In a world that often glorifies the elite and the affluent, true courage and willpower are frequently overlooked, especially in societies like ours. While many seek inspiration in foreign figures, we must remember that Bangladesh is home to its own remarkable personalities—individuals who exemplify resilience and determination, often emerging from the shadows of socioeconomic hardship. One such person is Joynal Abedin, a rickshaw puller whose life story serves as a beacon of hope and inspiration.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Courage from the Streets: The inspiring story of Joynal Abedin
In a world that often glorifies the elite and the affluent, true courage and willpower are frequently overlooked, especially in societies like ours. While many seek inspiration in foreign figures, we must remember that Bangladesh is home to its own remarkable personalities—individuals who exemplify resilience and determination, often emerging from the shadows of socioeconomic hardship. One such person is Joynal Abedin, a rickshaw puller whose life story serves as a beacon of hope and inspiration.
England’s Asian Undoing: A Tale of Hubris, Missteps, and Pakistan’s Renaissance
England entered the third day in Dubai with the optimism of a champion side, convinced they had clawed back enough ground to stage a recovery worthy of their world No. 1 ranking. By the close, however, they stood exposed—demoralised, dismantled, and dismissed with a haunting familiarity reminiscent of their Asian nightmares of the past. Pakistan, disciplined and resurgent, needed just 15 runs to seal a ten-wicket victory.
This was
not simply a defeat; it was a dissection.
The
Collapse of an Empire
England’s
batting unravelled twice in under 60 overs, not by chance but by the steady
application of pressure. Umar Gul, sharp and probing, tore through the top
order, claiming four wickets. Saeed Ajmal, all guile and invention, collected a
remarkable 10-for in the match. Together they exposed the psychological
fragility of England’s batting and laid bare an inconvenient truth: for all
their dominance in recent years, England remain inept in Asian conditions.
The misery
was compounded by the personal failings of the stalwarts. Andrew Strauss, the
captain, continues his slide into a crisis of form. Kevin Pietersen perished to
his familiar recklessness, undone once again before scoring. Ian Bell,
repeatedly hypnotised by Ajmal’s doosra, looked like a man who had forgotten
how to read spin. Each failure wasn’t just an individual lapse; it was a
symptom of a wider malaise.
Strauss’
Regal Rebellion
Strauss’
dismissal before lunch—caught down the leg side off Gul—encapsulated England’s
unease. The captain, usually stoic, betrayed his frustration with a sequence of
headshakes as if royalty were dissenting against its own court. Technology
offered no rescue. Hot Spot was inconclusive, the DRS inconclusive, and so
Strauss was forced to exit with the air of a man betrayed by fate rather than
his own flaws.
That regal
indignation could not conceal the fragility at the heart of England’s batting.
Pietersen’s impetuous hook, Bell’s befuddlement, and even Trott’s eventual
lapse after two hours of resistance all painted a picture of a team
psychologically outmanoeuvred.
Pakistan’s
Masterclass in Discipline
For
Pakistan, this victory was more than numbers on a scorecard—it was validation.
Misbah-ul-Haq, their unflappable commander, ran his side like a disciplined
battalion. Where once Pakistan thrived on volatility and drama, now they found
strength in unity and restraint.
Ajmal was
the magician at the centre, conjuring dismissals with turn, flight, and
deception, while Gul and Abdur Rehman played their supporting roles with
precision. Even with the Decision Review System occasionally failing him,
Ajmal’s supremacy was never in doubt.
Pakistan’s
batting, though short of individual brilliance, showed a newfound collective
grit. Adnan Akmal’s spirited 61 was symbolic of a side that refuses to fold. No
longer brittle, Pakistan’s line-up displayed the patience and tenacity that
Misbah has instilled—a stark contrast to the extravagance and chaos of the
past.
England’s
Myopia, Pakistan’s Redemption
England
arrived in Dubai speaking of flat pitches, tipped too heavily in favour of
batsmen. By the end of this match, that narrative lay in ruins. The surface was
fair; it was England who faltered.
What we
witnessed was not merely Pakistan beating England—it was Pakistan reasserting
themselves in the cricketing order. The spectre of the 2010 spot-fixing scandal
still lingers, but Misbah’s men are writing a redemptive script. This was their
chance to prove their progress against the best in the world, and they seized
it.
The
Theatre of Empty Seats
The irony
of this Test was stark: one of Pakistan’s most emphatic victories in recent
memory played out before a sparse crowd in Dubai. Yet, in the digital echo
chambers of Twitter and Facebook, the jubilation rang far louder than the
near-empty stands. It was, in many ways, a quintessentially modern
victory—witnessed not in person but shared across the globe in a chorus of
triumphant posts.
A
Fortress Rising in the Desert
Pakistan’s
triumph was about more than wickets and runs. It was about renewal. With
Ajmal’s sorcery, Misbah’s stoicism, and the team’s collective steel, Pakistan
are turning their Middle Eastern exile into a fortress as daunting as Karachi
once was.
For
England, the challenge is existential. Their supremacy depends on mastering
conditions beyond their comfort zone. This humiliation in Dubai is a reminder that
world dominance cannot be claimed without conquering the East.
In the end,
Pakistan’s ten-wicket victory was not only a cricketing triumph but also a
cultural one—a declaration that from the ashes of scandal, discipline and unity
can forge greatness. For all its poignancy, this victory will endure as one of
Pakistan’s finest chapters, and as a cautionary tale for England: in Asia,
reputation counts for little, resilience for everything.
Thank You
Faisal Caesar
Sunday, January 15, 2012
The Redemption at the WACA: Warner’s Wildfire, Clarke’s Composure, and India’s Unraveling
Four years on from the firestorm of 2008, India returned to Perth again 2-0 down—but the air this time was free of rancour. Gone was the acrimony of Sydney’s contentious Test; gone, too, the siege mentality that had bound India into defiant resistance and historic victory in that charged series. In 2012, there was no umbrage, no sense of injustice to unite the visitors. Australia, too, had shed their bitterness. What remained was the cricket—raw, unrelenting, and decisive.
Beneath the
burnished skies of Western Australia, the WACA pitch stood firm, hard and true,
a fast bowler’s dream and a batsman’s reckoning. Here, the narrative was never
destined to be subtle. Clarke, embracing the hostility of Perth’s bounce,
elected to field—backing a pace quartet that had both variation and venom: the
revitalised Hilfenhaus, the grizzled Harris, the fuller, fiercer Siddle, and
the angular, intriguing left-armer Starc.
India’s
response to the pitch was pragmatic but ultimately fruitless—they too packed
their side with seam, handing a debut to Vinay Kumar and sacrificing Ashwin’s
spin. But their arsenal was no match for the Australian surge. India's first
innings, a ragged 161, barely resisted. Kohli and Laxman flickered, but nothing
held. And with Sharma’s dismissal, Australia strode in with two full days
ahead—and a storm waiting on the horizon.
The Warner Tempest: A Century in Frenzied Verse
David
Warner's innings was not so much played as detonated. In 69 balls—a blur of
aggression, clarity, and defiance—he compiled a century that redefined what an
opener could be in the longest format. He did not negotiate the new ball; he
pummelled it. Hook, jab, upper-cut—each stroke seemed forged in the crucible of
T20 instinct but transposed seamlessly into the red-ball theatre.
Warner’s
180 from 159 balls, littered with 20 fours and five sixes, was less an innings
than a proclamation. Test orthodoxy held no power over him. Against Kumar and
Sharma, he lifted sixes over long-on and drove Zaheer high into the John
Inverarity Stand—each stroke a poem in rebellion against cricket’s conservative
guardianship.
At the
other end, Ed Cowan played the straight man in this double act, his 74 a study
in application and contrast. His watchful vigil allowed Warner the oxygen to
combust freely. Together they forged an opening stand of 214—Australia’s
blazing overture to a match that would leave India scorched.
Collapse and the Mirage of Resistance
Yet
Warner’s dismissal, to a mishit caught at long-on, revealed Australia’s fragility
beneath the spectacle. From 214 without loss, they crumbled to 369 all
out—losing 10 wickets for 155. The rest of the batting proved mortal. India’s
reply, already 208 adrift, dissolved even more pitifully. Dravid scratched out
a stay, Kohli fought with promise, but the tail collapsed with theatrical
finality—36 runs from the last six wickets, the final four contributing nothing
at all.
Hilfenhaus,
reborn with rhythm and bite, claimed a career-best match haul of 8 for 97. Once
mocked for his ineffectual movement in the Ashes, he now led an attack that had
methodically dismantled India six innings in a row. The wreckage was complete
before lunch on the third day. Australia had reclaimed the Border-Gavaskar
Trophy. The sun dipped behind the Swan River. India’s golden generation, once
so feared, now looked like an echo.
Clarke's Measured March and Australia’s
Awakening
In the
blaze of Warner's fury and the disintegration of India’s order, a subtler but
more profound narrative was taking shape. Michael Clarke, now firmly entrenched
as leader, presided over the win with the poise of a man who had learned from
collapse—be it Cape Town’s 47 all out or Hobart’s surrender to New Zealand.
These were not scars; they were scriptures. He had read them well.
Under
Clarke and coach Mickey Arthur, Australia had begun to chart a new path—one
that wasn’t just about survival post-Warne-McGrath but about belief in a new
structure, a new tone. Their victories—1-0 in Sri Lanka, a draw in South
Africa, and now this thumping of India—had restored rhythm, even if they had
yet to recover the symphony of dominance.
The
triumphs of the summer were dazzling. Clarke’s own triple-century in Sydney had
been regal; Ponting's renaissance century dignified; Warner's was volcanic.
Cowan offered solidity, and the bowling cartel, rotated with precision, throttled
India’s once-fabled batting. Australia had bowled India out six times for an
average of just 229, and between Cowan's dismissal in Sydney and Cowan’s again
in Perth, India had taken just 1 wicket for 836 runs.
Still,
Clarke was wary. “We haven’t achieved much yet,” he warned. His humility wasn’t an affectation—it was strategic. Australia had slipped down the ICC ladder to
fourth. Regaining the No. 1 Test ranking would not be a matter of isolated
brilliance. The next real milestone was still a year away: the 2013 Ashes.
Of Ghosts, Gaps, and Grit Ahead
For now,
there were blemishes to address. Shaun Marsh, with 14 runs in the entire
series, seemed out of place amidst Australia's run-glut. His place was in
jeopardy with Watson’s return looming. Brad Haddin, too, had failed to make his
presence felt, his form shadowed by missed chances and silence at the crease.
In a losing side, these would be open wounds. In a winning one, they were
veiled bruises—visible, but not yet crippling.
Australia
will almost certainly win the series 4-0 or 3-0—or, in some act of Indian
resistance, 3-1. But the real questions are longer term: Can this team conquer
England? Can this group evolve from promise to power?
The signs
are promising: Warner, Pattinson, Cummins, a reborn Hilfenhaus, the tireless
Siddle—each represents a brushstroke in Clarke’s new portrait of an Australian
resurgence. But the journey is long. The ghosts of recent failures linger.
South Africa, England—these are not India, crumbling on foreign soil.
And yet, as
Clarke stood in the late Perth light, he might have sensed what few dared to
say aloud: this was not just a victory, but a beginning. Australia were no
longer rebuilding. They were rising.
Thank You
Faisal Caesar
Friday, January 6, 2012
The Sydney Masterpiece: Clarke's Redemption, Tendulkar’s Absence, and the Ghosts of Australia’s Past
There are moments in cricket that transcend the dust of statistics and enter the realm of lore. The 100th Test at the Sydney Cricket Ground was not merely a commemoration of longevity—it became a cathedral of catharsis, redemption, and silent elegies. It was a stage on which the complicated figure of Michael Clarke finally authored his magnum opus—an innings so vast and immaculately timed that it shifted perceptions of a captain once jeered by his own.
Eleven
centuries—if you count Clarke’s in triplicate, and why wouldn’t you?—emerged
like fireflies across the four-day theatre. But no glow rivalled Clarke’s 329
not out: the highest score ever at the SCG, surpassing Tip Foster’s ancient 287
and brushing shoulders with Bradman’s 334 and Hayden’s 380. In another age, he
might have gone on to 400. But cricket is also a study in restraint, and
Clarke, perhaps mindful of ghosts both past and present, declared, leaving
posterity to wonder what might have been.
For India,
this was not a match lost but a mirror held up to years of away failure. For
Tendulkar, it was another chapter in the great chase for his 100th
international century—an odyssey that had become less about runs and more about
destiny’s delay. That Clarke, of all people, should be the one to dismiss
him—bowling gentle finger-spin to expedite the new ball—seemed like cricket’s
irony at full throttle. The great batsman, immaculate for two hours, offered a
faint nick. Haddin’s gloves trembled. Slip waited. History paused. Then fell.
Baptism by
Fire and Declaration of Arrival
The match
had opened with promise—thirteen wickets on Day One, seamers from both sides
spitting fire. Tom Parker’s pitch, curiously watered despite Sydney's warmth,
brought hope of balance. India’s 191 was poor, but Australia teetered too,
three down early with Zaheer Khan finding late magic. But then, the curtain
lifted—and Clarke emerged, not as a man out to silence his critics, but as one
who had ceased to hear them.
With
Ponting, who had not scored a century in two years and nearly fell short again
on 99, Clarke rebuilt. The former captain’s dive for his 100th run—spared only
by a missed run-out—was a dive into nostalgia and self-respect. His joy was
tempered, sheepish even, as though uncertain if the applause belonged to him
anymore. Yet it did. And then came Hussey, stroking his way to 150 in the
shadow of greater light.
But it was
Clarke who towered, serene in tempo and shimmering in control. Ten hours and
nine minutes of unbroken authority. Thirty-nine boundaries, one six, and
partnerships of 288 with Ponting and 334 unbroken with Hussey—both Australian
records against India. Never before had a single innings housed two 250-plus
stands. If Ponting had clawed back dignity, Clarke had ascended to grace.
The
declaration, halfway through Day Three, surprised many. Surely, with a shot at
400, he could have carried on. But Clarke, the man who had been cast as too
flamboyant, too distracted by the pop-world limelight, was making a different
statement: leadership above records. Even in his finest hour, he sought the
team’s triumph first.
India’s Retreat,
Symbolic and Tactical
India, for
all its batting riches, collapsed under psychological fatigue and tactical
inertia. The bowlers toiled, Sharma doffing his cap in ironic salute as another
century came at his expense. Dhoni, reduced to passive fields and opaque
ploys—like using twelfth men to halt momentum—seemed to summon every trick bar
conviction. When Tendulkar fell, and Laxman and Dhoni followed in quick
succession, it was only a matter of ceremony.
Kohli’s
middle finger to a baiting crowd was less an act of insolence than a metaphor
for a team unravelling. He later cited vile abuse targeting his family, and a
half-match fee fine followed. But India’s frustrations were not merely
provoked—they were inherited. The shadows of earlier humiliations abroad—from
England to South Africa—now lengthened into Australia.
And yet,
paradoxically, India managed 400 in the second innings—a number that read well
but meant little. There were no alarms for the hosts. Clarke’s men cruised to
victory with a day in hand, vindicating his decision to declare.
A Captain Reforged
Twelve
months earlier, Clarke had looked broken. Australia were reeling from an Ashes
defeat, and Clarke had stepped down from T20s amidst rising doubt about his
suitability to lead. His batting, diffused across formats, had lost its identity.
Former coach Tim Nielsen called the team “jack of all trades and master of
none.” Clarke was emblematic of the crisis.
But the
decision to quit T20 cricket became a rebirth. Freed from its erratic tempo and
cosmetic urgency, Clarke found space to rebuild—not just technically, but
spiritually. From the spinning dust of Galle to the green venom of Cape Town,
he had begun to score with clarity and conviction. His 819 Test runs since
then, at 68.25 with four centuries, signalled more than form: they heralded
maturity.
Clarke
admitted he might only appreciate Sydney’s grandeur after retirement. In the
churn of modern cricket, self-reflection is often an afterthought. But the
significance was already visible: not just a triple-century, but a triple
coronation—as batsman, captain, and figurehead of a team trying to emerge from
the ruins of past greatness.
“This whole
team is heading in the right direction,” he would later say. Perhaps it is. But
even if it falters again, Sydney 2012 will stand as the match in which
Clarke, once mocked, once doubted, finally became Australia's Clarke.
Thank You
Faisal Caesar




