't the no-ball for money or spot fixing. The issue was conspiring to defraud the public/cricketing authorities. It was put to the jury to prove beyond doubt that this fraud was planned but the Jury of 12 could not be convinced and failed to reach a unanimous verdict. So the judge changed the goal posts and said he would accept a majority verdict the next day owing to the time the trial was taking. I think it was a slim majority but have to check exactly what the numbers were.

This verdict and judgement hinged on connections with known bookmakers and most importantly the few phonecalls placed between Asif and another person abroad (I think it was an Asian country but I cant remember Dubai, India or Thailand) during crucial days leading up to the lords test. All the evidence presented was in the days between Oval Test and Lords. Asif had more than one phone and more than one sim card that he used for these calls. This clinched it for the jury! Nothing to do with having the name mohammed or understanding no ball rule. It was the fact that official phones were monitored but unoffical or second phones couldn't be. Why would an international cricket have a secret second sim to make private unmonitored calls to known bookies?

The money was irrelavant, the point was it could be shown beyond doubt that he intended to receive some benefit by defrauding. i.e intent and consideration were proven beyond doubt.


2)

I think this is not quite correct. Firstly, cricket or at least Pak cricket and the IPL hadn't quite finalised being signed up to WAPDA so when they found nandrolone from an IPL sample Shohaib and Asif were back in Pakistan and it fell to Pakistan authorities to come up with a ban. Due to the sample size and the marginal levels and the fact that the testing for Nandrolone itself has been dubious (see Linford Christie) a ban 12 month was given but this was overturned by a tribunal. This was 2006 and in 2007 the testing procedure for nandrolone was improved. Asif cant be criminialised for this.

3)


I think the story goes Akhtar and a certain leg spinning allrounder in the dressing room were having a chat and Akhtar said to him I am more famous today than even Imran Khan was in his time. To which the leg spinning allrounder laughed and relayed it to Asif who was innocently sitting there. The both split their sides laughing at this comment and in a rush of blood Akhtar whacked Asif with a bat nearby. Asif was quite innocent actually.

4)

This is a little disingenuous if i may say so. You are in Scotland and I am in Manchester. We could go outside now, walk the streets and come across at least 20% of people that may have an insignificant amount of illicit substances on their person and Asif was guilty of this. But he certainly wasn't Muling dope across borders hidden where the sun don't shine, so lets just say it for what it is. He got caught with a bit of dope in his wallet in a country that is very strict on these matters. There was no blood sample to indicate he is a user and the amount was "insignificant" yes they threw the rule book at him but this is Dubai and we know that from time to time, international pressure allows them to bend the rules. How many English people in Dubai do you know that have been caught red handed doing something illegal but then suddenly are let off to an international outcry. The newspapers are littered with stories of drinking on the beach, occasional immoral acts on beaches to which the authorities routinely turn a blind eye? Why should Asif be any different due to an insignificant amount of dope??

So all of this amounts to Asif being a bit of a Twit. The only really incriminating aspect during his cricketing career is those few days of phonecalls in July 2010 to a known bookie. But they could be innocent calls as well. Their contents were not known. Yet he paid a price of 5 years in the wilderness. If the rules of cricket i.e admitting your fault even if you know you are not guilty just for the sake of demonstrating rehabilitation and making a comeback were not so stringent, i am sure he would have continued fighting and been vindicated as Mazhar Mahmood has just been done for entrapment. In the end i think he reasoned that it was better to just accept guilt as he couldn't afford to keep on fighting in the courts of Europe. The financial costs alone were in the hundreds of thousands let alone the emotional strains.

Now the guy has no other trade. His family milk cows in a village so I guess he could do that. Or he could just grab a ball and try his best to show he has still got it. But he's gotta beat down the door of selection or the door has got to miraculously fling open somehow and in Pak cricket miracles do happen. Sohail and Imran arent exactly lighting the world on fire but Rahat's spot looks particularly vulnerable.

I think he has done enough that a neutral person would make it to the squad and get a sniff. But hes not a neutral person, he is always viewed with suspicion. Wily on the field, wily off it. But lets put our judgements to one side and see that he really does deserve to be in Australia right now, even if he has to carry drinks.

Even if he is clean, one performance in QEA final does not mean he deserves to be in Australia.

There are 5 other bowlers who are better then him but ignored.

In your haste to defend Asif, you forgot that, you are also raucously clamoring for his inclusion just like the average Joe on the basis of his past glories.

One match does not define a career, that too on the juicy track of Pakistan which as soon as it became flat, Asif was hit by a stomach bug and could not pick a wicket.

Thanks !

 

[Abid Z]

Even if he is clean, one performance in QEA final does not mean he deserves to be in Australia.

There are 5 other bowlers who are better then him but ignored.

In your haste to defend Asif, you forgot that, you are also raucously clamoring for his inclusion just like the average Joe on the basis of his past glories.

One match does not define a career, that too on the juicy track of Pakistan which as soon as it became flat, Asif was hit by a stomach bug and could not pick a wicket.

Thanks !

There's nothing about your post that I disagree with so I won't just for the sake of it.

Let's be clear, sat in England I don't watch pak domestic cricket so there is an obvious handicap I bring to the forum and openly admit this. But there are two points being discussed here.

Firstly: is Asif a wrong doer? .. yes we can all agree on that...we are only talking about degrees or the extent to which he is and whether we feel he has paid enough of a price. Some people think he's paid the price, others think he will never pay enough if a price. That's all conjecture and been discussed to death.

Secondly: should Asif get recalled to Australia? If this tournament was happening in UAE I would be ambivalent. But I do see his utility at least as a net bowler for our rubbish batting on bouncy wickets. More than that it's up to selectors.

On a side point you mention there are at least 5 bowlers better than him but that's a different point and entirely irrelevant You could argue those five are therefore by default better than sohail, Rahat and IK also but that would derail this thread as it's about Asifs new ball bowling. I don't see Rahat, sohail or IK AS new ball bowlers and selection for this tour has been a tragedy but what can we do.

But there is a problem I have with something you wrote. "Past glories " I would hate to think that you are presuming because he can take the odd 4 for on a juicy English track in 2010 he should therefore forever be etched in our mind as the saviour of Pak cricket.

No, his achievements are incidental. His skill set is everything as I believe stats are only part of the story. This is because I believe none of our bowlers have a brain, the captaincy is too timid, we are unable to properly utilise a world class leggie, we waste the new ball, we don't attack the stumps enough, we don't read batsmen or match situations and our current bowlers have no stamina. Having followed park cricket for over 30 years I also know this situation is not new but entirely predictable. We always have an over reliance on one or two individuals in the batting or bowling dept. The rest of the line up go and hide.

Because of all these factors I believe for the bouncy OZ WICKETS ANYBODY is better than Rahat sohail and Ik (in reverse order) to take the new ball. But because he is unproven since comeback at least let him bowl in the nets and watch him take the edge of Azhar and asad for fun. For this he merits selection, but I'm not suggesting the playing 11. That's up to the coach and captain.

 

[Abid Z]

Welcome to the party

So to summarise:

> Asif just happened to bowl the no ball at the exact time that Majeed predicted in the videos without being aaware of spot fixing. The judge simply moveed the goal posts and Asif wasn't trying to defraud the public or the cricketing authorities - is tht correct? He just also happened to call Majeed a few times in the lead up to the incident for some general chit chat?

> Asif and Akhtar were caught by dope tests carried out internally by the PCB and consequently pulled out of the Champions Trophy in 2006. However, due to the steroids level being marginal and ofcourse the testing methods bright faulty - Asif is innocent of this as well and didn't actually take a banned substance - is that what we are saying? Also are we saying that WAPDA and ICC were happy with the way PCB dealt with the issue?

> Ok so Afridi and Asif laughed and Akhtar soaked Asif with bat because he felt he's more famous then Imran Khan. Let's say Asif was innocent of this and he was in the wrong place at the wrong time

> So Asif was found with some drugs however in your opinion 20% of people are carrying that so that's fine. He wasn't smuggling drugs across the border and there were no blood tests to prove that he had taken the drugs either, so he was basically just carrying around some drugs (whilst travelling to play professional cricket) for a bit of a laugh and the fun of it?

Wow you have an incredible talent for changing the nuances of what one writes to guide the discussion where you think it should go.

For the avoidance of doubt let me be succinct.

A) Asif was deemed to have conspired to defraud. That was the judgement. My personal view is that this was harsh but it's what happened and he accepted it so let's move on.

What's your point??

B) nandrolone was found in the ipl tests in 2008 and 2006. Both times there were discrepancies and both times he received benefit of doubt. Nandrolone testing has since been revised because of some notoriously contradictory samples and evidence as shown in the linford Christie case.

What point do you disagree with here?? If ICC in agreement with PCB HAVE given Asif benefit of doubt and they are privy to all the key information do you think arm chair analysts from afar should cast doubt on their decisions for the sake of it?

3) Asif was hit by Shohaib not the other way round. It's a fact.

So???

4) yes totally agree. The amounts of the drugs were totally insignificant. Cannabis stays in the body for months and he has been regularly tested So clearly not a habitual user. He had a small amount of something on him. So what? Any police officer will tell you they come across minute amounts all day long. I don't think it's necessary to twist this.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

There's nothing about your post that I disagree with so I won't just for the sake of it.

Let's be clear, sat in England I don't watch pak domestic cricket so there is an obvious handicap I bring to the forum and openly admit this. But there are two points being discussed here.

Firstly: is Asif a wrong doer? .. yes we can all agree on that...we are only talking about degrees or the extent to which he is and whether we feel he has paid enough of a price. Some people think he's paid the price, others think he will never pay enough if a price. That's all conjecture and been discussed to death.

Secondly: should Asif get recalled to Australia? If this tournament was happening in UAE I would be ambivalent. But I do see his utility at least as a net bowler for our rubbish batting on bouncy wickets. More than that it's up to selectors.

On a side point you mention there are at least 5 bowlers better than him but that's a different point and entirely irrelevant You could argue those five are therefore by default better than sohail, Rahat and IK also but that would derail this thread as it's about Asifs new ball bowling. I don't see Rahat, sohail or IK AS new ball bowlers and selection for this tour has been a tragedy but what can we do.

But there is a problem I have with something you wrote. "Past glories " I would hate to think that you are presuming because he can take the odd 4 for on a juicy English track in 2010 he should therefore forever be etched in our mind as the saviour of Pak cricket.

No, his achievements are incidental. His skill set is everything as I believe stats are only part of the story. This is because I believe none of our bowlers have a brain, the captaincy is too timid, we are unable to properly utilise a world class leggie, we waste the new ball, we don't attack the stumps enough, we don't read batsmen or match situations and our current bowlers have no stamina. Having followed park cricket for over 30 years I also know this situation is not new but entirely predictable. We always have an over reliance on one or two individuals in the batting or bowling dept. The rest of the line up go and hide.

Because of all these factors I believe for the bouncy OZ WICKETS ANYBODY is better than Rahat sohail and Ik (in reverse order) to take the new ball. But because he is unproven since comeback at least let him bowl in the nets and watch him take the edge of Azhar and asad for fun. For this he merits selection, but I'm not suggesting the playing 11. That's up to the coach and captain.

Can't disagree with much.

I do see your point, but I don't think the PCB would actually go out of it's way to get Asif an Australian visa (which would need a lot of diplomatic channels) just so he can have net practice to our batsmen.

He's probably not going to come to Australia.

But provided he does come, it will be to play and not just for the sake of it. I don't think PCB is going to splurge the cash for him, not at this time anyway.

But rest of your post is top class as always.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[TalhaSyed]

Wow you have an incredible talent for changing the nuances of what one writes to guide the discussion where you think it should go.

For the avoidance of doubt let me be succinct.

A) Asif was deemed to have conspired to defraud. That was the judgement. My personal view is that this was harsh but it's what happened and he accepted it so let's move on.

What's your point??

B) nandrolone was found in the ipl tests in 2008 and 2006. Both times there were discrepancies and both times he received benefit of doubt. Nandrolone testing has since been revised because of some notoriously contradictory samples and evidence as shown in the linford Christie case.

What point do you disagree with here?? If ICC in agreement with PCB HAVE given Asif benefit of doubt and they are privy to all the key information do you think arm chair analysts from afar should cast doubt on their decisions for the sake of it?

3) Asif was hit by Shohaib not the other way round. It's a fact.

So???

4) yes totally agree. The amounts of the drugs were totally insignificant. Cannabis stays in the body for months and he has been regularly tested So clearly not a habitual user. He had a small amount of something on him. So what? Any police officer will tell you they come across minute amounts all day long. I don't think it's necessary to twist this.

A) So that is what I am asking. You and I both know what happened, but what - in your opinion - makes this harsh? Do you think Asif was not guilty of conspiring and defrauding the public/authorities?

B) That is my point - one failed test you can put down to discrepancies and testing methods - however, twice? Many players get tested but for the same guy to get caught twice is very suspicious in my opinion - specially whilst other players don't even get caught once.

My point is that ICC DID NOT support PCB in over turning the bans & neither did WADA (http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan/content/story/273291.html). Neither did ICC (or WADA) give Asif the benefit of the doubt and they both wanted Asif (and Akhtar) to serve the bans. However, since the tests were not carried out by ICC they did not have much of a say.

In your last post you mentioned how easily the UAE gov are manipulated, well the PCB is much easier to manipulate and I think they should have followed through with Asif's ban in the first instance when he did test positive for performance enhancing substances and maybe that would have thought him the lesson that would avoid future embarrassments.

3\C) Yes Asif was struck by Akhtar - however, without knowing the full story & IMO neither of the 3 players involved being absolute saints, for me I struggle to believe that Asif simply got struck since he laughed....

4) So if he wasn't smuggling drugs across borders to sell them & he doesn't take the drugs him self - why does he have them? Maybe the drugs in his wallet is what triggered the false dope tests we discussed in post 2....?

There is no need to twist this - you are right. The untwisted story it self is self evident. An international cricket player should recognise the reprecautions of carrying around banned substances with him. He's an ambassador for the country - not some average Jo on the street. However, I don't believe he understands the responsibilities which come with being an international cricketer and this can be seen with his lapses which have occurred time and time again. This is the very reason I don't think he should be let back into the team. It's nothing to do with his talent, ability or skill. It's to do with the fact that he has proven time and time again that is incapable of representing the country on a global stage.