Nasim Ashraf explains the changes the board has gone through ever since he has taken over
Osman Samiuddin01-Jun-2007
Nasim Ashraf’s short tenure as chairman of the board has been “challenging” and “interesting” even with doping crisis, captaincy issues, religion and a disastrous World Cup campaign © AFP
CI: You’ve had a tumultuous start. How has the experience been?NA: It’s a very challenging job, but I love it. My sense of this is that these months have been very hectic and, to say the least, interesting. There were some fundamental things that needed to be done. One was to bring corporate governance to the board. We have a proper personnel policy, we have brought in a chief financial officer and there will be a budget for this year for the first time ever, approved by the board for next year’s expenditure.Broadly, what sort of changes are coming in?The board has been completely restructured along corporate lines. We have brought in a modern, professional personnel policy. More importantly, there is now a proper structure for managing the game rather than a one-man show. It should not just be the chairman who does everything.We are looking at a new way of dealing with the players. I have made it clear to them that there will now be performance-based contracts. These are being finalised and the central contracts will be ready by July 1. They will be far more lucrative financial incentives, at least three times greater than before. But it is based on performance. We have introduced, for the first time, a significant incentive for run-outs and other fielding-based incentives as well.We are building a new team here and we want to bring in some fundamental changes, with regards to a fitness and training culture, with improving our infrastructure, by spending money on domestic grounds. We have rejuvenated the National Cricket Academy. We have programmes for U-16, U-18, we are running camps currently for fast bowlers and openers. As soon as this ends, we have a camp for future cricketers of Pakistan. The national team will be going around the country in a conditioning camp totally focused on physical fitness.And a new coach…We have had 13 serious applications which we are considering from within the country and outside. Some are fairly well-known. All of these are handed over to a search committee, who will go through this, shortlist, interview them and then make their recommendations to the ad-hoc committee. The ad-hoc committee retains the right to pick any of those 13 to interview. The final decision will be made by the ad-hoc committee.We are exploring the position of fielding coach too, maybe from baseball. I went to the US and made some inquiries. Their season is in progress right now so everybody has contracts. But they promised to give me some names. We are also looking at some other countries where baseball is developed like Japan and Cuba. Depending on what type of national coach we get, we might also need a bowling coach.We also want sports physicians and a trainer. This is really emphasising how serious we are about fitness. If anybody is not fit to play for Pakistan they are not fit to play elsewhere. Shoaib Akhtar had told me he was not fit to play in Abu Dhabi. He told me that he would be fit by September and that is a great motive for him. We didn’t want him to get injured in the Afro-Asia tournament. But our policy is very clear: if you are not fit to play for Pakistan you cannot play anywhere else.When you first came in, you made some comments about religion within the team. What prompted you to say that?The team is religious like many people in the country. I just made that statement, and I stand by it, that there should be no pressure on anybody that you have to say your prayers or that your selection is in any way linked to this. I was assured by Inzamam at the time that there was no such thing happening. In terms of focus, when you are playing for your national side, you should only have cricket as your objective. Of course, you will pray and so on, but I don’t think that necessarily is a major issue. There was an impression created that this team was praying all the time because they did it so publicly this perception was created.Did you have any reason to believe or any evidence that there might have been pressure on players?I don’t have any evidence or any knowledge of anybody forcing anyone. Inzamam assured me that wasn’t happening.The selection of Shoaib Malik, ahead of someone like Mohammad Yousuf, further fuelled those who thought that the religious element within the team was being dampened.We were looking for a captain who could lead Pakistan for the next 8-10 years. We needed fresh legs and a good clinical brain. We needed someone committed to fitness. Malik possesses all that. Hopefully, you will see, on balance, this will turn out to be a good decision. That was the only reason we picked Malik. He has put in place good practices. He talks to all of the team, he asks youngsters to give their input into match first and the seniors speak last. They support him fully.He’s an intelligent guy and only 25. If he keeps himself fit he can stay on for the next three World Cups and he could be a major stabilising factor for Pakistan. He is currently there till the end of the year which is the same policy we had in Inzamam’s time where we would appoint a captain by calendar year. We were looking for a captain who could lead Pakistan for the next 8-10 years. We needed fresh legs and a good clinical brain. We needed someone committed to fitness. Malik possesses all that. What did you make of the report into the World Cup failure? The committee was made up of two board employees, so it was convenient to find a scapegoat and put aside problems within the board.I am glad that they completed report and made it public. The reason the DCO (Salim Altaf) was part of it was because he was most familiar with what was happening and would be able to give perspective to that committee. The others – the chairman (Ijaz Butt) was independent and had nothing to do with the board and Salahuddin Ahmed, at that time, wasn’t chief selector. The report is very independent. They have come up with recommendations, and we have incorporated many of them. Some like the paid selection committee we put in even before the report came out.Inzamam was heavily blamed, which seems an overtly simplistic view, overlooking many other issues within the team and the board.Inzamam is perhaps one of the greatest cricketers produced by Pakistan. As captain, he himself said he takes responsibility for the debacle and I think we should move on from that. There were lessons learnt, not just from the World Cup, but lessons that we have incorporated in our new policies. Take selection: the policy now is for home series, the selection committee invites players to the camp. Then the squad is selected in full consultation with the captain. But the final XI for a home Test will be done by selectors.For away tours we have a mechanism in place also, in which captain, coach, vice-captain and the manager are involved. The final XI on tour will be that of the captain. If there is a disagreement, the captain will prevail. There were some lessons we learnt in the past.The concept of selectors on tour has been dropped?The selectors themselves have said they will be available but if you have a manager and a coach on tour then you don’t need another selector, provided they have a real say in matters. It won’t be a selection based on one individual anymore, whether it is captain, or coach.The doping issue still hovers over Pakistan.The board is totally committed to a zero-tolerance policy to doping. The PCB strictly followed its own doping policy during the process because we had to – otherwise we would’ve been legally liable. We could not do anything outside of that – this was out of competition testing so those rules applied. The first tribunal found them guilty and the second had to be appointed – it wasn’t my wish. They had a right to appeal. That tribunal exonerated them on the basis that the first tribunal found them guilty on the basis of WADA rules not PCB ones. The ICC reviewed this and did not take steps, because legally they knew not much could be done. We accepted whatever decision the two gave.WADA challenged this at the Court of Arbitration Sports (CAS) – basically to test jurisdiction. Our legal position is that they do not have jurisdiction. Therefore, picking Asif and Shoaib is within the board’s rights. We are very clear that the matter is closed – CAS has no jurisdiction and WADA no right to appeal. While the PCB’s anti-doping policy was not WADA-compliant, we have taken steps and handed the policy to our lawyers to bring it in alignment with WADA.But you can see surely why so much scorn was poured on the decision to exonerate them?When we took the first step of banning the players, everyone applauded the decision and said three cheers. Well, I’m very sorry but why will those same people not say three cheers if the appeal panel also went by the book? It is totally unfair. Only four countries had a doping policy and we put ours in place back in 2002. WADA’s code has only been implemented by the ICC recently so the policies were inconsistent but it was the ICC’s responsibility to make sure all board policies were consistent.