Media Mayhem

Alamgir Shahryar, my septuagenarian friend suddenly looked up from his newspaper."Here, take a look at this," he said pointing to a section in the daily specialsports supplement, issued with the Daily Telegraph and The Times these days."If the British media is to be believed, then the Pakistan cricket team has as manyproblems as Mike Tyson," he smiled.

The headline read, 'England beware cornered Pakistan'. In view of the story's content,a more appropriate title would have been, 'Pakistan beware British media'.

Sunil Gavaskar too has talked on the role of the media in a recent column of his. Infact, he stressed the need for the Indian media to support the home team rather thanmerely echoing sentiments expressed by touring journalists. Now, the British Press seemsto be demonstrating it to the fullest.

Even as the teams brace for the first Test, the British Press has given ample coverageto the internal quabbles that have plagued the Pakistan team ever since Imran Khan leftthe scene. That the British coverage has a generous dose of team infighting may beconstrued by Pakistani supporters as nothing more than the anxious anticipation of defeat.

The Independent for instance has focussed more on the sore areas namely, theinclusion of Rashid Latif, Wasim Akram and Shoaib Akhtar in the touring side. (No mentionwas made of Saeed Anwar, Inzamam-ul Haq, Saqlain Mushtaq or Abdul Razzaq in the article Ireferred to above).

The inclusion of Rashid Latif, the wicketkeeper has raised a lot of eyebrows. As Latifwas the first to blow the whistle on match- fixing in the mid 1990s, cricket journalistsare wondering how he will cope with the prospect of sharing the same dressing room withcolleagues he pointed fingers at.

Shoaib too has not been spared in this tirade. Following accusations of chucking and atemporary ban, Shoaib's action was finally cleared by the ICC very recently. But insteadof allowing him to put this controversy to rest, he is being reminded that the umpires forthe first Test will be Peter Willey and Darrell Hair, the duo that stood for the PerthTest in 1999 when suspicions about his action were first officially reported. TheIndependent quotes Hair, "I will just call it as I see it at the time. I'm notgoing to stir anything before I get there."

Finally, much has been made of Wasim Akram's selection as well. In view of thelong-standing differences between him and captain Waqar, unnecessary speculation aboutwhether the former will be included in the first Test are being carried out. Waqar'sstatements, made more than a year ago that Akram "is a great cricketer and I respecthim as a cricketer, but I cannot call him a great human being", is being recalledtime and again.

Referring to Akram, Waqar is cited as saying, "Of course I want him, but it alldepends on how the other guys are doing. Mohammed Sami is bowling pretty well."Clearly, Waqar's statement is being taken out of context. Evidently, a compliment to Samiis interpreted as a sign of Akram's days being numbered.

The media has also unfairly pronounced that "the Pakistanis may be foolingthemselves if they think the past will always remain concealed", reiterating that thePakistan team should consider itself fortunate if internal feuds are kept on a hold forthese two months.

It is now time to see how the Pakistanis perform in the face of such adversity in aseries that promises much excitement. With a team capable of drubbing any side on a givenday, the Pakistanis and their newly recruited coach Richard Pybus have done well towithstand the initial media onslaught.

Yawar Saeed, the Pakistani manager, told the media to judge them from the day theystepped on English soil. 'Recent history, I would like you to forget, for history isn'tgoing to make us win Test matches', he said.

Meanwhile, England, following the recent successes overseas, is expected to provide anencore. So, the pressure could easily be reversed on Nasser Hussain and his team if thetouring Pakistani media wakes up to the task.

The media undoubtedly has had considerable influence on the game and the relationsbetween the teams lately. Take the Australian media for instance. Throughout the recentseries with India, they tried hard to unsettle the home team by talking of theunsportsmanlike conduct of Saurav Ganguly.

The fact that the Pakistanis are subject to relentless criticism at the very onset ofthe tour says much about the home media's role in a high profile sport like cricket. WhenEngland visits India in November, we don't have to be fortune-tellers to know that the British Press will stir up extra cricketing issues to unsettle the home side. For his match winning potential, Harbhajan Singh could easily be the central target. As having had problems with his bowling action before, the sardar would be perceived to be that tiny bit susceptible to buckle under that extra bit of pressure.

This is where Indian media could profit by taking a leaf out of its English counterpart. And we should not be worried about displays of patriotism (what else are they when indulged in by the Aussies or the English?) casting aspersions on our credibility. Do we see the English media even conscious of its blatant partisan acts? For nowadays, the media as a whole is a very active participant in the strategy leading to, what Steve Waugh calls, the "mental disintegration" of the opponent. And that is where Indian press would do well to emulate their strategy and not just their words.