Never a dull day in Pakistani cricket. Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif have been sent home for testing positive for nandrolone in a scenario reminiscent of Shane Warne's dismissal prior to the 2003 World Cup. The charge is far more serious this time, however, as the drugs involved were performance-enhancing as opposed to the masking agents used by Warne.
The drug tests were not carried out by the ICC - rather, it was Pakistan coach Bob Woolmer's decision to test 25 players in September, two of whom returned positive tests from WADA's labs in Malaysia. Unfortunately for Pakistan, those two just happened to be their frontline bowlers, both of whom were recovering from injuries.
In all likelihood, both players will receive two-year bans from all forms of cricket. For Asif, this is merely a setback but for Shoaib, it could mean the end of his career. There are those who argue it could actually prolong rather than curtail it, as in the case of Shane Warne, but the two players are hardly cut from the same cloth. Shoaib thrives on extreme pace, for which he needs to be in peak physical condition. Two years out of the game will rob him of his sting and given Pakistan's plethora of fast bowlers, he will struggle to regain his place in the side once he returns.
Asif is a different proposition altogether. Only 23 years of age, and not as reliant on pace as his superstar colleague, he will most probably be welcomed back to the Pakistani fold once his ban reaches its conclusion. Pakistan are more likely to feel Asif's absence than Shoaib's due to the former's consistency and ability to move the ball both ways off the seam. It's a skill few bowlers can consistently demonstrate, and Asif's ban will be a huge blow to them.
Shoaib Akhtar maintains that he did not knowingly take performance-enhancing substances, and I tend to believe him. Doping regulations are fairly new to cricket, and the game itself is not suited to the übermensch types that one normally associates with drug use. Fast bowlers need to be well-built, but their speed is generated by driving through the hip and the twitch muscles in the abdominal area. Of course, fast bowlers also need strong shoulders and a good approach velocity to the crease to generate extra pace, but otherwise do not need a great deal of bulk to do so. Ajit Agarkar, for example, is a rather small man but manages to bowl between 80 and 90 mph. The point is that most bowlers don't really need extra muscle mass to generate pace. If anything, extra muscle in the wrong areas could hinder a fast bowler rather than help him.
It is quite likely that Shoaib and Asif have both been prescribed drugs by their physios and took them unknowingly. This does not however absolve them from blame. The Pakistan Cricket Board have stated that they regularly update their players on banned substances, thus implying that the two cricketers in question knew what they were doing. Whether this is a case of the board covering its tracks is another matter altogether - the players must accept some of the blame for what they did. Having said that, one cannot realistically expect cricketers, or sportspeople in general, to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of banned substances. They usually delegate the responsibility to the team doctor and in this case, those responsible failed miserably. The ban will affect the players the most, but perhaps some action must be taken against the people who prescribed the banned substances.
The drug tests were not carried out by the ICC - rather, it was Pakistan coach Bob Woolmer's decision to test 25 players in September, two of whom returned positive tests from WADA's labs in Malaysia. Unfortunately for Pakistan, those two just happened to be their frontline bowlers, both of whom were recovering from injuries.
In all likelihood, both players will receive two-year bans from all forms of cricket. For Asif, this is merely a setback but for Shoaib, it could mean the end of his career. There are those who argue it could actually prolong rather than curtail it, as in the case of Shane Warne, but the two players are hardly cut from the same cloth. Shoaib thrives on extreme pace, for which he needs to be in peak physical condition. Two years out of the game will rob him of his sting and given Pakistan's plethora of fast bowlers, he will struggle to regain his place in the side once he returns.
Asif is a different proposition altogether. Only 23 years of age, and not as reliant on pace as his superstar colleague, he will most probably be welcomed back to the Pakistani fold once his ban reaches its conclusion. Pakistan are more likely to feel Asif's absence than Shoaib's due to the former's consistency and ability to move the ball both ways off the seam. It's a skill few bowlers can consistently demonstrate, and Asif's ban will be a huge blow to them.
Shoaib Akhtar maintains that he did not knowingly take performance-enhancing substances, and I tend to believe him. Doping regulations are fairly new to cricket, and the game itself is not suited to the übermensch types that one normally associates with drug use. Fast bowlers need to be well-built, but their speed is generated by driving through the hip and the twitch muscles in the abdominal area. Of course, fast bowlers also need strong shoulders and a good approach velocity to the crease to generate extra pace, but otherwise do not need a great deal of bulk to do so. Ajit Agarkar, for example, is a rather small man but manages to bowl between 80 and 90 mph. The point is that most bowlers don't really need extra muscle mass to generate pace. If anything, extra muscle in the wrong areas could hinder a fast bowler rather than help him.
It is quite likely that Shoaib and Asif have both been prescribed drugs by their physios and took them unknowingly. This does not however absolve them from blame. The Pakistan Cricket Board have stated that they regularly update their players on banned substances, thus implying that the two cricketers in question knew what they were doing. Whether this is a case of the board covering its tracks is another matter altogether - the players must accept some of the blame for what they did. Having said that, one cannot realistically expect cricketers, or sportspeople in general, to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of banned substances. They usually delegate the responsibility to the team doctor and in this case, those responsible failed miserably. The ban will affect the players the most, but perhaps some action must be taken against the people who prescribed the banned substances.
No comments:
Post a Comment