
The misfortune of Shoaib Akhtar is that for a man who loves lofty praise he will always be remembered as a Pakistani train. For some reason, no one has been able to think of a better compliment than ‘Rawalpindi Express’ to describe the fastest bowler ever clocked. Which makes Shoaib Akhtar the only sportsman in the world who is faster than his own metaphor.
He is at the Hyatt in Delhi to promote his autobiography, oddly titled Controversially Yours. The girl at the door of his suite is Sudesh Rajput, his girlfriend for three years—a pleasant Delhi girl of austere beauty, who is reluctant to talk about her association with him. But she is very clearly his love, handler and some kind of filter.
Akhtar emerges from the bedroom looking like a Komodo Dragon. He has a grey stubble, his large baffled eyes look tired. As with most controversial people who know they are controversial, he has the bearing of a martyr.
There is something about muscular men that makes people, including other muscular men, first regard them as dim. But Akhtar quickly establishes that he has substantial son-of-the-soil wisdom. If you were to place him in your school classroom, he would be that philosophical thug. Despite everything, it is hard to dislike him after a point. Akhtar believes in the ability of all human beings “to see through” a man for what he is. And he has a good feeling about what they would see inside him. “If Indians come to know me, if I am allowed to interact with them, they will think I am not so bad.”
He turns to Rajput, who is in one corner of the room, and says, “Coffee.” He pretends that he is about to rise and help her, as if to suggest that he did not mean it as an order though it may have come across that way to the visitors. She saves the moment by offering to make coffee for everyone in the room.
He gathers his thoughts, looking a bit distracted at the same time, and says he is amused by the fact that the Bombay leg of his book promotion had to be cancelled following threats from Indians who claimed to be infuriated by his claim that Sachin Tendulkar was scared of him. What Akhtar is preoccupied with is the idea of fear. He likes the idea of fear. He likes to believe that fully grown men are terrified of him and that he himself is not scared of anything or anyone. He says that despite the fury of the Indian public he is not afraid of being in India, and he is not scared of saying what he wants to say. As proof, he says, “Shah Rukh Khan is an idiot” for criticising him without reading the book. A few days ago when a waiter at the Hyatt hotel asked him what he wanted to eat, he said, “bring me Kapil Dev”. That is part of his imagined fearlessness—to sit in India and make jokes about Indian stars. “I have the phone number of a good hair transplant doctor for Sehwag,” he says.
He is not very fond of Virender Sehwag, which is unfortunate because they talk alike. He and Sehwag have had one famous chat, which millions of cricket fans could not hear. It was on the pitch of the Centurion Park during the World Cup in 2003. Akhtar had been appealing constantly and at one point Sehwag said something to him. I was in the press box that day and the word was that Sehwag had said, “Are you appealing or begging?”
Akhtar says, “Sehwag spread a lie about what he had told me. He is not as gutsy as he pretends. He would not stand in front of me on a cricket pitch and say something like that to me.” I imagine he is referring to the ‘Are you appealing or begging?’ statement. But according to Akhtar, what Sehwag had claimed to have done was point to Sachin Tendulkar at the other end and say, “Tera baap khada hai” (That’s your dad standing there).
It is exactly the sort of thing Sehwag would say, but Akhtar fiercely denies that. “I know who my father is and if Sehwag had actually said that, I would have gone to his hotel room and hit him.”
He lights up a cigarette and asks Rajput to keep the door open “please” to let the smoke escape. He has been smoking for several years. “Four or five a day.” Does Sachin Tendulkar smoke? His eyes light up. He tries to look mysterious. “Never know what gods do,” he says. He looks as if he wishes Tendulkar smokes. He hopes, for some reason, Tendulkar is flawed, that he is not as perfect as Indians would like to believe.
In his book he has shown some great players he dislikes in poor light and has drawn flattering portraits of some mediocre players who are his friends. This makes his autobiography a flawed story, like many autobiographies. But his desire to embarrass his foes also gives one a rare insight into the Pakistani dressing room. Pakistani cricketers have dismissed his opinions and interpretations, and have condemned his decision to reveal some secrets, but he maintains that nobody can question his facts.
Cricket fans have always known that Pakistan’s dressing room is a snake pit, but some of Akhtar’s accounts are baffling. It appears that one of the greatest sporting mysteries is how, for years, eleven Pakistani men on a high-protein diet somehow did not kill each other despite easy access to willow wood bats and sharp objects.
In his book, Akhtar describes the Pakistani dressing room as ‘a place where wild animals are packed together’. He writes, ‘Over the years, I have seen fistfights, knives flashed around, bats swung at each other—it never got out because everyone was doing it.’
There is a question the Indian government has asked Pakistan explicitly, and the American government has been hinting at in public statements: ‘Who exactly is in charge of Pakistan?’ As Akhtar brings together many strands of Pakistan’s society to tell his story, it would appear that it is a question that can be asked in many rooms in Pakistan, including the Pakistani dressing room. It is a question whose answer keeps changing depending on who you ask and when.
There are portions in the book that carry the spirit and insanity of the great satirical novel by Mohammed Hanif, A Case of Exploding Mangoes. These portions tell the story of a fellowship of men who are comically religious, paranoid, scheming and not always in control of themselves. It is not Indians but Pakistanis who should be upset with Akhtar for embarrassing them in a book that does not even have the masquerade of ‘fiction’.
Akhtar grew up in poverty in Rawalpindi as the son of a watchman. Cricket saved him. He has in him the pride of a person who has made it on his own steam, but he has an unambiguous adoration for men of class. He says Pakistan and its cricket must be led by “men who have been to Oxford”.
“Like Imran Khan,” he says. “He has class, articulation, vision.”
When Akhtar later reveals his world view, his analysis of terrorism and his opinion of the United States, he repeats almost exactly what Imran Khan recently said in an interview.
“But what a strange country Pakistan is,” Akhtar says, somewhat ponderously, “Imran Khan was beaten up by some people in public. That can never happen in India to an Indian cricket legend.”
That is true.


























































OLDER COMMENTS FIRST
14 COMMENTS
Permalink
LOVE the opening lines :)
Permalink
Shoaib Akhtar is a train wreck but there is surely something mythical about the way his career unfolded.. as if struck by a curse like some greek tragedy.... fascinating.
He is opnionated but does not deserve to be pelted for sharing it. the man ran in hard enough for a long time to earn it.
Permalink
Manu Joseph knows how to sell his book. I have never seen any article in open or outside which does not mention his book in the bio.
Permalink
I agree with the comment above
Permalink
Manu Joseph is a man who, while growing up didn't think much about the world - preferring to drift through it the way one does while on a good trip, a perennial day off for his mind - and the opinions he formed growing up were formed of experiences passively felt and regarded. He seems not to have played much of a role in his own coming of age.
But something seems to have happened along the way, where he found the power to spin his possibly ordinary life story into an interesting narrative - and realised that if he could do so with his own life, maybe write about others' lives too. Might as well make a living out of it.
So when he writes of Amir Khan or Baba Ramdev or Shoaib Akhtar, there is sharp perception tinged with some condescension - which he might think is humorous, but oftentimes misses the mark. There is something of a bitterness in the way he chooses to put these stories across to us. But it's good, because while he thinks he is opening up a view on the person he profiles - he shows us a glimpse of himself, and his abilities and insecurities. And that is the mark of a good writer.
Permalink
There is at least one terrible factual error :
In the 2003 WC, Shoaib Akthar bowled only 1 ball to Sehwag and the second was a wide on which Sehwag was off strike. I don't remember Akthar appealing at all in that 1 ball. In fact, everybody knows Akthar bowled only one over in that match when Sehwag was there and there was hardly any need to appeal then. And the author claims to have been at that match !
Rather, i think that Viru sledge was in Multan 2004 as it is mentioned in most recollections of that incident when Sehwag hit his triple century and he had a long partnership with Sachin !
Permalink
Nice article. Shoaib seems quite naive through all the bluff and bluster.
Personally i dont think there is anything wrong in his suggesting that Sachin or Dravid were scared facing him *at times*. They have taken him for runs at other times and he ran through them a couple of times at least so the assertion seems quite valid.
I would also like to hear from Sachin/Dravid regarding this controversy when they have retired and perhaps no longer constrained to keep up their image to cater to "market forces".
Permalink
Himanshu,
Why would Manu J not reference his book in his bio? Wouldn't you want to know something about the author whose article you are reading? It would be a problem if he had plugged his book within the article.
Permalink
Like all typically Indians, Manu is paintin Shoaib in bad light coz he spoke against your God. Nobody believes that Sachin was scared of Shoaib. But for Manu to bring out nuances of the man, thereby indicating that he is lying or not to be believed, is not fair. A lot of the stuff he has said, actually happens. Cricket has an underbelly which u cant see on your TV screen. Get real guys, all that glitters is NOT gold and not even yur God is beyond many things. Pls accept that anything said against u or your country is not bad..... most of the times its true........
Permalink
Does Shoib has any credibility left in him after so much of contraversaries he has got himself in to ?, No one should belive what he says or what he is trying to sell. The Man (?) to earn money who can cheat his own country in Cricket , don't you think that this fellow will dump so many lies in to his rotten biography ? Earlier days the Biographies and autobiographies were written by the great and noble people, now Bios are just the false / contraversial stories to make money by selling the books ! Shame on these guys !. Publishers should know what to publish and what not !
Permalink
whwere's the report abuse button for the comment above???
Permalink
well-written piece
Permalink
Waat a piece I zay? Mrr Amoolya gumment also very perceptive about certain types oaf indellectuals, mainly from Kerala. Mr Josef adding to the pride of Malayali tinkers. But I finding, that Shoaib Akhtar is to Pakistan, waat Sreesanth is to Kerala. Alya?
Permalink
I think that MJ has done a great service to Open and nation by letting other writer to occupy more space in Open Magazine and intelligently supervising their work. Keep it up. No harm if you occassionally write on some issues not directly related to India. We will not mind it.
Post new comment