33
WHEN you chop off a man’s hand for theft, you condemn him to a lifetime of begging.
This is why civilised societies have moved away from such barbaric punishments. They try and ensure that their system of criminal justice makes it possible for criminals to reintegrate into society once they have completed their sentences. Punishment thus offers the chance of redemption, and allows criminals to repent and reform.
That’s the theory, anyway: all too often, extended incarceration hardens criminals, and many go on to offend again once they are released. But this approach at least holds out hope for lawbreakers, especially if they are young. And once a criminal has paid off his debt to society, he should be allowed to resume his life and his career.
The campaign against the cricketers smacks of hypocrisy.
This is as true for errant sportsmen as it is for robbers. However, retired cricketers like Ramiz Raja and Javed Miandad have made the case for the permanent exclusion of the tainted trio of Salman Butt, Mohammed Asif and Amir from all forms of cricket.
But this goes against the ICC’s five-year ban that has now been completed. The three have also served their time in jail. When so many killers and crooks escape scot-free, it appears vindictive to impose a lifetime ban on foolish young sportsmen.
One reason being given by their detractors is that the three ‘brought a bad name to the country’. By this measure, how many Pakistanis deserve to be in jail? Think of all the corrupt politicians, generals and bureaucrats; the tax-evading businessmen; and the mullahs preaching hatred and violence who have surely brought Pakistan into greater disrepute than any sportsman ever could.
To me, the campaign against the three cricketers smacks of hypocrisy and double standards. In fact, when Raja and Miandad were playing Test cricket, rumours of match-fixing — as against spot-fixing — were rife. While there has never been a shadow of wrongdoing on either of our ex-captains, they must have been aware of suspicious activities by some of their teammates.
So for them to assume this holier-than-thou attitude is puzzling. After all, they are well aware of the financial pressures on young kids who make it to the national side. And while Salman Butt is from a middle-class background, the other two come from relatively deprived families.
I am making no excuses for their actions. In fact, Butt and Asif deserved everything they got. The former, as captain, bears the greatest responsibility for leading the other two astray. Asif had been around for quite a while, and knew the ropes. He had also been involved in a brush with the law in the UAE when he was stopped at the airport with a banned substance.
But spare a thought and some sympathy for young Amir. Here was a teenager endowed with enormous talent, and a glittering career lay ahead. Cricket offered him an escape from the poverty he had been born into. So when he was ordered by his captain to bowl a couple of no-balls at predetermined moments, he was understandably reluctant to annoy his skipper by refusing.
And before we put on our holy masks, let us ask what we would have done in his place. Remember, he was not being told to throw the match, but just to bowl a couple of no-balls. On the scale of wrongdoing, this was not a major crime in the eyes of an immature teenager. Not wishing to risk his place in the Test side, he went along with the sting operation cooked up by Mazhar Majeed, the unscrupulous journalist who fooled the gullible Salman Butt.
And Amir confessed his guilt and showed genuine remorse, unlike the two senior players who pleaded their innocence in court. In a TV interview after his release from jail, Amir talked about his early struggle, as well as his remorse, never once seeking to find excuses for his action on the field that fateful day five years ago.
Speaking to the media recently, Amir expressed no urgent ambition to be selected to the national side. Instead, he spoke modestly about wishing to do well in domestic cricket. Hopefully, his return to the cricketing scene will not be marred by health issues.
And that’s the other thing we should keep in mind: a fast bowler’s career tends to be shorter than most other sportsmen because of the stresses and strains placed on his body. So the incentive to maximise his earnings during his playing career are higher than it would be for, say, a batsman. Again, this is intended more as an explanation than an excuse.
Finally, barring the three from pursuing their careers would effectively stop them from making a living doing the only thing they know: play cricket. How many of us have never made a decision in our youth we later regretted? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Published in Dawn, August 29th, 2015
On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play
