Cricinfo Mobile
Email Feedback Print

Desperate measures, desperate results

Surrey's signing of Shoaib Akhtar is optimistic, misguided or both

Andrew McGlashan

September 12, 2008

Comments: 10 | Text size: A | A


The heartbeat of the team: Shoaib Akhtar's arrival doesn't look like saving Surrey © PA Photos
 

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Take Shoaib Akhtar's figures from his first two days as a Surrey cricketer, for instance. Nineteen overs, one wicket, and an economy-rate of less than three. And he didn't break down. But it's hard to say he was a success, not even a qualified success. Yet no one should be surprised.

Desperate times call for desperate measures, as Surrey - the self-styled Manchester United of county cricket - struggle to maintain their first-division status. And yet, who on earth truly believed that Shoaib would be their saviour? In 2000, he didn't even make it on the field for Nottinghamshire before he was released from his contract due to injury. His one successful county stint came in 2003 and 2004 for Durham, when he took 42 wickets at an impressive 19 apiece, but he won no friends whatsoever during his most recent spell, with Worcestershire in 2005.

"Players like that are no good to our club. In fact, Shoaib has been no good for any club he's been at," the former Worcestershire chairman John Elliot said in late 2005. "It's all about team spirit and getting the dressing room right and when you've got a bloke like Shoaib in there, it can cause mayhem."

Steady on, though. It was a fine effort from Shoaib to even squeeze in a couple of games for Surrey, what with appearances on Indian TV shows and court dates in Pakistan. Shoaib's life is never dull but of late he's rarely made the headlines for cricketing reasons. Having said that, he's hardly played any cricket recently, partly because of Pakistan's struggles to get any matches but partly due to his own indiscretions. His last first-class game was back in February, since when he's had a few IPL outings in May. Even if Shoaib wasn't a player with such a colourful history, the fact is he wasn't ever going to bring his best form to The Oval.

His lack of match fitness was evident throughout Hampshire's long first innings. Out of 135 overs bowled during the first two days, Shoaib sent down 19 and none in more than a four-over spell. Even that shoddy work-rate didn't last. By the end of each burst he was already puffing, and it caught many by surprise when he made good ground to take a top-edged catch at fine-leg. Never mind the Rawalpindi Express, it was more like Thomas the Tank Engine, especially during his last, embarrassing three-over spell when he lolloped in at medium pace.

Occasionally, especially in his early spells, he would crank it up and rattle the batsman. A few gloves were hit, a few bouncers whistled past noses, and his wicket came from a quick delivery. In a way, that made the rest of his performance even more exasperating. When Surrey took their sixth wicket they had a chance to wrap up the innings, but Shoaib was barely seen during the 30-over 165-run stand between Nic Pothas and Dimitri Mascarenhas. Shoaib in his pomp would have raced in, targeted the stumps, and made swift work of the lower order. However, when he finally got to bowl at the No. 10, Imran Tahir, he was trundling in and Tahir was able to push onto the front foot with impunity.

A telling moment came earlier in the day when a slower-ball beamer slipped out and looped past Liam Dawson at chest height. These things happen and the game normally moves on, but Shoaib wasn't going to take his warning without some lengthy posturing. He has always thought very highly of himself and in an interview before the match said: "I have nothing to prove to the Pakistan selectors", and that he "couldn't do anything about other people's egos". The biggest problem is, he thinks he's bigger than the game, but in that moment he made himself look very small. Not that the Surrey dressing room has ever been short of players with inflated opinions of themselves.

 
 
A telling moment came earlier in the day when a slower-ball beamer slipped out and looped past Liam Dawson at chest height. These things happen and the game normally moves on, but Shoaib wasn't going to take his warning without some posturing
 

The purpose of bringing in a strike bowler is to win games. To have any hope of avoiding relegation, Surrey need two victories and therefore, in all likelihood, to take 20 wickets twice. It's believed Shoaib wasn't the club's No. 1 choice, but Harbhajan Singh was unavailable and many other international stars are taking advantage of a break after the postponement of the Champions Trophy.

However, when it transpired that Shoaib was the best available replacement, the search should have stopped. But Surrey's attack for most of the season has struggled to bowl sides out, and injury problems have mounted, so they felt forced into scouting around to see who was available. Unfortunately, that is the one major drawback of the two-division system - teams want to stay up at any cost and will import any player who might help.

Matthew Nicholson, the former New South Wales quick, who was released to allow Shoaib to join, wouldn't have done any worse. He's had a poor season, blighted by illness, but at least he would run in all day. That's what an overseas bowler is meant to do, not languish down at fine leg. They are meant to lead by example. Neither does it send much of a message to Surrey's young bowlers, but they have been getting mixed signals ever since Alex Tudor was brought back from Essex on loan. Surrey used to provide the core of the England team; now they resemble a retirement home.

The added problem with Shoaib is that he takes so long to bowl his overs - timed at seven minutes on a few occasions - and Surrey's over-rate was always behind the clock. At one stage, having claimed just two bowling points, they were in danger of ending in minus numbers. Everything suggests Surrey would have been better off without him.

If Mark Ramprakash, the acting Surrey captain, or the coach, Alan Butcher, expected to get anything more out of Shoaib, they were either far too optimistic or very poorly informed. He was a hothead coming in cold. Flying backwards and forwards because of visa problems didn't help, but Surrey's desire to chase him has telegraphed their desperation. They deserve everything that is coming to them this season.

Andrew McGlashan is a staff writer at Cricinfo

RSS Feeds: Andrew McGlashan
Comments: 10 
Email Feedback Print
Posted by The_Wog on (September 12 2008, 23:27 PM GMT)

Here's a question: The Champions Trophy tournament supposed to be starting yesterday, and Shoaib was litigating (with some success) to overturn his suspension. Should he not already have BEEN fit in anticipation of playing international cricket this week? Was he planning on turning out for PAK in this state? I hear Andrew Symonds is available - maybe they should give him a call. He can't truck his fishing boat to Surrey, and at least he's fit (anyone seen the Ford Ranger ad?).

Posted by UmarRajput on (September 12 2008, 22:13 PM GMT)

Well Andrew, what is wrong with you aussies, indians and english? This Cricinfo site has become a favourite place for your kind to criticize pakistani, sri lankan and the west-indian players. Jealousy, incompetency or too much spare time? You choose Andrew "Sahib"

Posted by jalps on (September 12 2008, 18:46 PM GMT)

Let's face it, signing Shoaib was not Surrey's problem. They went in to the season with a bowling attack including Pedro Collins, Nicholson, Jimmy Ormond and Jade Dernbach. The only one of those who's going to scare a batsman in Dernbach, and that because of his tendency to bowl beamers. It took far too long for them to realise that this lot were never going to bowl anyone out, you can't depend on an ageing Saqlain, constantly blaming the weather for the number of draws. Over the last few weeks there have been the desperate signings of Tudor and Shoaib, more in hope than expectation, but they needed to find someone who could produce a match-winning spell at the Oval. Essentially, at this point there was no-one else. Perhaps Meaker should have played, but that should have been ahead of Collins. I'm not sure about Saker but Jordan is injured so there's not much more there to come.

Posted by pragmatist on (September 12 2008, 17:55 PM GMT)

Lucky old Shoaib - the superstar team he's joined lost by an innings so he didn't have to bowl again. Nice day at the office for him. To quote Alan Butcher on Surrey's performance. "I would say we are pretty resigned to it," coach Alan Butcher said. Maybe he ought to keep the word "resigned" handy over the next couple of weeks.

Posted by Clickinfo on (September 12 2008, 17:44 PM GMT)

Sorcerer and SSRajan - the thing is if you had seen the guy then you would see why Andrew wrote what he did. The figures are irrelevant - had he got 4 for 20 he would still have been a disgrace although the wisdom of the signing might not be the issue. He was overweight, petulent and looked half interested. Nevertheless, what was unforgivable was the way he bowled, which appeared to lack the slightest sign of intelligence. He was a super example of how NOT to behave as a professional cricketer.

Posted by SSRajan on (September 12 2008, 15:40 PM GMT)

One match and criticism starts. Why can't Andrew have some patience. Is Shoaib a superhuman that he will start performing straightaway after so much time off the field. If he seriously believes he can then he should not be getting anywhere near a cricket field ever again. As for Surrey decision, that is not Shoaib's fault. He needs match fitness and he will do anything to get it and he should be commended for that.

Posted by Sorcerer on (September 12 2008, 13:11 PM GMT)

Correction needs to be made regarding the remark that he did not win any friends in his last county stint. There was indeed a team-mate or two who refuted Elliott's attack on Shoaib by saying Shoaib was a team man although being a maverick. Anyhow, choosing Shoaib for the last two matches and hoping he would bring a miraculous cure to the distatrous position which Surrey had gotten themselves into was always a long shot given how hurried everything was arranged resulting in the player arriving literally a day before the match. It's easy to criticise him for not taking more wickets in those 19 overs but not quite balanced to pronounce him as a disappointment.

Posted by Clickinfo on (September 12 2008, 12:35 PM GMT)

I was The Oval on Wednesday. Shoaib was an overweight, stroppy and devisive waste of money. What kind of message does his high-cost signing give to all of Surrey fringe and 2nd XI players? The county is a shambles and deserve relegation. Hopefully, a complete clear-out of the dead wood will follow and the Butcher clique which has landed us in this mess will be sent packing.

Posted by tbc1 on (September 12 2008, 11:13 AM GMT)

The ambition of recruiting Shoaib to avert relegation is not to be criticised, rather, Surrey's research should be. The principle of drafting in an international bowler is hardly poor, however, I suspect a different bowler, perhaps Sami, Gul or Malinga, might have proved more effective. Shoaib arrives with the expectation of cheap, plentiful wickets, and neither the fitness nor form to fulfil that. For that matter, why not be a little more audacious and try to sign Mendis? I daresay Sri Lanka would welcome his gaining county experiance, and I see no reason why county cricketers should play him any better than have India.

Posted by labib1996 on (September 12 2008, 10:04 AM GMT)

Shoaib's lack of match fitness should not be seen as the reason-detre for not hiring him and in fact by calling him Surrey has done the right thing because Shoaib is better than a Matthew Nicholson anyday. Having said that though i think Surrey could have hired someone like Mohammad Sami who would have been more fitter than Shoaib but we need to wait and see before we jump to conclusions about Shoaib's inclusion. For a ODI, Shoaib would been a better option than a 4 day match.

Comments have now been closed for this article

FeedbackTop
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Andrew McGlashanClose
Andrew McGlashan Assistant Editor Andrew arrived at Cricinfo in 2004 via Manchester and Cape Town, after finding the assistant editor at a weak moment as he watched England's batting collapse in the Newlands Test. Andrew began his cricket writing career as a freelance covering Lancashire during 2004 when they were relegated in the County Championship. In fact, they were top of the table when he began reporting on them but things went dramatically downhill. He likes to let people know that he is a supporter of county cricket, a fact his colleagues will testify to and bemoan equally.
Related Links
Season Fixtures Season Results
No fixtures scheduled
  • Twenty years of Tendulkar
Sponsored Links

Access your Indian Rupee earnings from anywhere in the world.

Debate now on the new ESPN Soccernet Castrol Rankings Blog

Cricshop.com - leading online cricket store

on www.scrum.com

20 Years of Tendulkar

Cricinfo celebrates two decades of the maestro

Bodyline

Bowl a fast one

Cricinfo Mobile Site

Our brand new mobile site