How to Politely Tell Your Wife to Bugger Off

In just 30 seconds (from 0:53 onwards), Roger Federer manages to mock women who expect their husbands to be involved with their pregnancies ("Oh I'm pregant...I can't move around...Help me"), condescend to his wife ("Mirka is a wonderful person anyway") and only see your wives pregnancy in terms of how it benefits you ("Mirka is feeling great which is really helping me"). Coming from, say, Shane Warne, it would sound horribly sexist. But Federer just seems all the more endearing.

Microsoft Word Changing The English Language Watch

The red squiggly line Nazi has just told me that "redressal" is no longer a word.

Other stupid MS Word corrections here, here, here, and here.

Punjab, Sindh Assemblies Locked In Battle To The Death

I absolutely love my country. Why? Because shit like this simply cannot, I repeat cannot, happen anywhere else. It just makes my day brighter.

On Saturday, the Punjab Assembly saw a walk-out in protest against, as Dawn says, something that was never said. Please, please, please read the whole article. In fact, I am copying and pasting here to save you the trouble of having to click.

LAHORE, June 27: Sheikh Ala-ud-Din of PML-Q Forward Bloc on Saturday must have made history in the Punjab Assembly when he walked out of the house in protest against something that was never said.

The ire of the Sheikh, a member from Kasur (PP-181) fell on Mohsin Leghari (PP-245, DG Khan) of the PML-Q when Mr Leghari, while accentuating his southern roots, read a few lines from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar.

Mr Leghari, delivering his budget speech, maintained the finance bill was more of an urban document, which excluded rural development.

Speaking on the neglect of southern Punjab, he said though he loved Lahore – a city where he was educated, got his first employment and still resides in – he has not forgotten his ancestral land. Explaining his predicament, he quoted from the last scene of the Julius Caesar, where Brutus explains his killing of Caesar by saying: “It’s not that I loved Caesar less, but I loved Rome more.”

Provoked either by his lack of understanding or knowledge, Mr Ala-ud-Din immediately stood on a point of order and started grilling Mr Leghari for insulting Lahore, which gave him education, employment and residence, and thundered: “This Lahore bashing must end, especially by those who have benefited immensely from the city.”

Both Speaker Rana Iqbal and Mr Mohsin tried to convince their colleague that no insulting remark had been passed against Lahore, but to no avail. After making an emotional speech, Sheikh Ala-ud-Din walked out of the house in protest against “insult to Lahore”.

He was later brought back by Education Minister Mian Mujtaba Shujaur Rahman on speaker’s request, and the minister also lectured the house on avoiding hurting each others’ territorial feelings.

As if all this was not enough, Dr Asad Ashraf of the PML-N found a new dimension to the innocent quote and stunned everyone in the house. On next point of order, he took off by saying: “Since Mr Mohsin has called himself Caesar, he must know how Caesar was born.

It was his difficult birth, which gave birth to Caesarian Operation (C-Section). How bad Caesar proved for his mother.”

On both occasions, Leghari defended himself that he has neither insulted Lahore nor called himself Caesar, but the die was cast.

The Sindh Assembly, on the same day, decided that this was not farcical enough, and decided to observe a minute's silence in honor of Michael Jackson's death. Because, after all, if there's one thing bridging the PPP/MQM rural/urban divide in Sindh, it's old Wacko.

The Punjab Assembly, in retort, decided that no, they should assume most-ridiculous status in Pakistan. And so this happened:

LAHORE: Government representatives and leaders of the opposition exchanged blows in Punjab Assembly hall when the assembly session was underway here on Monday.

According to Geo News, PML-Q’s PA member Bushra Gardezi waved a banner against Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif which led to the brawl as the Provincial Minister Prisons Abdul Ghafoor took the banner away from her and made some abusive remarks.

Chaudhry Abdul Ghafoor then threw budget proposal scripts at the female opposition leaders which further contributed to the heated environment and the opposition and govt leaders burst into a physical fight.

Women leaders of PML-Q threw back the books at Chaudhry Ghafoor and government leaders.

The opposition staged a walk out from the session in protest of the incident. Later, leader of the Unification Bloc, Atta Manika also walked out.

Opposition leader Chaudhry Zaheeruddin talking to media said it is no longer possible to sit here due to the inappropriate attitude adopted by the government leaders.

As with most things in Pakistan, Punjab wins this round, but the war is surely not over just yet.

When Academics Get Catty (Healthcare Edition)

Henry Kissinger is said to have once opined that "academic debates are so bitter because the stakes are so low". I'm not exactly endorsing that view -- wouldn't say much about my career choice, would it? -- but I did think of that quote today, because of this debate:

Greg Mankiw: Blah blah blah health care blah blah blah market best.

Paul Krugman: Meoooww.

Greg Mankiw: Meeeeeoooooowwwwwww.

Ok, ok, that's not actually what they said. But it wasn't far off.

Here's what actually transpired:

Mankiw:

If the government has a dominant role in buying the services of doctors and other health care providers, it can force prices down. Once the government is virtually the only game in town, health care providers will have little choice but to take whatever they can get. It is no wonder that the American Medical Association opposes the public option.

To be sure, squeezing suppliers would have unpleasant side effects. Over time, society would end up with fewer doctors and other health care workers. The reduced quantity of services would somehow need to be rationed among competing demands. Such rationing is unlikely to work well.

FAIRNESS is in the eye of the beholder, but nothing about a government-run health care system strikes me as fair. Squeezing providers would save the rest of us money, but so would a special tax levied only on health care workers, and that is manifestly inequitable.

In the end, it would be a mistake to expect too much from health insurance reform. A competitive system of private insurers, lightly regulated to ensure that the market works well, would offer Americans the best health care at the best prices.

Krugman's response:

Both George Will and Greg Mankiw basically argue that we don’t need a government role because we can trust the market to work — hey, we do it for groceries, right?

Um, economists have known for 45 years — ever since Kenneth Arrow’s seminal paper — that the standard competitive market model just doesn’t work for health care: adverse selection and moral hazard are so central to the enterprise that nobody, nobody expects free-market principles to be enough. To act all wide-eyed and innocent about these problems at this late date is either remarkably ignorant or simply disingenuous.

And Mankiw's final word:

On the issue of tone, I again think I understand Paul's point of view. He likely believes that civility is overrated. He seems to think that in the blogosphere, and perhaps in the public debate more generally, you score points simply by insulting your intellectual adversaries. Sadly, I am afraid he may be right.

Right-o. My personal view on Krugman is: great economist, excellent writer, kind of a douche. His commentary during last year's Democratic primaries, when he blindly supported everything Hillary did and said, really got my goat. My personal view on Mankiw is: anyone who thinks the market can provide healthcare adequately in an advanced economy can't possibly be thinking right and being honest at the same time. The healthcare system in America is so broken, it's actually quite funny.

Anyway, here's good ol' Nate Silver adjudicating the dispute.

Good News: Pakistan Moving Down Failed States Rankings (Updated Below)

To quote Borat, wow wow wee waa. After a move to number nine last year, we've slipped to tenth, as Guinea and the Central African Republic put in sterling performances to displace us. Brilliant! At this rate, we will be Denmark in 2167.

Yes, yes, these rankings don't really mean anything, but is anyone going to deny they're fun as hell to look at?

UPDATE: Here's the link for the full rankings, complete with an interactive map and everything. A commenter wondered how we're above (below?) Haiti. I don't know about Haiti, but I'm wondering how the hell we're seven spots above (below?) North Korea and a full thirteen spots above (below?) Niger. Niger!

Puerile SMS Of The Day

Dhoni: Mama aaj app nay mujhay plate mai chai kiyun di?

Dhoni Ki Mama: Kyun kay Cup tho tumhare baap lay gaye.

Pakistan Zindabad!

(Courtesy: SM)

Photograph Of The Day

For the westerners out there, it says "sub-inspector Ameer Ali, Sindh police". And no, before you ask, that's not what a cop car looks like in Pakistan.


Photo credit: Raja Islam/Karachi Metblogs.

How You Know You Have Bourgeois Friends

You know how Jeff Foxworthy has his "You might be a redneck if..." routine? Well, I couldn't help but think of that when I got this email from a friend, as part of a long chain:

also, i've been trying to called julius meinl and they are

just not answering their phones! i think they probably just have a house blend, which would be great, or whatever they use at the neue gallery (pronounced nu-ya) in ny. ground for a french press, so coarse rather than fine. thank you so so so so mcuh!! i cant wait to drink this coffee!

In order to reassert my of-the-people street cred, I would like to make the following points:

1. I don't even fucking drink coffee.
2. The only "Julius" I'm familiar with is Caesar (and Erving, I suppose).
3. The words "Neue" (pronounced nu-ya, remember), "french press" and "coarse rather than fine" mean nothing to me. To me coffee can either be black or with cream, sugar or without.

How to Embarrass a Cricket Team

I wonder how many Pakistan players would have turned down the money that is being thrown at them by the government if they knew they had to sit through this (via Well Pitched)

0:38: Misbah is congratulated for his rear-guard efforts, which would be true if this was 2007.

1:10: Well Pitched has a great description of Shoaib Malik's intorduction

Its interesting to note what the speaker has to say about Shoaib Malik. He says that Malik's full support to the captain that replaced him is thought of as a change in the camp's culture.

Duly implying that no former captains have supported their successors.

1:52: Shahid Afridi is "well-sung". Either the speaker knows something about Afridi's vocal talents that we are not privy to, or he meant "on-song".

2:37: Do you really want to begin the introduction for Akmal by referring to him as "dimunitive."

3:50: Salman Butt is one of the "few younger younger players confident when expressing himself." Yeah, I can't think of anything positive to say about him either. What I love about these descriptions is how brutally honest they are.

4:22 Poor Rao Iftikhar Anjum. What do you say about a guy who didn't get a single game?

5:02 Fawad Alam, "unlike most of his contemporaries is a brilliant fielder." Hahahha. More honesty.

6:50: Uh, he's meant to praise Mohammed Aamir not Tilkeratne Dilshan.

7:11: And the best one yet. Shahzeb Hasan is described as "ungainly."

7:32: Yasir Arafat "ironically..had fitness problems during the World Cup." Are they admitting we faked his injury so we could fly in Razzaq?

9:44. Restraint from Zardari. This is the only mention of Benazir in his speech.

Excerpt Of The Day: Bathroom Diplomacy To Save A Country

I'm currently doing some research on ethnic-centered independence movements for my dissertation, and quite naturally, the case study of East Pakistan/Bangladesh is crucial for the study. I plan on doing a post on the various historical interpretations of that event maybe next week, but today I wanted to highlight one quite amazing passage from War and Secession: Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh by Richard Sisson and Leo E. Rose.

To set the stage for you, we're basically just around the corner from formal civil war breaking out at the end of March 1971. The crisis -- born of decades of political, economic, social, and cultural mistreatment of East Pakistan at the hands of the West Pakistan establishment, culminating in the election results of 1970 being ignored by Yahya's military regime and Bhutto's PPP -- has reached a boiling point. Yahya has postponed the convening of the National Assembly, a meeting which Bhutto has barred all PPP representatives from even attending (the famous "break your legs" line). East Pakistan has erupted, and law and order has broken down. The central authorities in Bengal have lost control of events on the ground.

Under these circumstances, Yahya has gone to Dhaka for one last throw of the dice. He is meeting with Mujib ur Rehman, the leader of the Awami League, the democratically elected most powerful party in Pakistan. Take it away, Messrs Sisson and Rose:

Negotiations between the government and the Awami League began the following day, 16 March. After an early morning meeting with his senior colleagues, Mujib arrived at the President's House in a white car flying a black flag that symbolized the public's mourning for those who had died under army and police fire after the postponement of the National Assembly. The first decision to be made was where the two leaders were to confer. Mujib strongly objected to meeting in the drawing room for fear that it might be bugged and insisted that Yahya and he hold their discussions in a room that was more private and secure. After some deliberation, and with Mujib's concurrence, the president ordered two chairs brought to the bathroom off the main bedroom of the President's House. It was there that the final negotiations to save Pakistan began.

All I've got written in the margins next to this paragraph is the word "nice".

Breaking News: Michael Jackson Is Dead (Updated Below)

Holy shit. Do you guys believe this?

UPDATE: You know who I feel really bad for? Farah Fawcett and her family. Normally when a public figure as important/popular/seminal as Fawcett dies, there are tributes and celebrations to their life and career. Right now, no one gives a rat's ass.

UPDATE II: A friend and I were discussing this: whose death would be/is bigger news: Michael Jackson's or Bono's? We both agreed on the choice, but I won't tell you which one we agreed upon. What do you guys think?

UPDATE III: Another question for you guys. What is the list of all people -- not just entertainers -- whose natural death (i.e. no assassinations or murders allowed) would be bigger than Michael Jackson's death? Keep in mind that his passing basically caused the internet to slow down. Let me say that again -- the internet slowed down. Not one website. The entire bloody thing. Here's my list, in no particular order:

1. Barack Obama
2. Nelson Mandela
3. George W. Bush
4. Michael Jordan

People who I'm split on but sort of leaning toward Michael Jackson:

1. Paul McCartney
2. Madonna
3. Dalai Lama
4. Pele

I'm sure I'm leaving off some people. Thoughts?

Quote of the Day

Either Shoaib Malik has fundamentally misunderstood the job of a psychologist or he is trying to channel the tongue-in-cheek statements of Younus Khan. Either way, it's a great quote:

I think those sessions helped as the doctor used the power of hypnotism to drill it into our minds that we were going to England to become the World Twenty20 champions.

Nicolas Sarkozy Misunderstands Secularism And Freedom

I'm sure a number of you heard about this, but in case you didn't, here's what French President Nicolas Sarkozy said a couple of days ago:

In a speech at the Palace of Versailles, Mr Sarkozy said that the head-to-toe Islamic garment for women was not a symbol of religion but a sign of subservience for women.

"The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience," he told members of both parliamentary houses gathered for his speech.

He added: "It will not be welcome on the territory of the French republic."

Why the hell not? What business is it of Sarkozy's, or really anyone's, what a woman chooses to wear? As long as she is not physically or mentally abused or threatened into wearing it -- and my guess is many Muslim women who wear it in the West aren't abused or threatened -- then who the hell cares? How is it any of Sarkozy's or the state's business?

People like Sarkozy make life very difficult for people like me. When I argue for a secular system of governance in Pakistan (a pipe dream, I know, but humor me for a bit), I take care to mention that secularism is not the absence of religion from society. It is merely the politico-legal separation of religion and state, so that (a) everyone is free to practice their religion however they choose without interference from the state, and (b) no one is impelled to practice a certain type of religion as a requirement as a citizen.

When I am met with the argument that "Pakistan will never be secular because we are a religious people" I am at a loss for words because the second part of the statement is a non-sequitur. You can be religious and secular at the same time. There is no contradiction there. You can pray five times a day, grow a beard to your navel (if you're a man), cover yourself in a burqa or niqab (if you're a woman) and still live in a secular society. The two concepts are not opposed. I can't emphasize this point enough.

Unfortunately, the mistake many religious people make in Pakistan in delegitimizing secularism is the exact same mistake people like Sarkozy make: they think of secularism as the absence of religion, when it is anything but. This irony is both tragic and comical. Essentially, when I scream my head off at mullah types in Pakistan that they should mind their own goddamn business if a woman chooses to wear a tank top and jeans, and when I shake my head at Sarkozy types and ask that they mind their own goddamn business if a woman chooses to wear a burqa, I am arguing against ideological bedfellows, both totalitarians in their own way.

Shot of the Day

Since there isn't much too talk about in the early days of Wimbledon, other than Roger Federer's outfit, which the Guardian says make him look like an ice cream vendor, I thought I would just link to Federer's best shot of the day from Wimbledon. This one is from his first round match on Monday. He had a couple of unbelievable shots today too and as soon as they go up YouTube, I'll post them.

Watch and admire:

How To Make Bill O'Reilly Look Sane

Come on his show and explain the socialist conspiracy using a dollhouse. (via Gawker)

Is International Cricket Divided Into The Haves And Have-Nots?

There has been some interesting discussion prompted by my post-World Cup post. In both comments and an email exchange with a friend, there was issue taken with the following passage:

Without Pakistan, the world of cricket was on the verge of a becoming a super exclusive super-club of Australia, India, England and South Africa -- who play each other pretty much twice as much as they do against everyone else. This was a victory for the underdogs, the acned and pimpled kids who never get invited to the cool-kids parties, the ones who are socially awkward and can never get the hot girls (even those that claim to like the eccentric types). This was a victory for Sri Lanka and New Zealand too, ironic since we knocked them both out, because they are in the same position we are: an afterthought in the increasingly exclusivist cricketing hierarchy.

Before you read the rest of this post, it might be instructive to go and read a couple of the critiques made of that point in the comments. Go on, I'll wait.

Using that discussion as a background, I want to answer three questions. First, is it true that international cricket is divided into an upper class and a lower class, where the upper class plays other members of the upper class a lot more than they do members of the lower class? Second, if it is true, then why is it true? Third, if it is true, then are the reasons for it being true fair, just and smart? Let's deal with each in step, in separate blog posts. Today's question is:

Is there an elite in cricket?

Let me be more concrete with what I mean by this question. It's obviously not the case that Australia, England, India and South Africa don't play anyone else in international cricket. The question to consider is: is there a noticeable bias in scheduling that leads those four teams to play each other significantly more than proportionately? Remember, perfect proportionality would dictate that every team plays every other team equally, and since there are 10 international test sides (I'm including Zimbabwe for simplicity's sake), it would mean that we should ideally expect every team to play every other team 11.11% of the time. Obviously, this won't be true to the decimal point, but how far, if it all, do the actual data diverge from the null hypothesis?

To answer that question, I used Cricinfo's statsguru to collect data on all test cricket played from January 1, 2000 to the present. I also collapsed Bangladesh and Zimbabwe into one category, so for the purposes of this analysis, BanZim is one team. In my view, this corrects for the fact that both teams really do represent the sisters of the poor, so if we combine the two, we get something approaching a "real" test team in terms of scheduling. Of course, I was then forced to assume that Zimbabwe and Bangaldesh don't play against each other, but this is no big deal, because I am not really interested in them in the first place.

Here is what I found:

You can click on the picture for a larger view. The way to read the table is from left to right. So looking at Australia's row first, you see that since January 1, 2000 they played 6 tests against BanZim, 20 against England, 20 against India and so on.

Immediately, a problem with the hypothesis manifests itself, that is, the so-called big four (Aus, Eng, Ind, SA) simply play more cricket than everyone else. This might prove to be problematic for the hypothesis. Recall that I hypothesized that the big four pick and choose to play each other more than proportionately. But could it be the case that instead of playing less than proportionate cricket against the big four, it's simply a matter of the other teams playing less cricket in total? Which of these possibilities is closer to the truth? Let us investigate.

The chart below is basically drawn from the same data. There are a couple of points to make about it, but first have a quick look at it. Again, you can click on the image for a larger view.


When you break down all the teams' big four tests vs. everyone else tests, an interesting picture emerges. Basically, except for BanZim and Sri Lanka, everyone plays more cricket against the big four than the others. This is clear from the "positive difference" column, which is basically the difference in rate of playing big four teams vs. the rate of playing everyone else. Only BanZim and Sri Lanka have negative signs in front of this number. So, at first blush, this spells a little bit of trouble for the central hypothesis, because it suggests that the big four aren't the only ones treating themselves better than everyone else; everyone is treating the big four better than everyone else. We can call this the Uncle Tom/babu explanation.

I would submit, however, that the Uncle Tom/babu explanation does not disprove my hypothesis. Why? Simple: because it could be the case that even if everyone treats the big four better than everyone else, members of the big treat each other even better. This is where the last two columns of chart 2 come in.

The average level of "treating the big four better than everyone else" is 0.333; put differently, this means all international teams are will play 0.333 more tests against any one member of the big four in any given year vs. any non-member of the big four. It is against this baseline that we can truly judge levels of selectiveness. That is basically what the last column is about -- it is the quantity of "positive difference" less the quantity of "average positive difference".

When we analyze those numbers, an interesting picture emerges. Basically, Australia are enormously selective with an astounding "real difference" of 0.71. They really, really hate playing against non-big boys. At the other end of the spectrum is, predictably, BanZim with a "real difference" of -0.833. They consistently get screwed by the schedule-makers, even if you try and cheat the system by making two teams into one.

England and South Africa have negligble real differences. So they are basically average teams with respect to scheduling; they play the big boys more, yes, but no more than everyone else. Pakistan and Sri Lanka are fairly badly screwed -- they are definitely marginalized, for a variety of reasons including security (though Sri Lanka haven't really had major problems hosting cricket this decade, it should be noted).

India is fairly selective too, particularly against Sri Lanka and New Zealand (a paltry nine and seven tests respectively this decade).

The real shocker from these data is the West Indies. Their real difference is off the charts, second only to Australia. It appears that the big four should really have the West Indies in place of England, whose real difference is actually negative. I think this outlier is almost entirely due to the ridiculous amount of cricket England and the Windies have played against each other this decade -- they have played 24 tests between themselves, which is more than any other dyad (even more than immensely popular ones like Aus-Eng and Aus-Ind). So if we were to replace England as a member of the big four with the Windies, I would be willing to bet their real difference drops close to 0, because the only thing bringing up their "selective" rating is their schedule against England. Conversely, England's selective rating would shoot up, because they only thing keeping them out of the upper class is their fixture list against the Windies (I would run the data on this but I'm tired of Excel -- one of you is welcome to try and it let me know in the comments).

So given these data, we can reach the following tentative conclusions:

1. There is an elite in test cricket, but it's not the big four, it's the big two: Australia and India. These two teams really, really like scheduling cricket against other marketable teams and really, really hate scheduling cricket against the non-marketable teams.

2. Of the better teams in international cricket (i.e. everyone but BanZim), Pakistan and Sri Lanka are the teams most badly screwed. The reasons for this will be dealt with in another post, but let me just say this right now: it's not just security. Not in my opinion, anyway.

3. There is a broad middle class, consisting of England (who, on the basis of these numbers, have been excellent about keeping commitments against less marketable teams), New Zealand, West Indies, and South Africa.

Thoughts? Have I gone about this completely the wrong way? Do you find the data convincing? Could there better crude measures of this than the ones I have employed?

Why the Pointless UN Investigation into Benazir's Murder is Going Ahead

It has now been 18 months since Benazir Bhutto was assassinated and we can finally solve that vexing 'sunroof theory' once and for all. That's the only conclusion I could draw from reading this story that a UN team, requested by the Pakistani government to investigate Benazir's murder, is about to start work.

I doubt there are very few non-PPP people who dispute that this exercise is a colossal waste of Rs 200 million. But it could be justified if the purpose of the UN commission was to prove beyond any reasonable doubt who killed Benazir. That is not the case:

"The duty of determining criminal responsibility of the perpetrators of the assassination remains with the Pakistani authorities," said a U.N. statement released Saturday.

The mandate given to the UN team seems no different than that under which the Scotland Yard operated: find out how Benazir was murdered but no need to figure out who was responsible. This is a needless farce and I think the 'cult of Benazir' is responsible for its continuation.

In the weeks after Benazir's assasination, passions were undoubtedly ignited and trust in the government was so low and their performance in the aftermath - symbolized by the 'sunroof' press conference - so shambolic that no one even believed a single word uttered by them. Zardari further inflamed the masses by referencing the PML-Q as the 'Qaatil' League. In that climate, it made for good politics when Zardari rejected the government-invited investigation by the Scotland Yard and asked the UN to step in.

Now, the rationale for the UN to involve itself has dissapeared. There is no physical evidence for them to examine - that was washed away minutes after the assassination. If there was any evidence that the previous government was hiding, well, that government has been out of power for a long time and many of its principals are no longer in the country.

Yet, the UN investigation continues, I think, because Zardari would feel that he is somehow disrespecting the memory of Benazir if he called it off. She has now been ascribed such supernatural powers by the PPP that the very fact that the T20 final was played on her birthday guarantueed our victory (according to Rehman Malik in a statement he made on TV). According to this line of thinking, her importance to Pakistan is on a par or surpasses that of Jinnah, as this photograph of the President's House shows. The normal rules don't apply to Benazir, which is why Bilalwal Bhutto Zardari, in a speech he gave at his mother's birth anniversary, made the baffling claim that filing a First Information Report after Benazir's assassination would have been an insult to her memory.

When this is how you perceive Benazir what's the harm in chucking away another Rs 200 million?

Buffy Slays Edward Cullen

I doubt the Rs 5 readership includes many 15-year-old girls, but if there are any lurking around, they may want to look away just about now.

Any women readers in their mid to late twenties, annoyed by the Twilight mania of their younger sisters and tired of explaining how Buffy was the far superior, if less popular, pop culture phenomena should immediately watch this Buffy Summers/Edward Cullen mashup (via James Wolcott). This should leave no doubt that Buffy would take about five seconds to ram a stake through Cullen's heart, without even feeling the need to stop riffing with Willow and chiding Zander for his stupidity. Or, as Walcott puts it:

One of the comic bonuses of this mashup is how gulpily mannered Robert Pattison looks and sounds compared to the springy, melodic zing of Sarah Michelle Gellar. Drowning in his own beauty, he hems and haws like James Dean asking the correct time because in his world there are no watches to bind such delicate wrists.

And if there are any techical whizzes with a fondness for vampire tales reading this, do you think you could whip up an Angel/Cullen mashup? Angel may be the greatest vamp ever created (Blair from Gossip Girl doesn't count) with Spike a close second.

Time To Get Rid Of 'Breaking News'

Pakistani news channels have an affinity for breaking news tickers that is beyond ridiculous. It is 12.47 a.m. and ARY News is breaking the news on its flashy news ticker:

"President Zardari has telephone conversation with Angelina Jolie."

Who cares?

The same channel has shown a clip of Bilawal B. Zardari giving a speech at a congregation commemorating Benazir's birthday. He's trying really hard to sound impassioned and fiery, he comes out looking really awkward; poor guy has huge shoes to fill and just doesn't seem to have the qualities that made his mother and grandfather so successful.

The channel is now interviewing MoYo and he's trying his best not to sound like a 'patriot' rather than a greedy moron, I'm not too sure that he succeeds.

Hey, Obama, Did You Learn How To Say "Pander" In Urdu Too?

You've got to love Barry O. Check out this in-depth interview of the US president by Dawn, the first interview by a Pakistani news organization of an American president. As usual, he strikes all the right chords, and is respectful and conciliatory and careful in his language. But then there's this:

‘I would love to visit. As you know, I had Pakistani roommates in college who were very close friends of mine. I went to visit them when I was still in college; was in Karachi and went to Hyderabad. Their mothers taught me to cook,’ said Mr Obama.

‘What can you cook?’

‘Oh, keema … daal … You name it, I can cook it. And so I have a great affinity for Pakistani culture and the great Urdu poets.’

‘You read Urdu poetry?’

‘Absolutely. So my hope is that I’m going to have an opportunity at some point to visit Pakistan,’ said Mr Obama.

First of all, any idiot can cook daal -- hell, even I manage to do it, and let me tell you, I'm an awful cook (I once tried to cook chicken karahi and it ended up looking like, no joke, Chinese stir fry).

Second, please stop. Enough already. We get it. You respect everyone. You can connect with everyone. Your melange of childhood and adolescent experiences that bring together issues of race, class, education, nationalism, religion, indeed the meaning of life itself -- we get it: you understand everything at a deeper level. Stop making us feel like lesser beings all the time. And stop pandering, it's getting annoying.

Inane Headline Of The Day: World Cup Edition

From the Press Trust of India as published in the Hindu:

"T20 triumph a blessing in disguise for Pakistan cricket"

Who the hell is disguising this blessing? Has to be Imran Khan.

A Triumph Against The Odds -- And Against The Cricketing Establishment Too

On the cricket field, there can be no doubt how this World Cup victory compares to the one in 1992: it doesn't, really. The ODI World Cup in 1992 really, really meant something, while T20 cricket is still treated as somewhat of a sideshow in international cricket.

Compare the teams, too: the talismen of the teams were Wasim Akram and Shahid Afridi respectively -- one is among the twenty greatest cricketers of all time, and one has so barely scratched the surface of his talent that it is criminal. Compare the batting: Miandad, Imran, Inzi and Malik against Younis, Misbah, Afridi and Malik (the other one). No contest. The bowling? Aaqib Javed against Abdul Razzaq? Mushtaq Ahmed against Saeed Ajmal? Wasim Akram against Umar Gul? Please.

And yet this victory is more liberating. Why? Because it represents more than just sporting accomplishment. Because it has freed Pakistan cricket and its followers from the shackles and chains that have been imposed on us by the ICC, the Taliban, western boards, incompetent security and board officials in Pakistan, and everyone else that has wittingly and unwittingly ensured that Pakistan will not see international cricket within its borders for the foreseeable future. Because Pakistan, which was already isolated as a cricketing destination, was at considerable risk of being isolated as a cricketing nation. Because we have loudly and unequivocally announced to the world: Hey! We still matter!

We have shown that international cricket needs a thriving Pakistan team. To his eternal credit, Sanjay Manjrekar -- one of the world's most underrated and incisive commentators and analysts -- realized this, and said so as much in the turnaround-game against New Zealand. Without Pakistan, the world of cricket was on the verge of a becoming a super exclusive super-club of Australia, India, England and South Africa -- who play each other pretty much twice as much as they do against everyone else. This was a victory for the underdogs, the acned and pimpled kids who never get invited to the cool-kids parties, the ones who are socially awkward and can never get the hot girls (even those that claim to like the eccentric types). This was a victory for Sri Lanka and New Zealand too, ironic since we knocked them both out, because they are in the same position we are: an afterthought in the increasingly exclusivist cricketing hierarchy.

And what a victory it was. The whole "Pakistan win with their usual unpredictability and glorious unknowability" angle is valid but seriously overblown. Pakistan have easily been the world's best T20 international team since the format's inception. Is it really that much of a surprise that we won? Our players have grown up playing a format remarkably similar -- galli/mohalla cricket, intensely competitive games of 10-15 overs each on average, played over and over and over again well into the night, especially in Ramadan, games which place a premium on intelligence, skill, and ingenuity. We have the heady, sensible batsmen who don't get fazed (Younis, Malik, Misbah), bowlers who can bowl dot balls through variations and accuracy (Gul, Afridi, Ajmal) and the all-important wildcards (Akmal, Afridi with the bat).

The only people for whom our T20 skills were a surprise were the ones who don't actually pay attention to us, i.e. every non-Pakistani in the world. In that respect, our IPL boycott/unofficial ban (depending on which version of the story you believe) was the best thing that could have happened to us. The idea that the IPL was a cause of fatigue and thus the exit of teams like Australia and India is nonsense -- you don't get tired playing cricket for three and a half hours when you've been playing seven hour cricket your whole life.

But one advantage of not playing in the IPL that was true was that we were completely unheralded going in. Think about how ridiculous it was to hear foreign commentators being surprised at Gully's bowling at the death or Afridi's strangling of the middle overs. They simply didn't know. And why would they? What was perfectly obvious to us was simply unknowable to them, because nobody plays us or pays us attention.

That said, we did make it immensely difficult for ourselves with our abject failures against England and Sri Lanka earlier in the tournament. But even those losses were due to rust (the fielding against England would make school-level coaches barf) and silly selection (Salman Butt? really?) rather than some fundamental problems with our cricket.

So while it is fair to say no one really expected us to win, no one really expected us to fail to contend at all either. Our victory didn't come from nowhere, it just came from somewhere unlikely. While some of our strenghts could not have been foreseen -- Afridi remembering how to bat, anyone? -- some of our weaknesses (Misbah's underwhelming form) could just as much be written off as unexpected. In short, we were a prototypical cup-winning team: we had all the ingredients for success, and were one of three or four legitimate contenders, and we caught fire at the right time, and that was the end of that. Italy in 2006, Australia in 1999, the Lakers in 2001 -- all are examples of peaking at the right time, even when success never looked likely early on. Such is life.

We should all thank this team, not just because of the success they have allowed us to share in, not just because they have guaranteed that we won't be pushed around on the international stage for the foreseeable future, but also because they are so damn likeable. With the charismatic and disarmingly honest Younis as captain, with the cancerous Shoaib Akhtar jettisoned, with youthful exuberance in the form of Aamer, Ajmal and Shahzaib, and with unfair outcome upon unfair outcome tripping us up, people couldn't help but like us. But to all those people who avoided us like we were lepers, who didn't want to tour us for personal reasons masked in the language of security, who scheduled us for bullshit tours as run-ups to main events, who brushed us aside and questioned our place in the international cricketing fraternity, who almost ensured that cricket died in Pakistan, I just have one question:

How do you like us now, bitches?

Live Blogging T20 World Cup Final: Pakistan Vs. Sri Lanka At Lords

Hello and welcome to Rs.5's coverage of the T20 World Cup final between Pakistan and Sri Lanka. As always, all times are local (i.e. Chicago).

8:34 a.m. Man, it's early. I was up not four hours ago. Let's get the dodgy feed up and running.

8:35 a.m. Um, ok. I'm staring at a screen with the DirecTV logo and Nelly Furtado blaring away. I'm assuming that the coverage will switch over. Soon.

8:36 a.m. Breaking news: U2's "The Sweetest Thing" is now playing.

8:39 a.m. I don't know if I'm completely awake because the radio play over seems to be talking about "toilet twinning", the country of Burundi and something about "adopting a commode". No, I'm most definitely still asleep.

8:41 a.m. While we're waiting, check out some cricket videos I posted that should get you pumped up for the final.

8:43 a.m. I'm giving myself five more minutes before pressing the panic button.

8:50 a.m. Give me a couple, will you?

8:51 a.m. Ah, excellent. Everything is as should be. Anyways, these are the teams that are lining up. For Pakistan, it's Shahzaib, Akmal, Razzaq, Younis, Misbah, Malik, Afridi, Fawad, Aamer, Gul, and Ajmal. For Sri Lanka, it's Jayasuriya, Dilshan, Sangakkara, Jayawardene, Silva, Mubarak, Mathews, Udana, Malinga, Murali, and Mendis. Sri Lanka have won the toss and chosen to bat. Basically, we've already lost.

8:56 a.m. These Sri Lankan dudes need to drop the sixth fashion sense and drop the shades for their national anthem. So goddamn disrespectful.

8:57 a.m. God, Razzaq even does the anthem lazily. And what's wrong with Shoaib Malik's hair? Did he have a Cameron Diaz in "There's Something About Mary" episode?

8:58 a.m. Alright, we're all set here. I suppose if you're looking for omens, the last time Pakistan were playing a final at Lords...well, let me not finish that sentence.

8:59 a.m. Ian Bishop: "This is a people's final, if ever there was one." I'm getting kind of tired of this whole political turmoil angle to the final, to be honest. I get it. Leave me alone and let me watch the cricket.

9:00 a.m. Dilshan and Jayasuriya to open. Aamer with the first over.

9:00 a.m. Bouncer to start. Yeah, Aamer. Yeah.

9:01 a.m. Another short and pacy delivery, on target.

9:02 a.m. And another. "Definitely a plan there," says Waz, helpfully.

9:02 a.m. And another. Why don't I just tell you when it's not a short ball?

9:03 a.m. YEAH! Aamer gets Dilshan -- the tournament's batting star. Unbelievable start here! Aamer keeps it short, Dilshan tries to scoop it, doesn't get all of it, and Shahzaib takes a good running catch at short fine. That was a good catch under pressure. Sri Lanka in a spot of bother here.

9:04 a.m. Mubarak in.

9:05 a.m. Wicket maiden. "Perfect start for the Pakistan team," Waz tells us. He's pumped too, Waz.

9:06 a.m. And Sri Lanka are off with a legbye off Razzaq's first ball.

9:06 a.m. Ooooh. Jayasuriya edges Razzaq through a vacant second slip region. It's all happening. Two slips now for Mubarak.

9:07 a.m. And another! Sri Lanka in disarray here. Mubarak skies Razzaq trying to smack him through a light leg side field, catches a leading edge, and it's a safe catch from Shahzaib for the second time in a day. Wow, this is a real Pakistan circa 99 start from Sri Lanka here. 2-2 in 1.3. Sangakkara in.

9:09 a.m. Younis has two slips in for Jayasuriya too. The crowd is buzzing.

9:10 a.m. And Sri Lanka have their first boundary, as Jayasuriya flays Razzaq through the leg side. Massive inside edge, but there's just two fielders on the leg side. Wow, what a start. 8-2 after two.

9:11 a.m. Aamer really steaming in here. Nearly 90mph, and just back of a length. Hasn't given a run yet in his eight deliveries.

9:12 a.m. Arrghh. Too short, and Sangakkara short-arm jabs it for four.

9:13 a.m. And now through the covers. What a player Sangakkara is. You guys know he's a lawyer in his spare time, right? Anyway, we need him early. Like preferably now.

9:14 a.m. Just the two boundaries off the over, then. 16-2 after three. This is the key partnership for me.

9:15 a.m. Hah! Jayasuriya thinks its 1996, nonchalantly hoiking Razzaq over deep square for six and then flicking him to fine leg for four. How do you flick someone to fine leg from outside off stump?

9:17 a.m. Waz doesn't like the way Razzaq is running in. That makes 170 million of us, Waz.

9:18 a.m. Hahahaha. How lame is Razzaq? Jayasuriya plays on to his stumps, but Razzaq can't even celebrate properly, falling down before it even gets underway. Dork. Big wicket though. 26-3 in 3.5, and Jayawardene in.

9:20 a.m. And it stays at 26-3, with four overs gone.

9:20 a.m. Goddamn Shahzaib is slow. That shouldn't have been two. I love when our young guys can't field for shit.

9:24 a.m. Waz and Bishop have a discussion about how young Aamer is, and Bish asks Waz how old he was when he was started. "I was the same, seventeen, seventeen and a half." He neglects to mention this is in "Pakistan" years -- different metric for us. Anyway, 31-3 after five after an excellent over from Aamer.

9:26 a.m. Gone! One more! Bloody hell, Razzaq gets another! What's going on here? Jayawardene looks like he's giving catching practice to Misbah at a widish first slip, and Sri Lanka are in ALL sorts of trouble here. Razzaq, of all people, has wreaked havoc with three wickets. Silva in.

9:28 a.m. And a quiet end to over, 34-4 after the end of the power play. Afridi into the attack.

9:31 a.m. By the way, it's a final, so what counts as a "good" score changes to about 80% of the normal estimates. Sri Lanka will be able to defend anything in the 140 range, I think. That's probably what Sangakkara is thinking anyway. He's the key now, to state the obvious. Anyway, five from Afridi's first over, and it's 39-4 after seven. Ajmal into the attack from the other end.

9:37 a.m. Sorry guys, a couple of technical issues here. Anyway, short and sweet summary of the last couple of overs: spinners keeping it tight. Surprising, right?

9:38 a.m. 46-4 after nine. Afridi's given away 7 runs in two overs. Again, before the Pakistani fans out there get too excited, remember what I said earlier: you don't need a normal good score in a final. And if you don't believe me, ask England from 1992 or Australia from 1996. Ajmal taken off for Malik, by the way. Real brain-teaser, that one. Younis has done this a couple of times in the tournament: taken Ajmal off after one over, and giving Malik a go.

9:40 a.m. "They've got a lot of work to do here, Sri Lanka," says David Lloyd. Not if we keep fielding like this. We're leaking singles in the circle, and don't do too great a job on the boundary either.

9:42 a.m. I don't even know what language Akmal is speaking anymore. Anyway, it's 54-4 after ten. This pitch is taking spin, which again should be cause for consternation for us, what with Mendis and Murali in the wings.

9:43 a.m. Haha. Afridi appeals for an LBW and ends up next to the batsmen. Spirit of a quick bowler in a spinner's body, Afridi. Sangakkara cuts him for four in front of point before under-edging him to the fine leg fence. Some momentum here for Sri Lanka.

9:45 a.m. 65-4 after eleven. They've scored 19 in the last two overs. Gully into the attack. Key phase this.

9:49 a.m. YES! Gully gets a breakthrough just as Sri Lanka were looking to get off to a gallop. Silva pulls Gully, it gets too big on him, high up on the bat, and straight to Ajmal at midwicket. Critical wicket at a critical juncture, and Sri Lanka are 67-5 in 11.3. Gully, by the way, is fucking awesome. Udana in.

9:51 a.m. Slip in. Yeah, Younis. Yeah.

9:51 a.m. Some away swing for Gul. What a bowler.

9:52 a.m. Udana doesn't look like even touching Gul, and the over ends with a couple of whishes. 67-5 after twelve. How many do you think Younis will give him? I say one more, and then bring him back at the end. Unless he gets a wicket in the next over.

9:53 a.m. Sangakkara is just biding his time here. Moved on to 33, basically giving him half of Sri Lanka's score. "Key wicket" would be a negligently gross understatement.

9:54 a.m. And another, this one from Afridi. Udana looked completely out of sorts, it must be said. Afridi gets him with the drift, as he plays all around it. What a way to end another superb spell (1-20 in four). He just stands there and points up, relishing the spotlight. 70-6 after thirteen. What a performance this has been from Pakistan. Mathews in.

9:57 a.m. It was just the one over for Gul, as Ajmal back into the attack. "Everywhere you look there's a wicket-taker," says Nass.

9:58 a.m. I see that Saeed Ajmal has perfected his "Listen, Akmal, will you just shut the fuck up and let me bowl?" look. Record time too, it took Dani a couple of years to master that one. Anyway, it's 74-6 after another quiet over from Ajmal; fourteen gone.

10:00 a.m. Gul replaces Afridi. Slip in for Mathews.

10:00 a.m. Younis has six players in the circle. In the 15th over of a T20 game. What. A. Hero.

10:02 a.m. Keeping the slip in for Sangakkara. What. A. Hero. Squared.

10:02 a.m. No yorkers yet, just keeping it back of a length outside off. As Nass says, why bother with the yorkers just yet?

10:05 a.m. Excellent over from Gully. Fast and accurate. Pretty simple, really. 79-6 after fifteen. Ajmal to continue from the other end.

10:06 a.m. Ian Chappell thinks 120 will be a good total to bowl at. I'm inclined to agree with him, but they'll have to bat really well to get eight an over against our attack from here.

10:08 a.m. Three twos in a row. Aaarrgh.

10:09 a.m. 88-6 after sixteen, nine from that over. Importantly, Sangakkara retains the strike with a single off the sixth ball. Very clever player, Sangakkara. By the way, he has WELL over half of Sri Lanka's score (46/88).

10:10 a.m. And now he clips Gul over midwicket for four to bring up his fifty. Captain's innings and all that.

10:12 a.m. Two more. Why the hell isn't Gully bowling yorkers? Seven off the first three balls of this over. Dangerous times.

10:15 a.m. An expensive over, to put it mildly. 15 off the over, and Sri Lanka are suddenly looking pretty good. 103-6, with three overs to go. Gully didn't bowl a single yorker in that over, and I can't recall a single yorker from him all day. 130 is on.

10:17 a.m. And Sangakkara now flays Ajmal to wide mid on. This has been a brilliant innings from him. Could be a match-winning one.

10:18 a.m. And now Mathews charges and smacks Ajmal down the ground. Ten off the over, and it's 113-6 with two overs to go. Partnership is 43, and really, it came out of nowhere.

10:19 a.m. Alright Gully, I want six yorkers now. No messing about.

10:21 a.m. Wow. Mathews moves back and leg side, gives himself room to smack Gul to midwicket for four. This has been underwhelming from Gully, to be fair.

10:23 a.m. Eight off the over, which I'll take given there was a boundary off the second ball. 121-6 with 6 balls remaining. This has been an excellent partnership for Sri Lanka. Gully's four overs went for 29, by the way.

10:25 a.m. Aamer to bowl the last over. Come on, man. Finish strong here. Nothing over 130, yeah?

10:26 a.m. Mathews skies into no-man's land, and it's two.

10:26 a.m. And now it's four to third man, who's in the circle (somewhat inexplicably).

10:27 a.m. Six over midwicket. I have no comment. Score is 133, by the way.

10:28 a.m. Two yorker types, for a two and a one. Last ball coming up.

10:29 a.m. And a two to finish. Sri Lanka end up with 138-6 in their twenty overs. The partnership was 68.

10:30 a.m. Wow, what a disaster those last five overs were. They scored 59 when I thought that getting 40 would be tough. I clearly underestimated Mathews and overestimated us. Disappointing close there. I say, with their bowling attack, Sri Lanka are favorites. I'm not even doing the whole jinxing thing; it's a final, there's added pressure, the pitch is taking bounce and spin, and Malinga is impossible to get away. 6.95 an over might just prove beyond us. But we shall find out soon enough.

10:38 a.m. So some questionable bowling tactics (Gully's first yorker came in his fourth over) and some questionable field placements (third man up in the last couple of overs, though it should be said Younis has done that before and it's come off) leave us chasing about 25 more than we would have thought not too long ago. Also, Sangakkara played a blinder -- smart cricket mixed with aggresion and good old fashioned "good cricketing shots". Anyway, if we're going to get this, it's important our openers give us something. Akmal and Shahzaib to open.

10:41 a.m. So this is it. For all the marbles.

10:41 a.m. Forward defensive to start for Akmal.

10:42 a.m. And another.

10:42 a.m. Ahaha. Beautiful. Classic cover drive from Akmal, just threading the needle in a packed off side field. Solid start.

10:43 a.m. And now two through midwicket. Araam sey, Akmal. Araam sey.

10:44 a.m. An ungainly hoik toward square leg for two more. 8-0 after one over. Hey, just sixteen more like that and we're home.

10:45 a.m. Udana to open the bowling from the other end. Shahzaib facing up.

10:46 a.m. A wide down the leg side to start. Solid.

10:47 a.m. Shahzaib taps it down to third man for his first run as Udana settles in on a line. Akmal on strike.

10:49 a.m. Clever from Sri Lanka, as they pack the off side ring (six guys in all) and dare Shahzaib to hit across the line, where the two boundary fielders are (backward square and midwicket). Just the three of the over, and we're 11-0 after two. Malinga replacing Mathews straight away.

10:52 a.m. Just back of a length to start. Quickish too. We've scored three off the last eight balls.

10:52 a.m. Three off the last nine.

10:53 a.m. Slower ball full length ball for one. He's got all the variations, Malinga.

10:53 a.m. Shahzaib has no idea. None whatsoever. He's going soon, I might add. Next three balls, and Younis/Malik/Afridi is in.

10:54 a.m. Oooh. Slower ball yorker after the short/quick one. Just the one off the over, and we're slowing down here. 12-0 after three, with jut four runs coming off the last two overs.

10:56 a.m. Udana continues, and is worked through midwicket for two by Akmal. Next ball, he tries a crazy scoop. Leg-bye. Shahzaib, who has scored a grand total of one run, is on strike.

10:57 a.m. Oooooh. Shahzaib slices one and it goes high and wide, over the covers. Mathews running back, dives and nearly takes a blinder. Well, at least it's two.

10:58 a.m. And now it's four. Chinese cut to fine leg. Better over, this.

10:59 a.m. And Akmal launches a slower ball over mid on for four. Excellent over, as we score 14 off it. 26-0 after four, and we're back on track. Just keep it solid guys. Keep Malinga out, and target everyone else.

11:00 a.m. The plot thickens. Murali in early. Power play is still on, mind.

11:01 a.m. Haha Shahzaib has NO idea. Somehow gets one. This could get ugly if it lasts.

11:01 a.m. Half a mix-up there. Sensible guys. Sensible.

11:02 a.m. Dangerous times here, as Akmal edges Murali after charging. Gets two for his troubles.

11:03 a.m. Four off the over, and we're 30-0 after five. Required rate is 7.27.

11:04 a.m. Another change in the bowling, as Mendis replaces Malinga. 109 needed off 90.

11:05 a.m. Oooh. Akmal didn't pick that one. No question.

11:06 a.m. Nor that one.

11:06 a.m. He got that one. Leg down, bat across, and six over midwicket. Beautiful sound off the bat too.

11:07 a.m. And now a paddle sweep for two. Harsha is trying his best to jinx us, for the record. Bastard.

11:08 a.m. And a single to end the over. Nine off the over. Every now and then we get a good over to break the shackles. 39-0 after six. Really solid start, despite not playing particularly well (especially Shahzaib).

11:09 a.m. Mathews back into the attack, as the fielding restrictions are relaxed.

11:12 a.m. Goddamn. Did Akmal just sweep a fast medium bowler over square leg for six? Yes. Yes, he did. Brings back Moin-off-Donald-in-99 memories.

11:13 a.m. Meanwhile, Shahzaib is playing a different game at the other end, continuing to poke, prod, miss, and edge. Somehow he's survived. It's 48-0 after seven, with nine off the over. Jayasuriya into the attack, as Sangakkara looks for the breakthrough.

11:14 a.m. Well, he needs to look no further as Jayasuriya gets Akmal first ball. Dances down, misses it inside, and Sangakkara pulls off a smart stumping. Afridi in. How's this going to go, then?

11:15 a.m. Afridi taps it away to the leg side for one. "What's the world coming to? asks Harsha.

11:17 a.m. Just the three off the over, and we're 51-1. Rate required is hovering around seven and a quarter. Nass warns against leaving it to the end, and I agree with him.

11:18 a.m. Mendis back into the attack. This should be interesting.

11:19 a.m. Shahzaib doesn't pick Mendis, lifts his foot, and Sangakkara whips the bails off in a flash. Tough one for the third umpire, but it's given not out.

11:20 a.m. Bang! Shahzaib smacks Mendis down the ground for four. Needed that. Both him and the team.

11:21 a.m. And one more! Smacks Mendis over cover for four. Like I said, every couple of overs, we have a biggish over to release the pressure.

11:22 a.m. Smart placement from Afridi to finish the over, 12 off it. 63-1 after nine. Rate required drops below seven.

11:23 a.m. Murali back in, and gets the wicket. Shahzaib's painful innings is finally over, as he tries to slog Murali across the line and it loops up to short fine. Don't throw it away here, Pakistan. Just keep it ticking. You have them on the back foot. Keep them there. Malik in.

11:26 a.m. Malik drives to long on for one. Played an excellent innings on a wearing pitch against Murali and co in Sri Lanka in a test match in '06. Saved the game for us by batting over a day. Anyway, just the two off the four, and we're 65-2 after ten.

11:28 a.m. Malinga back into the attack. There hasn't been two overs from the same bowler from the same end in quite a while.

11:29 a.m. 72 from 58 is the equation as it stands. Sensible, guys. Sensible.

11:31 a.m. Two excellent bouncers from Malinga against Afridi. Just play him out, Lala. Play him out.

11:32 a.m. Just the four from the over, then. 69-2 after eleven. We need 70 in nine overs.

11:33 a.m. Jayasuriya back in, and Afridi smacks him down to long on for one.

11:35 a.m. Five singles off the over so far. Something's about to give.

11:35 a.m. Six singles then. 75-2 in twelve. 64 needed off 48.

11:36 a.m. Udana back into the attack. Think Afridi's going to go after this guy.

11:38 a.m. Excellent running from Malik. Makes a single a two. Brilliant. Five off three in this over so far.

11:40 a.m. Ian Chappell wants someone shot for changing the backing up law. What a cranky old fool he's become lately.

11:41 a.m. Eight off the over. 56 needed from 42. Nice and sensible, guys. Nice and sensible.

11:42 a.m. Murali back into the attack.

11:42 a.m. BANG! Afridi just smacks Murali for six over midwicket. He got a hold of that one, Lala.

11:43 a.m. One more! This time a four through the covers after giving Murali the charge. Acha now, calm down. We've got the runs for the over. Chill.

11:43 a.m. Chill he does, tapping it away for one. "This is a new Afridi with a bat in his hand," says Ian Chappell.

11:44 a.m. A single to end, giving us 14 for the over. 97-2 after fourteen. 42 needed from 36. Araam sey, bhai. Araam sey.

11:46 a.m. Mendis back into the attack. Chappell is trying his Harsha-jinxing-us routine. Stop it, yaar. Come on.

11:48 a.m. Sensible cricket gives us six from the over. 103-2 after fifteen. 36 needed from 30.

11:48 a.m. Two Lancastrians will be bringing us home in the commentary box: Waz and David Lloyd. Malinga back into the attack.

11:50 a.m. "How do you feel?" Bumble politely inquires. "I'm feeling very relaxed now," Waz assures us.

11:50 a.m. Don't know why the commentators think this game is over. 35 from 28 is not to be scoffed at, when ten of those balls are coming from Malinga (who's given away just 6 runs in 2.2 overs).

11:52 a.m. Brilliant bowling from Malinga. Star performer with the ball for Sri Lanka.

11:53 a.m. Only three from the over. 33 needed from 4 overs. Mendis back into the attack. "No mistakes now, Pakistan," says David Lloyd. I hear you bro.

11:55 a.m. Just one from the first ball.

11:55 a.m. Malik drives for another one.

11:56 a.m. Afridi and Malik both get another single each. Four off four so far. Need a boundary here, fellas.

11:57 a.m. Aargh Afridi wastes a full toss, just getting two when he could have gotten six.

11:57 a.m. Seven off the over. 26 needed from 18 balls. Malinga's over will be the key. Dangerous times here, as I said. It's getting tight.

11:59 a.m. Udana back in. This is the over, guys.

12:00 p.m. Two off the first ball.

12:00 p.m Afridi swings away to the leg side. Single, 23 off 16. Tight. Very tight.

12:00 p.m. Wide. Bless your heart, Udana.

12:01 p.m. Single to long on. Could have had two. 21 off 15.

12:01 p.m. Brilliant running from Malik. Gets us two. 19 off 14.

12:02 p.m. Oh yes, Afridi. Oh, yes. Picks up an Udana slower ball for six over midwicket. I groaned after he first hit it, I thought it was out. I was wrong. 13 off 13.

12:03 p.m. Oh, my. Full toss, above waist height, no ball, four. Oh, Afridi, you fucking beauty. Oh, Udana, you royal dumbass.

12:04 p.m. Single to finish. 7 needed off 12. 19 off that last over.

12:05 p.m. Malinga back in.

12:05 p.m. Malik hasn't hit a boundary yet, has he? In a 69 run partnership. Or am I wrong?

12:06 p.m. Single to start. By the way, Afridi got his fifty in the last over. Malik back on strike.

12:06 p.m. Glanced for four! Beautiful. I do the Afridi celebration by pointing at the W. She thinks I'm crazy and cute at the same time.

12:07 p.m. Single. Scores level. One needed off nine balls. And how appropriate that Afridi will score the winning run.

12:09 p.m. And a leg-bye to finish! What a performance! Unbelievable.

12:10 p.m. Bloody hell. This is Intikhab Alam's second World Cup triumph.

12:10 p.m. Wow. I don't believe we've done it. And what a non-Pakistani performance in the final -- cool, calm, collected and clinical. "Everything went according to the plan," affirms Waz.

12:11 p.m. Oye, Malik. You can take your helmet off now. What comical scenes here, as Manjrekar tries to shove the microphone in between his grill.

12:14 p.m. It bears repeating: the entire chase was very sensible, right from the start. Every time the rate looked to be getting away from us, we'd get a big over -- a 9 or a 14 or a 12. Always kept us there and thereabouts. This was a Bob Woolmer-inspired chase.

12:17 p.m. Did we just win? After getting thrashed by England and Sri Lanka not two weeks ago? England?

12:20 p.m. Madrid, cabron, saluda al campeon! Ok, it's borrowed from another sport (and another language), but you know what I mean.

12:21 p.m. Afridi predictably wins the man of the match award. Nass calls him Boom Boom out of habit now.

12:23 p.m. Great interview, Lala. Well done. I like the giving-credit-to-Younis-and-Inti-and-Aaqib bit too. Very gracious.

12:23 p.m. Wow. Dilshan just stole Afridi's man-of-the-tournament award. Highway robbery, that.

12:27 p.m. I wonder if Younis is going to fail to credit his teammates, and mention his cancer hospital 17 times. Oh, wait.

12:28 p.m. All class, Sangakkara. All class.

12:29 p.m. Ten bucks says Sangakkara just made fun of Nass' hairline in Sinhalese.

12:30 p.m. Haha. I didn't even know Rao Iftikhar was in the squad until he got his medal. Excellent.

12:34 p.m. Is it just me, or does Nass really want to give Younis a hug?

12:35 p.m. Emotional scenes here. Watch the Youtube tomorrow.

12:36 p.m. Junaid Jamshed invades Lords. The crowd is singing along. What a moment. Hard to describe, really. I know I'm doing a crap job, but I'm trying my best.

12:39 p.m. Younis cloaks himself in the flag. What a man.

12:40 p.m. Hey, who let Salman Butt carry the trophy? Alright, alright, I'll stop being mean. Unbecoming, really.

12:41 p.m. To summarize, then: we got off to an excellent start with the ball, and simply didn't let Sri Lanka get away. We got so many wickets early on that they didn't know what hit them. But the Mathews/Sangakkara partnership brought them back into it, with Sangakkara playing an unbelievable innings, mixing caution with aggression. It was a trickyish total, and it was imperative we got off to a good start, which we did, Shahzaib's efforts notwithstanding. Every time the rate looked to get away from us, we got a big over to bring it back. Afridi played his second consecutive match-winning innings, and Malik gave him excellent support by rotating the strike intelligently and running hard. At the end of the day, we were the better team and were deserving winners.

Congratulations to the team and to all Pakistanis for this magnificent triumph. I don't need to go into what this means for us, because we are all well aware of what is happening in the country and to cricket in Pakistan.

So that's it from me. I hope you guys have enjoyed the coverage, and take care.

Cricket Videos To Get You Pumped Up Before The Final

In lieu of a preview, I'm putting up some videos to get everyone in the mood. Commenters are encouraged to put some up in the comments section; I will add them to the main post if they're worthy enough (which they should be, I trust you guys with these things).

Let's start with Waz making Rahul Dravid look all sorts of stupid.

Here's Ambrose destroying England in Trinidad. Look at Richie Richardson's shades and tell me the Windies are the coolest team of all time.

Here's Allan Donald bowling an absolute fearsome spell to Michael Atherton in 1998 (at Trent Bridge if memory serves). As a Pakistani, I'm proud that one of our own had a role to play in this spell; if you don't know what I'm talking about, google Javed Akhtar Donald Atherton 1998.

Six words: you just dropped the cup, son.

By the way, every time I've read about that incident (including Steve Waugh's autobiography), it is denied that Waugh ever said anything to Gibbs, least of all that most iconic of phrases. Why do I refuse to believe the denials?

Here's a sick Shoaib spell against Australia. We actually lost this match, which should give you a measure of how crap our batting was in the early part of this decade.

Brian Lara, as old-time readers will know, is easily my favorite player of all time. Here's the first video in a four-part series of his 277 against Australia, which happened to be his first hundred. Along with his own 153 in '99 at Barbados, Akmal's Karachi knock, Steve Waugh's double at Jamaica, and Laxman's rearguard in '01 (Calcutta?), it remains one of the five best innings I have ever had the privilege of watching.

Mohammad Asif has certainly bowled more important spells in his career (Karachi, Sri Lanka), but I wanted to embed this video only for how excited Athers' and Nasser Hussain get in the commentary box. Two fairest English commentators for me, and you can tell that they're genuinely excited to see this beautiful bowler in full flow.

As a bowling pair, Wasim and Waqar's peak was probably from 1991 to 1996. During this time, they had many things going for them but one obvious one was their ruthlessness and their sense of fear. They could smell that shit a mile away. Once you opened the door to the tail, it was all over. I really can't emphasize to non-Pakistanis how easy it was for these guys to rip through lower orders. This video is from an ODI in New Zealand when the hosts were coasting. They lost a wicket at the wrong time. And then Waqar took over. This video is so violent, it should come with an R-rating.

Here's some awesome sledging by Kumar Sangakkara, going for the mental and emotional weak spot of Shaun Pollock. Unless I'm badly mistaken, this is the infamous "we thought the DL score was what we had to get, not what we had to beat, oops" mix up that led to the Saffies ouster from their World Cup in 2003.

This is a fantastic catch from Paul Collingwood in the lead up to the 2005 Ashes. It's not the GREATEST catch I've ever seen, but the cameras have a great angle, and you can hear the crowd go "ooohhhh" when watching the replay. Great stuff.

Mega Links Post (Updated Below)

All the random stuff I've enjoyed over the past week.

The New Yorker reports on the last days of the Shah of Iran's rule. Sorry for being 30 years too late with this but its worth reading, if only for this quote on co-education from a cleric:

I want to separate the schools of learning from the schools of flirting.

More Iran stuff from Foreign Policy which lists ten movies that will help you better understand the country.

I hope Pakistan's performance tomorrow isn't as bad as this pun in The News:

Opponents 'Afridi' of Shahid

Here's how you piss off an Australian cricketer (no, the word convict was never mentioned).

Gear up for Wimbledon and rue Nadal's absence by listening to this fantastic BBC documentary on the greatest match ever played (link will only work for one week).

Ever wondered how a tennis player's grunt compares to a lions roar? The Times lets you know.

By now you must all have watched Obama swat a fly. But have you seen Stephen Colbert's response to it?

And another example of something that would be incredibly annoying if done by George W. Bush yet seems so cute when Obama does it.

Quote of the week comes from Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's lawyer:

"He does not need people to bring him women," Niccolò Ghedini told the newspaper Corriere della Sera. "It's seems a bit over the top to think that Berlusconi needs to pay €2,000 [£1,700] for a girl to go with him. I think he could have them in large numbers for free."

Warning to anyone recently married: Don't read this piece in The Atlantic.

Pray the Pakistani cricket team makes this a great weekend.

UPDATE (from Ahsan): Thanks to Bubs for giving me the motivation to put up some of my own links, which I've been very lazy with.

You remember how George Bush didn't even know who Musharraf was before he got elected? Well, here's reason 327671609ednuhndaiu0180389 Obama is cooler than Bush: dude is dropping Jinnah's name. Not only do I have no doubts whatsoever that Bush doesn't who Jinnah was, but I am also sure that when Bush hears the term "Jinnah" he automatically thinks "tonic".

You've heard of F My Life but have you heard of My Life Is Desi? (Link courtesy reader Wasay)

Steve Walt has an IR guide to parenting. This has to be the greatest passage ever written:

And once the kids are mobile, you learn about another key IR concept: the window of opportunity. You're feeding or changing Kid #1, and Kid #2 makes a bolt out the front door, just like North Korea tested a nuclear weapon while we were busy with Iraq. Or you're in the middle of a crowded department store and they each decide to head down different aisles. The potential complications of a multipolar order were never clearer the first time this happened to me.

I don't even want to imagine what a bait-and-bleed strategy looks like with child-rearing.

The Washington Post fires one of its only real journalists -- you know, the type who actually feels the need to investigate and challenge authority, rather than be subservient to it. They absolutely do not fire the partisan hack who continues to write trash.

Speaking of the establishment media in the US, a NYT reporter escapes from the Taliban with another Pakistani journalist by, uh, scaling a wall:

Mr. Rohde told his wife, Kristen Mulvihill, that Mr. Ludin joined him late Friday night in climbing over the wall of a compound where they were being held in the North Waziristan region of Pakistan. They found a Pakistani army scout, who led them to a nearby army base, and on Saturday they were flown to the American Bagram military base in Afghanistan.

“They just walked over the wall of the compound,” said Ms. Muvihill.

But they left one guy behind (their driver), who is now in all probability having AK-47s shoved up his ass as retribution. Seriously, why didn't they take him with them? I mean, I'm happy for the two who got away and their families, but that drives is now FUCKED.

Hey, good news: some people from Buner are going home. Well done to everyone involved -- the NGOs, aig agencies, the people themselves and yes, the government. Kudos.

I had a few others, but I've forgotten now. Oh, and one more thing: no preview of the final from me, because I'm too lazy/have nothing to say. But I will live blog the shit out of it, rest assured.

Live Blogging Pakistan vs. South Africa T20 World Cup Semi Final (Updated Below)

Hello and welcome to Rs.5's coverage of this first semi final in the T20 World Cup between Pakistan and South Africa. As always, all times are local (i.e. Chicago).

11:16 a.m. Team news from the middle. Pakistan are playing the same eleven: Shahzaib, Akmal, Razzaq, Malik, Younis, Misbah, Afridi, Fawad, Gully, Saeed Ajmal and Aamer. South Africa are lining up with: Smith, Kallis, Gibbs, de Villiers, Duminy, Boucher, Morkel, van der Merwe, Parnell, Botha, Steyn.

11:19 a.m. Fuck, it's only when you type those names out that it hits you: this South Africa team is bloody talented. No question about it, man for man, they're a better team than us. But the game's not played on paper, is it?

11:20 a.m. Hey, what's the difference between a restaurant and the South African dressing room? Only one has the Heimlich maneuver poster stuck on their wall because of the law.


11:27 a.m. The weakest link in our team is when Razzaq bowls. I fully expect him to be targeted. But that's a matter for a later time, because Pakistan will be batting first.

11:29 a.m. Nasser Hussain: "Lose, and you go home." Man, I'm pumped.

11:30 a.m. Shahzaib and Akmal to open. I predict an early dismissal for Shahzaib. And Akmal, for that matter.

11:31 a.m. I should tell you I'm going to be in full blown "jinx the opposition" mode today. So if you're looking for positivity, go elsewhere.

11:31 a.m. Dale Steyn, only the world's best quick bowler, to open the bowling.

11:33 a.m. Yeah, Akmal! What a start. Second ball smashed for four. What a cutter/puller Akmal is. After Inzi, our best horizontal bat player left. Steyn follows with a beauty though.

11:35 a.m. Bang! Four more, through the covers. Good start here for Akmal, and very unlike Steyn offering that much width. 8-0 after one, and Pakistan are away.

11:36 a.m. Parnell in from the other end.

11:37 a.m. Well, that didn't take long. Shahzaib plays an ungainly pull, goes straight up, and van der Merwe takes an excellent diving catch running back from mid-on. Sigh. 8-1 after 1.2

11:38 a.m. Afridi in. Bad move.

11:38 a.m. That's how you fucking play the pull, dumbass. Akmal smashes it for four. He's looking up for it, Akmal.

11:39 a.m. Hahahahaha. South Africa pull a Pakistan here, as Akmal drives it, and Smith dives over it. Four more.

11:40 a.m. The crowd is basically split 80-20. Anyway, Afridi on strike. "Anything could happen with this man," Nasser tells us.

11:40 a.m. Bouncer first up, and it's given as a wide. Touch harsh for me.

11:41 a.m. BANG! Hoiked over mid on, bat twisting in his hand and all. 22-1 after two, and we're off to the races.

11:43 a.m. My goodness, me. Stand. Deliver. Akmal, you fucking beauty. Kami basically drives a good length delivery for six.

11:43 a.m. And that's the end of that. Akmal gone pulling AGAIN. It's the third time in the last four games if memory serves. That's really annoying. We had the momentum and everything. Now the pressure's on, what with losing two wickets in the first three overs and everything. Who knows, Fawad might have a real role to play by the end of the day. Anyway, Malik in.

11:45 a.m. Cuts him in half first ball.

11:46 a.m. Hahahaha. Another misfield. Any they were making fun of us. Anyway, it's just a single. Malik off the mark, and Afridi to face Steyn for the first time. I say a bouncer first up. Square leg gone back.

11:47 a.m. And a bouncer it was. 29-2 after three. God, that wicket hurt. Aaaarrghh.

11:48 a.m. Malik edges Parnell, but falls short of slip. Keep it steady guys.

11:49 a.m. Acha, that doesn't mean you go to sleep at the wicket, either. Malik takes a single off the third ball of the over. One off it so far.

11:50 a.m. They're keeping Afridi waiting. They know he has the attention span of a four year old.

11:51 a.m. Miscues a full toss for one. Even singles are eventful with Afridi.

11:52 a.m. Just the three of the over, then. 32-2 after four.

11:52 a.m. Kallis replacing Steyn for some odd reason. Guess he wants to keep him for the end.

11:53 a.m. Malik charges but can't get it through. Single brings Afridi on to strike.

11:55 a.m. South Africa keep bowling it in their half against Afridi. Nothing to drive. Anyway, check out the comments to this post too. There's something about Kallis and eunuchs in there.

11:56 a.m. Short, pull, four. Short, pull, two.

11:57 a.m. Short, hoik, four. Afridi looking good, and by "looking good" I mean he's not out yet. "Boom Boom's firing," Nass says. 43-2 after five.

11:58 a.m. Morkel replacing Parnell from the other end.

11:58 a.m. Oye, Malik, where are you going? Sets off for a suicidal run and thank God Afridi sends him back. If he gets Afridi run out, there will not be enough eggs for Malik's house, let me tell you. Not enough effigies either. Anyway, he charges and gets a single. Afridi back on strike. Nothing stupid now, Lala.

12:00 p.m. Oooh gets away with one, Morkel. Full pitched on the leg side, and Afridi glances but it goes straight to short fine. A couple of yards either way and it was four.

12:01 p.m. Wow, now I've seen everything. Afridi taps and runs to end the power play. 47-2 after six.

12:04 p.m. I'm trying to think of a more unattractive player than Afridi. Failing.

12:05 p.m. "Everything's been short for Shahid Afridi," Manjrekar informs us. Yup.

12:06 p.m Good over for the Saffies. Just the three off it, and one was a wide. They keep bowling short, and our batsmen (at least at present) can't get 'em away. 50-2 after seven.

12:07 p.m. van der Merwe in. I'm just going to call him VDM, thanks.

12:08 p.m Left arm spinner, for those who've never seen him before.

12:09 p.m. Malik charges and gets two. Quietish over to start.

12:10 p.m. Six off it, as Afridi and Malik look to consolidate. 56-2 after eight. We can't completely take our foot off the gas here. Remember, we don't really have a Yuvraj to finish for us, so we have to keep scoring even in the middle overs.

12:11 p.m. Botha in, so we have spin from both ends.

12:13 p.m. I really, really don't want to jinx him, but I'm kinda surprised Afridi hasn't lost his shit here. He seems happy taking ones and twos.

12:14 p.m. Just five from it, and Pakistan slowing down here. 61-2 after nine. Malik looks in terrible touch. Don't think he's middled one yet. We need at least a hundred more. At least.

12:14 p.m. First boundary in a while, as Afridi charges, miscues, and it still beats long on. Single to follow.

12:15 p.m. Ooooh. Malik sweeps across the line and gets hit. Thought it was a good shout, but maybe that's because I want Malik gone. Anyway seven off the over, 68-2 after ten. We've scored just 25 off the last five.

12:18 p.m. Afridi pings it through the covers. Full toss...I mean, that was just asking to be smacked.

12:19 p.m. One more! This one was straighter but still four.

12:19 p.m. And again! Three in a row. Yeah, Afridi. Yeah.

12:20 p.m. Harsha starts talking about "match winning innings" and "hasn't self destructed yet." Shut up, Harsha. I know exactly what you're doing. I INVENTED that. Please stop.

12:21 p.m. Now it's the late cut, and Afridi gets four fours in a row. Good over that, eighteen off it. 86-2 after eleven. By the way, Afridi just changed his bat. Again. Nass and Harsha are really perplexed that a guy who just hit four boundaries in a row is unhappy with his bat.

12:23 p.m. Malik's just going about his way. To be fair, he's played his role well, getting ones and twos regularly. He's moved on to 17. Afridi's nearing his fifty.

12:24 p.m. Amid all the hullabaloo, I forgot to tell you Steyn is back into the attack. My bad.

12:25 p.m Two for Afridi, and he gets to fifty. Well played, Lala. Well played.

12:26 p.m. I've been really, REALLY impressed with Afridi's ability to play sensibly here. Normally, he goes for ludicrous shots on good balls, but here he's giving the bowlers respect when they deserve it. I mean, he could throw it away next ball, but that shouldn't take away from his very cerebral innings here. And yes, I used "cerebral" to describe Afridi.

12:27 p.m. Uh, oops. Sorry guys. That's my fault. Duminy comes in, and Afridi skies one straight up. Can I blame it on the bat-change, a la Saeed Anwar in 99? Ok, ok. I'll put my hand up and accept responsibility for that one. I should just keep my mouth shut.

12:28 p.m. Younis in.

12:30 p.m. Four singles and a wicket off the over. 99-3 after 13.

12:31 p.m. Did Malik lift his foot? Stumping chance, and it's gone to the third umpire.

12:33 p.m. Not out! Alright, come on now, Malik. Just carry on here.

12:34 p.m. Full toss, sweep, four. Yeah, Malik. Yeah.

12:34 p.m. "They've all been positive," says Harsha. Yeah, that's true. Other than Malik's first ten minutes, no one's gotten bogged down.

12:35 p.m. Ten off the over. 109-3 after 14. Strong push to end here, guys. Strong push. We've got batting in the box, so we can step it up.

12:36 p.m. Yeah, Malik. Hits Duminy over cover, opening the face and slapping it for four.

12:37 p.m. Goddamnitt. Waste of a knee length full toss. Anyway, single to follow and Younis on strike.

12:38 p.m. Hahaha. Reverse sweep. Four more. Ten off the over, with one to go. Good going, guys. Keep going.

12:38 p.m. And a legbye to end. 120-3 after fifteen. 175 is the goal now. 175. Anything less, and it's a waste of this start. Though our batting in the last few overs in this tournament has been quite crap, to be fair.

12:39 p.m. Malik's sweeping from seventeen feet outside off stump. Two more.

12:41 p.m. And he holes out to long off. Charging, but didn't get all of it. A well played 34; he kept things ticking when Afridi was going nuts, and played a goodish innings overall. 12-4 after 15.4. Razzaq in.

12:42 p.m. Six and a wicket off the over; 126-4 after sixteen. Push hard, guys. Remember, we need 175.

12:43 p.m Steyn back in. Against Razzaq. Should be a good battle.

12:45 p.m. Two twos and a bouncer in the first three balls. Need a boundary here.

12:46 p.m. Slower ball, dot. Come on Razzaq. Smack that shit into the Channel.

12:46 p.m. This has been a really good over by Steyn, no surprise there. Mixed it up really well. Just the six off it, and it's 132-4.

12:47 p.m. Parnell back in. Target him here. I know he's bowled well in this tournament, but he wouldn't bowled two bigger overs than this in his career. Semi final, death bowling, nineteen year-old. Single to start.

12:49 p.m. Just two runs off the first three balls. They've pulled us back here, the Saffies. Done really well.

12:50 p.m. Just a single, that too of a misfield. Suddenly, 150 is looking out of reach. It changes so quickly in this format, it really does. 137-4 after eighteen. Just 17 runs off the last 3 overs.

12:52 p.m. Two singles to start the over. They're bowling really well. What can you say?

12:53 p.m. Simon Doull tells us it's been four overs since the last boundary. Feels a lot longer, to be honest.

12:55 p.m. And a dot to finish. Seven off another high-class over from Dale Steyn. 144-4 with one to go. These last four or five overs have been really good. I mean, I want to bitch out our guys, but really, that would be unfair. They've just had to face up against some top quality death bowling. Anyway, Parnell to bowl the last over.

12:56 p.m. Razzaq swinging and missing. Maybe, just maybe, Misbah should have been sent it? Or is this just hindsight talking?

12:57 p.m. Bloody hell. Only ones. 148-4. Last ball coming up.

12:58 p.m. And South Africa will require 150 to win this game. We were favorites half an hour ago. We no longer are. Only the Saffies choking will stop them from getting this. About 15 runs too light for me.

1:04 p.m. I'm thinking about the Razzaq vs. Misbah decision, and really, I don't think you can fault the management/decision-making. With four overs to go, with pace on from both ends, with the score 120 odd, Razzaq was the most logical choice. South Africa just bowled brilliantly -- Steyn and Parnell didn't give us ANYTHING. If/when South Africa win this, they will look back on those last few overs, where there wasn't a single boundary scored, and decide that's what won them the game.

1:07 p.m. Star performers of the first twenty overs: Lala, Steyn, Parnell, Malik. In that order.

1:08 p.m. It's not enough. It's not enough. We're going to be smoked. They're going to finish this in sixteen overs. For the loss of one wicket.

1:10 p.m. Razzaq's going to be targeted here. I know it. He's too slow and too innocuous. Anyway, Kallis and Smith to open.

1:11 p.m. Where is Smith going? It goes straight to the fielder and he's running off.

1:12 p.m. Ooooh. Ball comes in, and hits Kallis in front. I appealed, but it was going down leg. Next ball beats him outside off.

1:13 p.m. He really is a nothing bowler, Razzaq. He's just putting it out there. Kallis drives a 70mph good length ball through the covers for four.

1:14 p.m. A single to finish the over. 5-0 after one. Aamer will presumably be in from the other end.

1:15 p.m. Come on, Aamer. Come on.

1:15 p.m. Full, wide, four. Sliced backward off point. Too much room.

1:16 p.m. Edged and four. Younis had just taken the slip out. Oh, dear.

1:18 p.m. Goddamn. Do you know Kallis has averaged 60-plus in this tournament?

1:18 p.m. A two to end. 10 off the over, and South Africa off to a solid start here. 15-0 after two. Smith hasn't faced up yet, though he will now against Razzaq.

1:19 p.m. We're fucked, I tell you. They're winning this in 11 overs.

1:20 p.m. Down the leg side. Fine leg up. Four. Well done, Razzaq. Just beautifully bowled. Chootia.

1:21 p.m. They're doing this easy, the Saffies. Boundary followed by a tap-and-run.

1:21 p.m. The crowd's gone real quiet. They realize it, just as much as I do: we're done. We're smoked. We're out. Best of luck to the Saffies in the final against Sri Lanka.

1:22 p.m. Four byes. I know that moved and all, but I mean, come on. You think they might win by ten wickets?

1:23 p.m. 26-0 after three.

1:24 p.m. This has been a better over from Aamer, but there's just this feeling of flatness out there. Nothing's happening. No one's being bubbly in the field, and we haven't been able to string together some dot balls.

1:28 p.m. Swing and a miss from Smith. Much better over from Aamer. Just the four off it, and South Africa are 30-0 after four. Need a wicket here, guys. Lord knows Razzaq's not going to provide it.

1:30 p.m. Well, then. Smith skies it, and Gully going back, drops a sitter. Made a complete meal of that, and probably hurt himself too by banging his head against the ground. There you go. Our fielding -- oh, our fielding.

1:32 p.m. Can't get over that. Just terrible.

1:33 p.m. By the way, they took two off it too. Quick single to follow. Easy does it for them. They're winning this in a canter.

1:33 p.m. Four more, as Kallis walks across and drives it beautifully to long on for four. They're not even TRYING, the Saffies.

1:34 p.m. 39-0 after five.

1:36 p.m. Afridi: "Yeh jaga hai, Aamer, yeh jaga hai." For the westerners out there: "that's the spot, Aamer, that's the spot." Just a single off the first three of this over. After that nervy start, he's come back well here.

1:38 p.m. YEAH, AAMER!! Quickish short ball, Smith miscues (very similar to what happened ten minute ago), and this time the bowler doesn't trust anyone else to go for it, and gobbles it himself. There's the breakthrough, and it's a pity we can't give Razzaq's last over to Aamer. 40-1 after 5.5

1:40 p.m. And a slower ball to finish. A run and a wicket off the over, and South Africa are 40-1 after six. Will Younis bowl him out, trying to get another wicket? Or will he keep one for the end?

1:41 p.m. Afridi replaces Razzaq, who's basically done everything wrong today.

1:41 p.m. "Right, key phase in this match here," says Harsha. Yup. Afridi really holds the key.

1:42 p.m. Four to start. Razzaq looked like he was going for a mid afternoon stroll here. How much have Dubai/Bombay bookies paid Razzaq?

1:43 p.m. YEAH, AFRIDI. Bowls his slider and Gibbs has no idea, playing for the turn away. Off stump pegged back. 46-2 after seven and whisper it, but we may be back into this game.

1:44 p.m. What a player Lala is. I mean, really.

1:45 p.m. AB in for Gibbs. Ajmal in for Aamer.

1:46 p.m. Crowd's back into it.

1:46 p.m. Younis has a slip in for AB. Nice to have an attacking captain, yes? By the way, Waz keeps calling Herschelle Gibbs "Harsha Gibbs". Anyway, solid start here for Ajmal -- three of his first five balls. Finish strong, man.

1:47 p.m. He does, finishing with a dot. Just the three off the over, and the Saffies are 49-2 after eight. Rate required is inching up to eight and a half.

1:48 p.m. Kallis holds the key, here. Need him. Soon.

1:49 p.m. And Akmal drops it. AB edges it, and Akmal, with his iron gloves, doesn't even look like catching it. How much will we regret that?

1:49 p.m. Uh, not much. AB plays Afridi on off a quicker ball, trying to cut. What a day Afridi is having. Duminy in, and South Africa in a spot of bother here.

1:50 p.m. Harsha tells us that South Africa are 10-3 in the last eighteen deliveries. What a difference it makes when Razzaq is taken out of the attack.

1:52 p.m. Three runs and a wicket off the over. 52-3, and the rate required is pretty much nine.

1:52 p.m. Aaargh. Short ball, and Ajmal releases the pressure. Four off the first ball. Goddamnitt.

1:53 p.m. Slip in for Duminy. Smart from Younis.

1:55 p.m. Our in-circle fielders are too far back to stop the single, even off Duminy. Not a fan of that, to be honest. Anyway, nine off the over, a good for the Saffies. 61-3 after ten. Need Kallis. Need Kallis. Need Kallis.

1:57 p.m. Brilliant bowling from Afridi. I know I've said it before, but the way he mixes it up is a thing of beauty. Just two off the first five balls. Nothing stupid now.

1:58 p.m. Single to end. 64-3 after eleven. Game's in the balance. Both sides will fancy themselves from here.

1:59 p.m. Malik replacing Ajmal. Oh God.

2:00 p.m. If I was South African, I'd be quite miffed at this Duminy chap right now. Not really doing anything. Just the two off the first four balls from Malik.

2:02 p.m. Five off the over, and South Africa are now at 69-3 after twelve. Camera pans to the some Pakistani MILFs in the crowd.

2:03 p.m. Afridi bowling out here.

2:04 p.m. They're just tapping and running. Fielding in the circle sucks balls.

2:04 p.m. Appeal for caught behind, but much ado about nothing. Kallis hit his pads.

2:05 p.m. What an amazing spell of bowling from Afridi. Just the four off the over, and South Africa are 73-3 after thirteen. Need a move on here, as the rate required is above eleven now.

2:06 p.m. Gully in. And this is the game, right here. He bowls well, and we're through. He doesn't, and we're not.

2:07 p.m. Leg side wide, full toss. I suppose he can only get better from here.

2:08 p.m. Oh, dear. Duminy glances fine for four. Gully's had an indifferent start, to put it mildly.

2:09 p.m. Full, straight, pads. That was out. Don't know what the umpire saw there. That was out. That was fucking plumb. Fuck me.

2:10 p.m. Some reverse swing there, as Gully beats Kallis outside off. Wonder what Vettori's thinking right now. Asshole.

2:10 p.m. And beats him again. Gully's come back in this over. Just one ball to go, and six off it.

2:11 p.m. Aarrgh, goddamnitt. Kallis drives it between cover and mid off, which is in the circle. Good over for the Saffies, ten off it. 83-3 after fourteen. 67 needed off 36 balls.

2:12 p.m. Fawad Alam in. Wait, let me use the right punctuation. Fawad Alam in?

2:13 p.m. I guess Younis doesn't want Aamir or Razzaq to bowl again.

2:14 p.m. Kallis miscues, but it runs away for four. Seven off the first four balls.

2:14 p.m. And now a six. You really have to second guess this decision from Younis. I mean, with Ajmal with two left, Gully with three left, and Aamer with one left, that was 36 balls.

2:15 p.m. Two off the last ball. 98-3 off fifteen. Five overs left, 52 to get. That was a really bad decision. If we lose, that's where we lost it. Well that, and the last five overs of our innings.

2:16 p.m. What the fuck is Younis doing? Gully's taken off, and Ajmal back in. I guess Younis thinks taking the pace off is the key, but come on.

2:17 p.m. Waz is pissed. Can't blame him, to be fair.

2:18 p.m. Three off three to start. Come on, Ajmal. Come on.

2:19 p.m. Duminy tries to slog Ajmal, and it lands in no-man's land. At least go for it yaar.

2:19 p.m. And a single to finish. 105-3 after sixteen. 45 needed off 24 balls. Anyone's game, really.

2:21 p.m. Gully back in, and starts with a yorker. That's it bro. That's it.

2:22 p.m Tries to swing him over midwicket, but you can't do it if it's right up there. Kallis back on strike.

2:23 p.m. And another yorker. I hope everyone understands that the Fawad decision means Gully will bowl just three overs.

2:23 p.m. Brilliant stuff. It's been four yorkers in this over for three runs. "Super bowling," Waz gushes.

2:24 p.m. Great fielding at third man. Kallis gets an outside edge, and it flies to the boundary, before Ajmal dives and saves two.

2:25 p.m. And a great end to the over with another yorker. Just six off it, and South Africa need 39 off 18 balls. With Morkel to come, the game is still very much in the balance.

2:26 p.m And he's gone! Kallis holes out to long on off Ajmal. Just held it back there. Beautiful and crafty bowling. Kepler Wessels is distraught in the commentary box. Morkel in.

2:27 p.m. 39 needed off 17. My heart's pumping, and my fingers have lost all feeling.

2:28 p.m. A single to long on. Morkel on strike.

2:29 p.m. Darted in, and a legbye. Waz and Wessels are hilarious -- you'll struggle to find two more biased commentators. Appropriate for this tight match.

2:29 p.m. Duminy smashes Ajmal for four, and then follows it with four leg byes. Wow. What a game this has been. 29 off 13.

2:30 p.m. And a dot ball to finish. 29 needed off two overs. Uh, Mr. Captain: who the FUCK is going to bowl the last over? Do you realize what that Fawad Alam over has done? It basically cost us two overs.

2:32 p.m. Gully to bowl the penultimate over. I'm serious, my fingers have lost feeling. Don't know how I'm typing.

2:33 p.m. Low full toss to start, and it's just a single. 28 off 11.

2:33 p.m. Another yorker, and another leg bye. Gully's bowling yorkers like he's shelling fucking peanuts.

2:33 p.m. Slower ball, leg bye to Akmal. 26 needed off 9. Numbness is extending to my wrists. No dirty jokes, please.

2:34 p.m. Gully's lost his run up twice in a row. Wind's blowing hard, and Waz likes him opting out rather than trying to plow through.

2:35 p.m. And after another false start, another yorker squeezed to long on. Another single. 25 off 8.

2:36 p.m. ANOTHER yorker. This has been unbelievable stuff from Gul. It really has. 24 off 7.

2:37 p.m. Full, straight, drive to long off, one. 23 needed off the last over, to be bowled by Aamer. Has Gully done enough to protect the 17 year-old?

2:38 p.m. Alright, here we go. 6 balls.

2:39 p.m. Both fine leg and third man up in the circle.

2:39 p.m. Swing and a miss from Duminy. They have the wrong man on strike, South Africa. 23 off 5.

2:40 p.m. SIX! Full toss on leg stump, swing over midwicket. 17 off 4. Great shot.

2:41 p.m. Run out! Duminy smacks Aamer down the ground, Morkel tries to come back for two and is well short, as there's been a direct hit from Fawad Alam. Whew. It's all happening, as Bill Lawry would say. 16 needed off 3.

2:42 p.m. Boucher in, but he's at non-striker's end.

2:42 p.m. Two to long off. As long as there are no extras, we're through.

2:43 p.m. Four to midwicket. South Africa need 10 off 1 ball, only slightly less arduous than their 1992 Semi Final requirement.

2:44 p.m. And we've done it! South Africa lose ANOTHER semi final, and Pakistan bring up memories of 1992. We were down and out a week ago. But things can change quickly, and we haven't looked back since the disaster against Sri Lanka.

2:45 p.m. Dil Dil Pakistan is blaring away. Waz is basically coming all over Kepler Wessels' face.

2:46 p.m. Team effort -- everyone played their part, except for Razzaq. But one man stood out: Shahid Khan Afridi. What a player -- stood up when it counted. A fifty and a class spell of bowling. Just an unbelievable effort from everyone.

2:50 p.m. Wow, Nass, way to be sensitive. He flat out asked Grame Smith the choking question. Wow.

2:52 p.m. Younis is bloody hilarious. I love him.

2:53 p.m. Afridi's such a character. Nass: "Which did you enjoy more, the batting or the bowling?" Lala: "Uhh, both." Nass: "Can you win this final?" Lala: (after a pregnant pause) "Inshallah". Classic.

2:54 p.m. Just wrapping up here. My synopsis of the match is basically this: we were about 15 runs too light, mainly due to some excellent bowling from Parnell and Steyn at the end. We looked all over the place in the first six overs of the Saffies' innings, mainly due to Razzaq's non-threatening start. But once the spinners (Ajmal and Afridi) came on, the game changed, an we began to squeeze them. Gully came in, as usual, and other than Younis' Fawad brain fart, we kept our heads in the field and didn't really panic.

So South Africa lose another semi they should have won on paper, but truth be told, they didn't really choke this one away. They just ran into a team hitting its stride at exactly the right time.

With that, I'm calling it a day. I hope you've enjoyed the coverage, and see you for the final at Lords.

UPDATE: Here's an excellent measure of the tension in this game. As I write this update, there are 41 comments to this post. Between 1:53 p.m. (Chicago time) and 2:47 p.m. (Chicago time), there were a grand total of zero comments posted. Basically, once Afridi got Gibbs, you guys went: fuck the blog, I'm watching this and not taking my eyes off the screen.

Anyways, thanks for the comments guys. Somebody mentioned a Cover It Live type scene for the final, but I don't want to over complicate things. As it is, this technology/computer/internet stuff confuses the hell out of me. Let's just keep it simple and as it is. I do read the comments in between overs though (if a little quickly) so rest assured they're not going to waste.

UPDATE II: 14 out of the last 18 Facebook updates on my front page refer in some way to the cricket. You think the Pakistani people are pumped for this? After what we've been through? You bet your ass.

Daniel Vettori Is A Douchebag

Like most Karachites I wasn't in the best of moods today morning (thank you PEPCO, WAPDA and KESC) therefore it was really nice to read Andy Bull's article "Which team will win the World Twenty20?" in the Guardian. Bull dissects the performances of the 4 teams thus far and then reaches to the following conclusion:

"My heart says Pakistan, my head says South Africa, my gut says West Indies and my gammy knee is going for Sri Lanka. I'm sticking with my original prediction of South Africa."

His heart says Pakistan! When was the last time any non-Pakistani cheered Pakistan on? Sure, foreign nationals might want us to defeat the Taliban, but that's because the Taliban are scary homicidial maniacs. This is different, and it shows why cricket is so important for Pakistan.

Unfortunately my joy was short lived, because even though there are plenty of commentators who support Pakistan and want us to win, almost all of them refer to the 'controversial' manner in which Umar Gul has been reverse swinging the ball. Lets just be clear, there is no controversy. Daniel Vettori as captain of a sucky New Zealand team was alarmed by the swing generated by Gul and he approached the match referree to make an unofficial enquiry, they checked the ball and found nothing amiss.

I don't get it, did Vettori make an official complaint or not? Surely, if it was an official complaint then then Vettori should have been asked to explain the basis on which the complaint was made. If that wasn't the case his 'enquiry' should simply not have been entertained. To say that the ball is swinging too much is just not good enough. Will he ask the umpires to check Gayle's bat after he deposits Vettori's shit bowling to the next city to check and see if it isn't made out of dark matter?

AND even if all of this had taken place was there any need for him to give this loaded statement to the press:

"I think it's important to note the position we were in when Gul came on in the 12th over. We were well and truly behind the game; Pakistan were dominating and were likely to go on to win," said Vettori whose team face Sri Lanka in Nottingham on Tuesday needing to win to reach the semi-finals.

"The amount of reverse swing that we saw was new to us, and therefore we raised a couple of concerns with the on-field umpires and the match referee.

"They relayed back to us that they had no issues at all with the state of the ball. We accepted that - and now we move on to our important game against Sri Lanka.

It didn't take long for everyone to catch on to that and during the Pakistan v Ireland match even the commentators were referring to the 'extraordinary amount of swing' being generated by Umarl Gul. This is such bullshit. The man is a really good bowler, he always has been (when not struggling with a back injury) and he certainly has the ability to run through the middle / lower order of a middling side.

Thankfully we have a proper captain now rather than a cross-border cassanova and Vettori got a fitting retort:

"Everyone has his own opinion, especially when you get out cheaply and lose a game like that because New Zealand have a big reputation in world cricket."

Cheating is a serious allegation and Vettori should have had more sense then to make such claims, more importantly the ICC should provide a clear framework under which complaints can be made as well as guidelines or reporting them to the press.

I-Had-No-Idea-About-This Fact Of The Day

Nobody ever tells me about cool internet/computer stuff, so please ignore this post if this information is painfully obvious to you.

I have been told that on Amazon.com, a user's "Wishlist" is public. In fact, you can search for and access anyone's wishlist. Needless to say I find this incredibly voyeuristic or, put differently, bloody amazing.

All you have to do is sign out, and then run your mouse over "Gifts & Wish Lists" and then type in a name or email address of someone you know.



Before you get any ideas, you should know I don't have a Wishlist on Amazon, and have put all my prospective purchases in my shopping list (because I'm smart like that). So yeah, nice try.

Anyway, just thought you guys should know if you don't already.

Revisionist Iran Links

As news trickles out of Iran, some truisms have been established; that social networking has added to the potency of the protests, Hossein Mousavi is the face of the reformist movement and the ruling regime has been badly shaken. The information available is so limited - although that has not stopped everyone from suddenly becoming an Iran expert - that I'm not sure what I think about events in the country. Nonetheless, I thought these three pieces challenging the prevailing wisdom were well-argued:

Evgeny Morozov at Foreign Policy disputes the centrality of Twitter in organizing protests within Iran.

Also at FP, Ranj Alaaldin has a sober assessment of how Mousavi might rule. It serves as a cautionary tale to those who got similarly excited by events in Georgia and Lebanon.

And Steve Coll at The New Yorker argues that recent events have shown the strength of the ruling establishment

It'd be interesting to hear what you guys think about these revisionist pieces.

Quote of the Day

Asif Zardari contradicts just about every statement he has made over the past three months without sacrificing his arrogance. For best effect, read this rhyming statement with some P. Diddy beats playing in the background:

‘What I need is trade, not aid. I'm looking for MOUs (memoranda of understanding) and not IOUs and I intend to get them,’

The "Revolution" In Iran: The Role Of The Military And Communication Technology

I don't have any particular thoughts on what's going on Iran right now. But what I do have is a short response paper -- just about a thousand words -- for a class titled "Democratic and Nationalist Revolutions" that I took in my first year at grad school. I think it's sort of relevant to the issues at hand. Without further ado...
_____________________________________________________________________________________

The literature on 21^st century revolutions is understandably sparse. Uprisings in places like Serbia, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon and Ukraine have taken place so recently that it easy to grant academics time to come to a consensus –- or not –- about what happened, why it happened and how it happened. What is slightly more difficult to accept, however, is the lack of theoretical grounding in studies of these “color revolutions”. Specifically, there are two important variables in explaining both cross-sectional and longitudinal variance in outcomes that are missing in these analyses: the roles of militaries and digital technology. I tackle each of these in step.

Of the works I read this week, the most theoretical was Mark Thompson and Philipp Kuntz’s Stolen Elections: The Case of the Serbian October. Thompson and Kuntz do well to explain why semi-authoritarian regimes such as that of Slobodan Milosevic are at risk of revolutions. They argue that semi-authoritarian regimes seek to impose a façade of representative government by holding elections, and that these elections –- when they do not go to plan, and are consequently rigged or stolen –- present oppositions with the opportunity to rise up against them.

Thompson and Kuntz write that stolen elections cause mass outrage at the regime and vividly illustrate its unpopularity. Stolen elections also test the loyalty of regime personnel and cause “splits between those are willing to ignore and the voters' will in order to stay in power and those who favor accepting the opposition victory or at least calculate that the opposition is likely to take power anyway.” While this is a sound analysis of semi-authoritarian regimes’ and their vulnerability to revolutions in times of electoral crisis, Thompson and Kuntz do not account for the all-important role of the military.

One of the constitutive aspects of semi-authoritarian regimes, as opposed to fully authoritarian regimes, is the fact that militaries will not unquestioningly act on the orders of leaders. In addition, militaries in semi-authoritarian states are less likely to brutally assault their own populations on a widespread scale, especially if (a) the cause of the opposition is viewed as “just” by the wider world, and (b) violence against the citizenry is likely to be broadcast by local or international media. The role of the military in semi-authoritarian states, then, is likely to be more permissive than those in fully authoritarian states during times of political instability for two reasons: a lack of complete control of the military by the political leadership, and a disinclination by the military to commit violence against their fellow citizens.

We see one or both of these mechanisms in all of the cases under study. In Serbia, for instance, Thompson and Kuntz write that “Army chief of staff Nebojsa Pavkovic…publicly declared that the armed forces would take a neutral stance and respect the electorate’s decision. Even Milosevic’s special paramilitary units cooperated with the opposition to avoid bloodshed.” In a description of civil unrest in the important Kyrgyz city of Bishkek, Scott Radnitz writes that “at some point, people broke through the line of defenders and flooded into the main government building, sealing the fate of Akayev, who had already given orders not to use force.” Oussama Safa, writing on the Cedar revolution in Lebanon, notes that “the Lebanese Army, though under orders to prevent demonstrations, looked the other way.” When authorities in Ukraine were considering violently clamping down on protesters, Andrew Wilson tells us that “the regular army contacted the interior ministry, to say they were unwilling to do the regime’s dirty work.” These cases – and the contrasting case of Uzbekistan in 2005 – demonstrate the central importance of a military that does not stand in the way of political oppositions, an importance that remains under-theorized in the extant literature.

Similarly under-theorized is the role played by distinctly 21^st century technology. Certainly e-mail, cell phones and pagers were not available to those congregating on a tennis court outside the Palace of Versailles in 1789. New technologies shorten the distance between citizens -– stop me if I sound like Tom Friedman –- and enable them to obviate their reliance on traditional middlemen like television news (which can be censored) and newspapers and pamphlets (likewise). This means that word can travel exceptionally quickly amongst opposition movements, and that rallies and protests can be organized at a shorter notice than we have seen in 18^th, 19^th and 20^th century revolutions.

During the Tulip revolution in Kyrgyzstan, Radnitz notes that news of a fracas in which some protestors were injured in limited clashes with soldiers “worked its way around the region by mobile phone, radio and taxicab…[and as a result] many previously passive people began converging on Jalalabad, where crowd numbers may have swelled as high as twenty thousand.” Safa writes that after the funeral of assassinated Syrian politician Rafiq Hariri, “backed by various elements of civil society and using mobile phones, e-mail, and public announcements to spread the word, opposition groups organized daily vigils and marches at various spots around Beirut.”

Wilson too notes the importance of technology in the Orange revolution in Ukraine, writing that “the rival opposition network…won the battle for hearts and minds, including most ‘opinion-formers’ in Kiev. Opposition [web]sites were groovier, funnier, more informative, and, in the last analysis, simply more honest. Internet access rose by 39.6 per cent throughout November, and continued to rocket up thereafter. Vladislav Kasiv of Pora claimed this aspect of their work was more important than their physical contribution to blocking buildings and helping with the demonstration.” Wilson further writes that “the opposition also texted campaign slogans to mobiles, and used them to give times and places for demonstrations.”

These examples illustrate one of the central differences between the revolutions of yesterday and those of today (and tomorrow, no doubt): the widespread availability and access to digital technology, which circumvents the need to employ traditional modes of communication that can be controlled by governing authorities, and thus allow opposition movements to organize rallies and protests easier and quicker than previously possible.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Further reading:

Foran, John. 2005. Taking Power: On the Origins of Third World Revolutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

Radnitz, Scott. 2006. "What Really Happened in Kyrgyzstan?" Journal of Democracy 17:2, pp. 132-146.

Safa, Oussama. 2006. "Lebanon Springs Forward" Journal of Democracy 17:1, pp. 22-37.

Thompson, Mark R. and Philipp Kuntz. 2004. "Stolen Elections: The Case of the Serbian October," Journal of Democracy 15:4, pp. 159-172.

Wilson, Andrew. 2005. Ukraine's Orange Revolution (New Haven: Yale University Press).

Live Blogging Pakistan Vs. Ireland T20 World Cup AKA Revenge Day AKA Let's Do This For Bob AKA Go Back To Potato Farming And Leave The Cricket To Us

Hello and welcome to Rs. 5's coverage of today's T20 world cup game between Pakistan and Ireland. As always, all times are local (i.e. Chicago).

7:21 a.m. Bloody hell, it's early. My eyes aren't even open. The W thinks I am completely insane. But she doesn't understand. You, loyal cricket follower, understand, but she doesn't. She doesn't know/remember what happened in 2007. Today, we correct history.

7:23 a.m. We've won the toss, and chosen to bat. Same team as the one that destroyed NZ.

7:24 a.m. I want this to be a Tony Soprano vs. Fabian Petrulio type of situation: revenge.

7:30 a.m. And we're off. Akmal facing up to Boyd Rankin, and works away the second ball off his hips for one. Shahzaib at the other end.

7:32 a.m. And straight away there's some action, as Shahzaib skies one over mid off trying to work it through the leg side. Falls safe for two. Anyway, four off the first over. I want 250.

7:34 a.m. Trent Johnston to bowl from the other end. "Bowls a heavy ball" according to Alan Wilkins. "Bowls a wide ball" according to the umpire.

7:35 a.m. Bang! A full ball pinged over cover. That heavily clattered into the advertising hoards.

7:37 a.m. Iffyish shot from Shahzaib, just evades mid off running back. Ends up for four, and neither he nor I will complain. Hey, man, they don't pay you to be pretty in T20. It's 13-0 after two.

7:39 a.m. Looks to be a beautiful day for cricket. But I am sitting about 10,000 miles away and watching on a real dodgy feed, so don't trust everything I say.

7:41 a.m. Bloody hell, this Boyd Rankin fellow is built like fucking Frankenstein. He bounces one well over Akmal's head, who of course tries to hook it. FYI, Akmal was out pulling against both England and New Zealand. Anyway, quiet over -- just the one off it. 14-0 after three.

7:43 a.m. Akmal's looking very iffy here. Hasn't middled one yet.

7:44 a.m. My powers know no bounds. Akmal middles the next one alright. A nonchalant flick into the stands at midwicket. First six of the day.

7:45 a.m. And now it's Shahzaib's turn to get into the act, flicking a good length ball to deep square for four. The next one is lifted over mid on, and this has been a good over so far. 14 off it already with one to go.

7:46 a.m. Yeah, make that twenty off it. Huge hit over long on. Count me fairly and squarely as occupying the Shahzaib bandwagon. 34-0 after four.

7:48 a.m. What do you think Salman Butt is thinking right now? "Thank God the management had the good sense to see that I'm a terrible, terrible player"?

7:49 a.m. Shahzaib has added something to our team that most teams already have but we inexplicably didn't: big hitting at the top of the order. I mean, it's frigging twenty overs. You think our management would have caught on to the fact that you might want to score quickly at the top (and in the middle, and at the end). Anyway, this Rankin fellow is bowling well, mixing up menacing bouncers with balls swinging away. Three off the over, and we move on to 37-0 after five.

7:51 a.m. Alex Cusack into the attack. Apparently he got 4-18 against Sri Lanka.

7:54 a.m. Well, that was one too many attempted lofts from Shahzaib. Tries to get it over mid-off again, and this time it's safely pouched. He'd done that a couple of times and gotten away with it. No worries, he's done his job.

7:55 a.m. Surprise move here, as Boom Boom Afridi walks in. 38-1 after six, by the way.

7:57 a.m. With the fielding restrictions up, Regan West (slow left arm) into the attack. "Dream come true for Shahid, spinners on" says Waz. Chappel thinks it's a good move to have him up the order, so that he actually has a chance to get into form. Meanwhile, Akmal plays a gorgeous cover drive for four.

7:59 a.m. Wow, Afridi strategically placing it so they can back for two. What's happened to him? Anyway, eleven off the over and it's 49-1 after seven.

8:01 a.m. And now a smashed cover drive off Cusack. Say it softly, but Afridi's actually playing well.

8:02 a.m. And now Akmal paddle sweeps Cusack (a medium pacer) over short-fine's head. Four more, and we're looking good here. Also, it's nice to see Akmal carrying on after a solidish start -- he's thrown it away the last few games. He's such an important player for this team.

8:03 a.m. Great over, with a couple of boundaries and a couple of twos. 14 off it, and we're motoring here: 63-1 after eight. Really sensible cricket, mixing powerful hitting with aggressive running and smart placement.

8:07 a.m. 73-1 after nine. Remember, kids: aim for 250. So we 177 off 11, just around 16 an over from here.

8:09 a.m. An off-spinner in from the other end. Afridi greets him with a powerful sweep for four, and he's raced to 24 off 12. The funny thing is he hasn't really gone after the bowling.

8:10 a.m. Well it was too good to last. Afridi holes out to long on. Sigh. 78-2 after 9.3. Younis in.

8:12 a.m. Tidy first over from Generic Off-Spinner, and it's 79-2 after 10. Johnston back in from the other end.

8:13 a.m. "Three and four, lads," yells the keeper. "Two freshies out here, two freshies out here." Listen up, Irish dude: shut up. You don't even play this sport. You don't belong here. Stop talking like you know what you're doing. Just stop it. Go home.

8:15 a.m. As Manrekar says, Younis looking busy straight away. Two, four, one to start.

8:16 a.m. Beautiful. Akmal plays a really delicate late to the medium pacer, the type which makes the purists go "Aha". 91-2 after eleven.

8:18 a.m. Stop the presses: Younis played a sweep shot against a spinner. Anyway, five off the over (including a half stumping chance against Akmal), and Pakistan are 96-2 after twelve.

8:20 a.m. Shot! Akmal opens his arms against West, and lifts him over extra cover. He's the complete batsmen when in full flow, Akmal.

8:21 a.m. And Younis is gone! Nothing shot in the end, as he tries to slog sweep across the line and gets bowled. Very unYounis like shot there, at least at this stage of his innings. 102-3 in 12.5 and Misbah in.

8:24 a.m. These spinners are being really slow and loopy, as Manrekar calls it. Making the batsmen come up with the pace -- smart bowling. Anyway, Akmal holds the key for us. He needs to bat until the end.

8:25 a.m. Tidy over, with six off it and no boundaries. 109-3 after 14. Come on, guys. Let's get to 200. Seriously. 200. Teach these bastards a lesson.

8:26 a.m. I would like to nominate Kepler Wessels for the coveted "world's most boring and least insightful commentator" award. Other nominees: Rameez, Arun Lal, Bob Willis, Jimmy Adams, Ranjit Fernando.

8:28 a.m. Another tidyish over, seven off it. Just biding their time, methinks. 116-3 after 15.

8:30 a.m. Fifty for Akmal! Well played, young man. Not exactly Karachi circa 2006, but then again, what is? Now carry on.

8:32 a.m. Akmal tees off, and lifts it over the covers. Another gear now that he got his fifty?

8:33 a.m. And now Misbah gets going by smashing a low full toss past the cover fielder for four. Good over, and it's 129-3 after sixteen.

8:34 a.m. The seamers have been carted for a lot more than the spinners. Clue for how we should approach things in the field, right? I expect Ajmal, Afridi and Malik to bowl their full quotas.

8:36 a.m. What the fuck, dude. Four singles off the first four balls. Get a goddamn move on, guys.

8:37 a.m. And now Akmal's gone. Brilliant. Dances down and basically yorks himself. 133-4 in 16.5. This hasn't been a great over for us, to put it mildly. Razzaq in. Not that I disagree with the move or anything, but allow me to say the following: poor Fawad Alam.

8:39 a.m. Three overs left. Ok, seriously guys, we need at least 160-170. Let's get some boundaries going here.

8:40 a.m. Misbah obliges. To be fair, if you're going to bowl a full toss at slowish pace, you're going to end up in the stands. 98 meters, we're reliably told.

8:41 a.m. What a comical dismissal. Quite possibly the slowest delivery ever bowled in cricket, and Misbah's through his swing by the time the ball gets to him. Gets the toe end, and loops up for the keeper to take a smart catch. Malik in, and Pakistan 141-5 in 17.4 overs.

8:42 a.m. Shoaib Malik's nickname is "moon". I have no idea why. Alan Wilkins elicits 42 million groans with "Well, I hope he's a full moon, not a half moon." Good one, Wilko. Good one.

8:43 a.m. Just nine from the over, and Pakistan are 142-5 with two overs to go. BOUNDARIES! MORE THAN ONE AN OVER, THANKS.

8:45 a.m. Single to mid off. By the way, Waz pronounces the word "interesting" like it's "entrusting".

8:46 a.m. Single to backward point. I have three words. WHAT. THE. FUCK.

8:46 a.m. Bouncer, through to the keeper. Dot. Two off four in this over, by the way.

8:47 a.m. Single to long on. Awesome.

8:48 a.m. And a single to finish. Brilliant. 146-5. We'll be lucky to get to 160. Disappointing close to the innings, it has to be said. After the start we got, we really should have ended up with 180. It can change so quickly in this format -- a couple of quiet overs, and suddenly you're left with a below average total.

8:50 a.m. Two singles to start this over. I can only presume match-fixing.

8:50 a.m. Thank you, Razzaq. Massive six, ramrod straight.

8:51 a.m. A two to midwicket.

8:52 a.m. And a single to finish. Ireland will require exactly eight an over against a top-class bowling line up. But you have to give them credit: they pulled it back really well in the last six overs. Their spinners bowled really well, as did Rankin. For Pakistan, Akmal was obviously the best player, and Shahzaib and Afridi both played useful knocks. No one else really did anything of note.

8:54 a.m. Misbah starts every sentence with "Yeah, of course." He also looks quite pissed off. Pretty bland interview with Chappell though, which is yet another reason Younis is a better choice for captain. The "WWF" and "fun" and "dummy captain" and "every game is like a semi final just to get to the semi final" quotes? Come on man. You can't argue against that stuff.

8:58 a.m. What do you think people? Is it enough? What about net run rate considerations?

9:08 a.m. Aamer to open the attack. Porterfield (?) works off his hip for two to start. Follows with a single. Come on, Aamer. Crank it up.

9:11 a.m. A couple of LBW appeals against Niall O'Brien. First one was perhaps too high, second one probably had a bit of bat and struck just a bit outside off. Anyway, six off the first over. Decent start for the Irish.

9:13 a.m. The replays suggest that both shouts were closer than I had first thought. But it's Rudy, so we really shouldn't expect anything.

9:14 a.m. These guys just keep it tapping it and running. Our fielding in the circle is so bad, it's not funny.

9:14 a.m. And Razzaq is picked up over mid on by O'Brien. Excellent.

9:16 a.m. Seven from a harmless over from Razzaq. 13-0 after two. "Ireland are really up for this, they're up for it," says Wilko. Shut up, Wilko. I don't want to hear this crap.

9:18 a.m. Aamer with a couple of quick bouncers, flying right past O'Brien, who's apparently been hit in his career a couple of times according to Kepler Wessels. Just keep bowling the bouncers, then.

9:19 a.m. GONE! The bouncer does the trick. O'Brien is caught one-third of the way between a pull, a short arm-jab and a leave, and it just scoops up to Aamer for the caught and bowled. Well done, Aamer. Well fucking done. Next Waz? You heard it here first.

9:20 a.m. By the way, I was joking with the whole "next Waz" thing. Even my hypometer is not that off-base.

9:21 a.m. Beautifully carved through the covers by the new batsman, Paul Stirling. 18-1 after three.

9:22 a.m. Razzaq is just putting it up there -- this can't even reliably be called "bowling". "It's rather gentle," Wilko says.

9:24 a.m. Razzaq apparently bowls a slower delivery. I say "apparently" because it's impossible to tell with him. Anyway, five from the over and Ireland are 23-1 after four. Decentish start for both sides, I would say.

9:28 a.m. This is great bowling from Aamer. Just back of a length, at good pace, and well directed. Can't really get him away.

9:29 a.m. Yeah, Fawad! Great fielding at the boundary. Saved a run there. Seven off the over, and Ireland are 30-1 after five. Can't play the short ball from Aamer AT ALL, for whatever it's worth.

9:33 a.m. Note to Razzaq: you can't bowl halfway down the pitch if you're bowling at 70mph. That instantly transfers it from "bouncer" to "long hop". Ruins the good over, and Ireland move on to 37-1 after six overs. Afridi into the attack.

9:36 a.m. Ireland are ticking along here. Getting singles and twos regularly. I mean, they're not dominating or anyting but...I donno. I don't feel comfortable.

9:38 a.m. Ok, I feel a touch more comfortable. Stirling tries to slog sweep Afridi and gets bowled. What a bowler Afridi has become. Kevin O'Brien in.

9:39 a.m. Ajmal in from the other end. "This will be the test for Ireland," Kumble informs us.

9:41 a.m. They're just quietly knocking it around. 47-2 after eight. Rate required around nine and a half.

9:43 a.m. Akmal, please stop talking. Please.

9:45 a.m. Too many twos in that over, as the Irish batsmen just knock it halfway to the boundary and challenge our pathetic out cricket. 55-2 after nine.

9:45 a.m. Malik replaces Ajmal after just the one over.

9:48 a.m. This has been a good over for Ireland. A three and a boundary in between a couple of singles, and there's already ten off it with a ball to go. Why was Ajmal taken off after a really good first over? Malik's half the bowler Ajmal is. Anyway, Ireland move on to 66-2 after ten.

9:51 a.m. Afridi's keeping things tight. Rate required inching to ten.

9:51 a.m. Damnitt. Boundary to end the over. 74-2 after eleven.

9:52 a.m. And Umar Gul into the attack. A bit early for me, but whatever. In Younis We Trust.

9:54 a.m. Aaaannnd we're into a discussion of ball-tampering. Lovely. Cameras trained on the ball. Let me say this: Pakistan unjustly complains about a lot of things on the international cricket stage, and generally we act like we have a permanent chip sculpted on to our collective shoulder. But just for once, I would like the Western countries to just appreciate when we're better than them. I mean, is it really a surprise when we kick New Zealand's ass with quick bowling? We've ALWAYS kicked their ass. In Pakistan. In New Zealand. In third countries. In test cricket. In ODI cricket. In meaningless games. In World Cup semi finals. I think our record of being a better team, and a better skilled team, is fairly well-established. I just wish they would acknowledge this, instead of casting asperions on the reasons for our success.

Put differently, fuck you, New Zealand.

9:57 a.m. Ireland 81-2 after twelve, by the way.

9:59 a.m. Afridi's last over is, as usual, full of guile and smarts. Just the six off it, and he finishes with 1-26 in his spell. Ireland need 73 off 7 overs.

10:01 a.m. Ajmal replaces Gul after one over, and gets a wicket right off the bat. A mistimed push, and Younis gobbles it up at extra cover with a well-timed jump. Ireland drop to 87-3, and finally Pakistan break the partnership.

10:03 a.m. Ajmal ruins his wicket-maiden with a last-ball wide. This better be a quiet last ball.

10:04 a.m. It is. Dot to finish. 88-3 after fourteen. Rate required is an even 12. Gully replaces Afridi.

10:07 a.m. Great bowling from Gully. Beats the left hander three times in a row outside off, and follows with a bouncer.

10:08 a.m. And the next one is fuller and on leg stump. Don't know what Akmal is appealing for.

10:09 a.m. And again, full and on leg stump. Just the leg-bye from the over. Beautiful bowling. As Manrejkar says, Gully has all the tools: pace, swing, direction, a good bouncer, and an excellent yorker. Ireland are 89-3 after 15.

10:10 a.m. And Razzaq drops a catch at long off. I've run out of mean jokes about our fielding. I'm just going to matter of factly tell you when we misfield and drop catches. That's it.

10:11 a.m. No mistake this time though, as this one goes straight to him. Maybe the fact that he didn't have to move helped. Ireland drop to 93-4, and this game is over. But we need to keep our foot on the pedal because of net run rate issues.

10:13 a.m. Five off the over, Ireland 98-4. They need 62 in four overs.

10:15 a.m. Stumps all over the place. Yikes. How many bowleds/LBWs is Gully going to get in this tournament?

10:18 a.m. Have you noticed how few wides Umar Gul bowls? He's always at the stumps or within six inches of them. It's the Pakistani way for quick bowlers, I guess. (Except for Asif)

10:19 a.m. Gul hits the stumps but it's not out because it was a free hit. What a dumbass rule this is.

10:20 a.m. Anyway, Ireland are 105-5. 55 needed from 18 balls.

10:22 a.m. Akmal gets a stumping off an Ajmal doosra. Brings back Saqlain-Moin memories.

10:24 a.m. Hahaha. Classic. Cusack (the new batsmen) hits Ajmal in the deep for a two. Akmal then says "yeh maarey ga" ("he's going to go for it") so Ajmal serves up a doosra. Sure enough, Cusack comes down, swings, misses, and Akmal has himself another stumping. Brilliant.

10:25 a.m. And now it's Gully, getting another batsmen bowled. He doesn't half smash the wickets, Gully. Ajmal and Gully, if I'm not mistaken, are now the tournament's two leading wicket-takers.

10:27 a.m. I think it's safe to say no.55 is going to be my next Pakistan shirt purchase. Now he gets a run out, as there's a little bit of confusion, and Gully runs down, aims, and gets the direct hit. Things have fallen apart for Ireland quite quickly here. 111-9.

10:30 a.m. Some mild comedy here, as a powerful gust of wind drops the umpires hat, drops the bails, blows the boundary in, and leads to the bowler's cap escaping Rudy's control too. Shahzaib goes and collects Gully's cap and promptly sticks it down the back of his pants. I'd be careful about wearing that cap if I was Gully.

10:33 a.m. And that's the end of Gully's spell. Four overs, 2-19. Brilliant stuff. And yes, confirmation that Gully and Ajmal are the leading wicket takers in the tournament (12 and 11 respectively).

10:33 a.m. Last over will be bowled by Aamer. He starts with a leg-side wide. He did his part too, don't forget, with the early breakthrough.

10:36 a.m. So as this winds down, let's discuss the group at large. Basically Pakistan are now through. Sri Lanka will be through if they beat NZ. If NZ win, it will then depend on net run rate to decide who between them and SL go through. The only question for Pakistan is now whether or not we go through as the first seed or second seed. Seeing as how the second seed will be playing (a very dangerous looking) South Africa, we should be pulling for NZ to beat SL badly enough to knock them out, but not so badly to get their NRR above ours. Don't know if that's mathematically possible, but we shall see.

10:38 a.m. And we're done here. Pakistan win by 39 runs in a comprehensive victory. As Ian Chappell says, "things coming together for Pakistan." FYI, the table shows our NRR well above both SL's and NZ's. But because NZ has a better NRR than SL, any win for them gets them through. So we basically we should be pulling for a narrow win for NZ against SL. Anyway, that's it from me, I hope you've enjoyed the coverage, and take care.

Pimp Your Faith With Junaid Jamshed

Once upon a time a man called Junaid Jamshed would lend his voice to Vital Signs and become the sound track of a new generation.



One military dictator later and the poster child of post-Zia liberalism became the poster child for post-9/11 Islamism. JJ is now quite literally the official spokesman on Islam in Pakistan. Consider this for example, recently rumours were circulated that Lays Chips contained non-Halal ingredients and were therefore Haram (only in Pakistan). So widespread were these rumours that it had a significant impact on their sales. Pepsi Pakistan, makers of Lays, needed someone to rebutt these rumours. Who could they turn to? A scholar? No, we don't have any. A religious leader? Nope, their beards are unkempt. How about doing a sketch showing the ludicrousness of the rumour? Subtle message, I don't think so.

I know, thought the marketing executive at Pepsi while smoking a joint, we'll get a former pop icon turned naat khwan, pay him close to 2 Million Rupees (verified) and see the magic happen. Excellent!

Here's the result:



Now when he's not fronting for a multinational corporation and making millions for three hours of work and telling Pakistanis which chips to eat, he's telling Pakistanis what not to do.

SM was recently working on a project that included JJ, she was standing next to a colleague when JJ appeared greeted the man and almost immediately started telling the man that he shouldn't wear his watch around his left wrist; the reason: 'you use your left hand for "na-paak" things (wiping your ass? wanking?) and your watch can get dirty.

In a seperate incident, Z was on a flight seated behind JJ and Saeed Anwar when JJ turned his attentions to another passenger and lectured him for half an hour on why he shouldn't your use his left hand to eat. Once JJ had finished Saeed Anwar turned to the man, smiled and said "just be glad he hasn't started on your clothes," the passenger was wearing trousers and a shirt.

A true public servant.

P.S.

My favourite Vital Signs song:

Sentimental Youtube Of The Day

My dad sent me this video -- it's a five-minute short film from Greece.

Live Blogging Pakistan Vs. New Zealand

Sorry for the late start, I just got home. As always, all times are local.

11:42 a.m. NZ are 21-1 in 2.4 overs. This is a must-win for Pakistan, not necessarily so for NZ. So basically, I fully expect them to play harder than us.

11:45 a.m. Razzaq opening the attack? Lovely. Gets picked up over mid on for four. Wasim: "He's not very sharp." No shit. Maybe it's the lack of spinach?

11:46 a.m. Historically, Pakistan have always smashed NZ. All of our players have had career days against them: Miandad, Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, hell even Sami had a great spell against them once. Anyway, Razzaq gets picked up for four more over mid off, as NZ move on to 33-1 off four.

11:49 a.m. So I go to the bathroom and NZ lose a wicket. Awesome. I'm happy they lost one, but couldn't they have waited 45 seconds? Anyway, this Redmond fellow lobbed an Aamir full toss to mid on, and NZ are 33-2 in four and a bit overs. Anything above 120 will be beyond our batting, mind.

11:54 a.m. Gone! I saw this one! Razzaq angles one in to this Guptill (?) chap, who swings, misses, and is caught plumb in front. Classic Razzaq dismissal, and NZ in a spot of bother here. 37-3 in 5.3 What a comeback by Popeye! Two years it's been. Jacob Oram in, whose nickname is apparently "Big Jake".

11:57 a.m Beats him straight away outside off, with a bit of nibble off the pitch. It's all happening, as Bill Lawry would say.

11:58 a.m. Great over. I don't believe I'm applauding Razzaq, but there you go.

11:59 a.m. Interesting move here -- Ajmal into the attack before Umar Gul.

12:01 p.m. Afridi slides over the ball. Just a single though. By the way, do you think Pakistan will EVER be a good fielding side? I mean, say it's the year 2100, and Pakistan is still a viable nation state and cricket still exists. Do you think our fielding will still suck?

12:03 p.m. Afridi in from the other end. Will Gully bowl his four on the trot toward the end? Anyway, NZ have slowed down a bit here -- quite natural with the fall of wickets and the spinners on. 42-3 in 7.2.

12:04 p.m. Direct hit would have had Styris, as he set off after playing a scoop. Of course, we're Pakistani, so Akmal has to collect. They're playing the "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" tick-tock in the back, as the third umpire figures things out. Not out.

12:06 p.m. Great over, two off it. NZ 43-3 after eight.

12:07 p.m. Styris advances and launches Ajmal for six over long on. For a second, it looked like it would end up in Gul's hands at long on, but just went over. No worries, he's bowled well.

12:09 p.m. Oyee. Ajmal gets Styris' edge with the doosra, but no slip in. A single to short third. Good over for NZ, as they move on to 54-3 in nine.

12:11 p.m. Take care, Big Jake. Tries to smash Afridi over the top, gets beaten in flight, and Misbah takes a harder-than-it-looks catch running back from extra cover toward long off, over his shoulder. Some McGlashan fellow is in. I'm just going to call him McG for convenience if that's ok with you.

12:13 p.m. This is great bowling from Afridi, giving Styris all sorts of problems: Manjrekar says "this is almost artistic from Afridi". Not quite, but I see what he's saying. His variations are very clever and well-thought out.

12:14 p.m. Shoaib Malik into the attack. With the ball stopping on the pitch, this is smart from Younis, making the NZ batsmen come up with the pace off the ball.

12:15 p.m. A couple of tap-and-runs. We're terrible in the circle. No bloody direct hits. Anyway, Malik bowls a full toss to McG who times it away through to wide long off for four. NZ on to 64-4 off 11.

12:18 p.m. Oooooh. Quicker one from Afridi, and McG looked very confused there. 80 mph. "Goodness" says Ian Bishop.

12:19 p.m. As Faisal Iqbal would say, "Oyyye. Gully!". Saves three at short third as Afridi got reverse swept, and Gully dives full-length. What a player.

12:20 p.m. More good fielding, as Ajmal saves a boundary and keeps it to three. "They can blow hot and cold" Ian Bishop tells us. "They're blowing hot right now." Is Ian Bishop actually engaging in dirty talk? Anyway, Gully into the attack from the other end, and will probably bowl out from here. NZ at 72-2 after 12.

12:24 p.m. WHAT A CATCH! AFRIDI, YOU FUCKING BEAUTY!! Styris skies one over mid on, Afridi sprints back, full tilt, and takes it coming over his head. Without a doubt, the toughest type of catch in cricket. Please watch the Youtube of that later. Unbelievable. The celebration was kickass too, with the arms spread out and the fingers pointing out. Afridi's so fucking badass.

12:26 p.m. NZ are 73-5 in 12.3, and in real trouble.

12:27 p.m. Make that 73-6. McG tries to, uh, sweep Gully after coming down, and is hit plumb in front of a fullish delivery. Simon Doull is doubtful. I'm doubtful Doull knows what the hell he's talking about. Gully on a hat trick. James Franklin in.

12:28 p.m. Oooooh. Full and swinging in, but just going down the legside. My heart's pumping right now, and the W is giving me strange looks.

12:29 p.m. Gully is moving it all over the place. In and out, bounce and swing. NZ 74-6 after 13.

12:30 p.m. Ah, that's the Pakistan we know and hate. Afridi bowls a quicker one and is glanced straight to short fine, who of course lets it go straight through his legs for four.

12:32 p.m. Afridi finishes a brilliant spell: 1-17 off four, and it really should have been 1-13. Awesome bowling.

12:33 p.m. NZ 80-6 after 14. There's no doubt about it, we're up for this. There's great energy out there.

12:34 p.m. Ajmal back in, replacing Gully after one (two-wicket) over. In Younis We Trust.

12:35 p.m. Decent over, four off it. Five overs to go, and NZ are 84-6.

12:36 p.m. Gully in from Afridi's end.

12:39 p.m. And McCullum (the other one) is gone too, losing his off stump to a full-pitched delivery from Gul. His figures? 3-4 in 1.4 overs. NZ are 88-7 and as Sanjay Manjrekar says, "in all kinds of trouble." Vettori in.

12:40 p.m. Net run rate is going to count for a lot in this group, if NZ manage to beat Sri Lanka. So it's really imperative that we chase hard, even if the total (as it seems now) will be quite low. I want to win this in fewer than 15 overs.

12:42 p.m. Simon Doull interviewing Salman Butt. Given his perspective on the game and his ability to speak English, I think we should make him our designated interviewee. Fuck me, he's good for nothing else, is he? Anyway, Salman basically just said that Pakistanis only try hard when it's a do-or-die situation. Appreciate the honesty bro.

12:45 p.m. "An unquenchable thirst for batsmen's toes," says Simon Doull. So, yeah, Gully is bowling.

12:46 p.m. My goodness. Gully gets another, bowling a leg-stump yorker and Franklin has no answer. Too good. Gully's figures are currently 4-4. NZ 93-8.

12:47 p.m. Kyle Mills' nickname is Andy Murray. Manjrekar: "Is it because he looks like him?" No yaar.

12:48 p.m. I'll have to put my sarcasm away for a second, because Gul is on yet another hat trick. Andy Murray gets an outside edge as he tries to work a Gully leg cutter through the leg side, and gives a dolly to cover. Gully has 5 wickets. For four runs. Ian Butler in.

12:50 p.m. The atmosphere is electric. It really is.

12:51 p.m. By the way, it's only fair that Gully has his day in the sun against NZ. He wouldn't be a Pakistani quick bowler if that wasn't the case.

12:52 p.m. This is T20 cricket's first five-wicket haul.

12:53 p.m. Razzaq back in, and Vettori greets him with a slog over midwicket for four. 99-9 off 18.1.

12:54 p.m. And a run out to finish the innings, which really confirms it's our day. Younis dives, saves four, and runs out Vettori too boot. 100 to win, and I can't emphasize this enough: we need to do this in 12 overs or less.

12:57 p.m. Wow. I really need to catch my breath here. Even allowing for our enigmatic unpredictability, I was not expecting that. By the way, not to ruin the fun or anything, but would it really surprise you to see us lose?

1:06 p.m. Chase hard, you madarchods. Chase hard. Net run rate. Net run rate. Net run rate.

1:06 p.m. Pakistan off to a great start here. We haven't started batting yet, but Salman Butt isn't walking out.

1:08 p.m. Andy Murray to open the bowling against Kamran Akmal. Shahzaib at the other end.

1:10 p.m. First runs on the board, as Akmal works off Andy Murray off his hip for two down to deep square. Bit of a misfield there too.

1:11 p.m. And that's a five! Brilliant. Easy single, and a direct hits deflects from the stumps all the way to the boundary. Great start, 7-0 after the first over.

1:13 p.m. Just found out that people from the W's family read my blog. Maybe I should stop saying stuff like "madarchod"?

1:15 p.m. Franklin's had a tidy first over so far.

1:15 p.m. Though Akmal ends up with a streaky cover drive. 13-0 after 2 overs. Remember, kids. 12 overs or fewer. 12 overs or fewer. Net run rate. Net run rate. Net run rate.

1:16 p.m. Bloody hell, this Shahzaib dude is tall. Never seen him before. By the way, that was his first ball.

1:18 p.m. No ball, free hit, four. 18-0 in 2.2.

1:20 p.m. 19-0 in three overs. and Vettori in real early. Come on Akmal. Destroy him. Fucking destroy him.

1:21 p.m. The two men out are deep backward square and deep midwicket. Destroy him, Akmal. Destroy him.

1:22 p.m. Shahzaib tries to destroy him, but gets it higher than further, and gets two over mid off.

1:23 p.m. Yikes, that was ungainly. Two more, over mid on this time.

1:23 p.m. He got this one though. Smacks him for six over long off. Tall guy, with good reach this Shahzaib fellow.

1:25 p.m. Quiet end to the over. 30-0 after four.

1:26 p.m. Beautiful. Akmal on drives Murray for six. Full face, and keeps the position for the photographers. Just stands there. "Dangerous team, Pakistan" Ian Bishop says.

1:27 p.m. And he's gone. Well done. Pulls Andy Murray straight to deep square. Goodish knock (given it's T20), but man, Akmal needs to carry on his good starts one of these days. Razzaq in.

1:28 p.m. Off the mark straight away, with a backfoot cover drive for three.

1:29 p.m. Quick question. Kyle Mills has been around since 2000 or so, right? And Andy Murray only recently came on to the scene, like three years ago? So what was Kyle Mills' nickname before Murray surfaced? And more to the point, shouldn't that be his nickname, rather than this more recent incarnation?

1:31 p.m. 40-1 after five by the way.

1:32 p.m. Shahzaib swivels and pulls Ian Butler, who just came into the attack, for four.

1:33 p.m. Now he pulls a Sehwag, slashing a widish delivery for six over backward point/third man.

1:34 p.m. And now four through midwicket. Butler's really serving them up here...get it? Hahahahaha. I'm so funny.

1:34 p.m. I am so not missing Salman Butt right now. Anyway, 54-1 after six.

1:38 p.m. First impressions of Shahzaib, as he hits another pull for four: better back foot player than front foot, great bat speed, will struggle against anyone who seams it.

1:39 p.m. 59-1 after seven.

1:42 p.m. And Razzaq edges Vettori to the keeper. Man, he sucks against spin. Whatever, I'm not going to complain during this performance. 61-2 after eight.

1:44 p.m. Awesome. Two in two balls, as Shahzaib decides to run down the track, gets sent back, and is short by an inch or two. God, we're a dumb team. Well played, young man. 35 off 28, and Pakistan drop to 61-3.

1:46 p.m. Interesting move here, as Afridi joins Shoaib Malik. Favorite shot? "Anywhere for six". Starts with a paddle sweep four.

1:48 p.m. And Malik gets his own sweep for four. 70-3 after nine.

1:50 p.m. Beautiful bowling from Vettori -- beats Malik in the flight, and a soft dismissal in the end as cover safely pouches it. That was great bowling. 71-4 in 9.2, and Younis Khan in.

1:53 p.m. Ten gone. 73-4.

1:55 p.m. Wow, Afridi's actually playing quite sensibly here. Even Manjrekar notes this fact: "He's playing a strange innings."

1:58 p.m. Long hop + Afridi = smashed for four. 83-4 after 11. Nice little discussion there between Bishop and Manjrekar on what Pakistan bring to the international cricket table when they're playing well. They settle on "flair".

2:01 p.m. Quiet over from Vettori. 12 gone, and it's 85-4. Come on, guys. Let's finish this in the next two overs. Net run rate. Net run rate. Net run rate.

2:04 p.m. Goddamn, Afridi hits the ball hard. Couple of twos.

2:04 p.m. And now a four. Why can't he play like this all the time? Seriously. He clearly has the ability.

2:05 p.m. Manjrekar makes the good point that he plays like an idiot when he's nervous. When he's confident and relaxed, he's less likely to play stupidly. Sort of the reverse for most people.

2:06 p.m. This crowd is really rabid. Just electric, really. Anyway, great running to end the over -- made a two a three, and a one a two to finish. Two to win. Afridi on strike for the next over.

2:08 p.m. It's a spinner. Any guess what Afridi's going to do?

2:09 p.m. Attempted big hit, edge, straight up, falls between three fielders, there's a collision as two of them went for the catch, and the game's over. What a dominating performance: win by six wickets with seven overs to go.

2:10 p.m. Listen up, rest of the tournament: we've arrived. Proceed with caution.

Mufti Sarfraz Naeemi's Assasination

The murder of Mufti Sarfraz Naeemi, the senior cleric at Jaamia Naeemia and secretary-general of the Ittehad Tanzeematul Madaris-e-Deeniya, comes as a huge blow to the anti-Taliban movement in the country. Naeemi, who had taken a stand against the Taliban as far back as 1995 (albiet somewhat reluctantly), had held an anti-Taliban rally in Lahore barely two weeks before his assassination and strongly come out in favour of the military operation in Swat, declaring, "The military must eliminate the Taliban once and for all otherwise they will capture the entire country which would be a big catastrophe." It took real courage for Naeemi to take the stand that he did - courage that most of us do not possess - and for that he should be applauded and remembered fondly.

But the media obscures the true significance of Naeemi in its constant references to the cleric as a "moderate" (A Google search of Sarfraz Naeemi+moderate turned up 34,000 results). His opposition to the Taliban nothwithstanding, Naeemi held decidely unmoderate views on just about every issue, from his staunch opposition to the Women's Rights Bill, his support for the use of the death penalty for 'crimes' like adultery and blasphemy, his ridiculous statements on the Danish cartoons and fondess for consipracy theories.

Pointing out some of Mufti Naeemi's extremist positions isn't meant to denigrate or question his anti-militant bona fides or diminish his bravery in opposing the Taliban. I just feel that we need to place Naeemi in the right context to understand his achievements. He was no reformist like Fazlur Rehman (I refer to the scholar not the JUI leader) and was squarely in the mainstream of clerics in Pakistan.

This made his anti-Taliban stance all the more useful. He could reach out to people who might be inclined to follow the Taliban in a way that liberals like us never could. He also served as a symbol, not only of the public's growing revulsion at the Taliban, but also their willingness to support military action to deal with the threat. It is no surprise that Naeemi's support of the current military operation, support he had not given to such previous actions, coincided with greater public support for the army.

There are two possible public reations to Naeemi's assasination. One, the public will be even more fearful of the Taliban and other clerics who might have considered publicly and forcefully denouncing the Taliban may find it prudent to remain silence. Or, sickened by yet another display of barbarism, clerics who have not taken a stand against the Taliban and political leaders who still consider the US and India to be a greater threat to Pakistan than the Taliban, will finally come to their senses. We do a great disservice to the memory of Mufti Sarfraz Naeemi if it is the former.

Thank You, Salman Butt, For Being Completely Useless

Sorry for no liveblog today, but I didn't want to wake up at 7:30 when I knew that we'd lose. Anyway, consider this an open thread on today's game against Sri Lanka. The Indians in the crowd can talk about their game with the Windies too, if they want. Random thoughts from me:

1. Salman Butt needs to be dropped. Yesterday. Why is he in the team? Can he field? No. Can he bowl? No. Can he bat? Fuck, no. So why is he in the team? By the way, there's an anti-Salman Butt Facebook group, for those interested.

2. Malinga is an excellent bowler.

3. Younis has been far and away our best player in this tournament.

4. Shoaib Malik needs to open with Akmal, and we need to draft in another batsmen in place of Butt to play in the middle order.

5. Fawad Alam should not have to wait for Afridi to sky his first ball to bat.

Discuss.

Quote of the Day

Refreshing honesty from de-facto Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin:

‘Why you want me to be killed by someone after imposing tax on agriculture.’

A One-Sentence Summary Of Game 4

When you miss that many free throws, when you don't foul when you're up three with ten seconds remaining, when you give Derek Fisher the three instead of forcing him to drive, when you can't get a defensive rebound on a key possession in overtime in four chances, you deserve to lose.

Congratulations to the Lakers and their fans. Your 2009 NBA champions, ladies and gentlemen. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go throw up.

The Most Unfortunately Named Information Service Of All Time

I just saw an ad for an interesting company, which allows you to text a question (trivia, information, anything else) and they text you back the answer for 99 cents. Kind of like a wikipedia but for cell-phones.

There's only one problem: if you're going to come up with a name for an information providing organization, you probably don't want to name it after this particular information gathering organization.

Poll Post

This week's poll was inspired by AKS' post last week, which engendered a lively discussion in the comments section. I figured there was only one way to decide once and for all: putting it up for a vote. You can comment on the poll here if you want.

Zardari's Lobbyists

Just came across this in a Mother Jones piece about Afghanistan's (lack of) lobbying power in Afghanistan:

In his memo to Afghanistan's finance minister, Omar Zakhiwal, which is dated April 21 and marked "confidential," Ambassador Said Tayeb Jawad surveys the competition. Pakistan, he writes, employs nine American lobbying firms, including two "that alone represent and promote President Asif Ali Zardari's interests in Washington." According to the ambassador's missive, these include Locke Lord Strategies-LP, which since May 2008 has been on retainer from the Pakistan government for more than $100,000 per month, and JWT Asiatic and Hill & Knowlton, which together collect a monthly payment exceeding $100,000. All told, according to Jawad's estimate, Islamabad spent at least $3 million on Washington lobbyists in 2008 alone.

Would Asif Zardari's "interests" happen to include sugar exports and property values in Dubai?

Obama And His Views On Governance

Via Matthew Yglesias, I came across this article in Newsweek examining Rahm Emanuel's role in Obama's Middle East strategy. The basic thrust of the article is that despite widespread expectations that Emanuel would act on behalf of the Israeli/neocon right on issues pertaining to Middle East security, he is actually acting quite even-handedly and keeping pressure on Israel on the settlements issue. People based their expectations on his ethnicity and background; Emanuel volunteered in the Israeli military in the first Gulf War, and his father once said that Emanuel would quite naturally force Obama to be pro-Israel because, well, "Why wouldn't he? What is he, an Arab? He's not going to be mopping floors at the White House." But these expectations, at least up to this point, have proven to be largely incorrect.

Reading this piece took me back to the period between Obama's election as president and the time he officially took office. In that period, Obama made a number of choices for his cabinet that rubbed many progressives and liberals the wrong way. The central complaint was that Obama ran on a platform of change and yet was employing many veterans of the Bush (Gates) and Clinton (Hillary, Summers, Geithner) eras that hardly represented the progressive movement of the 21st century. Wasn't this a contradiction, people wondered? How can someone who promised change be so wedded to personalities often tainted by the past?

Obama's answer at the time was that the change would come from him, and the people under him would be tasked with carrying out policy. It was basically George Bush's "I'm the decider" moment dressed up in more articulate language. Here are his exact words at the time:

"Understand where the vision for change comes from, first and foremost," he said. "It comes from me. That's my job, to provide a vision in terms of where we are going and to make sure then that my team is implementing [that vision]."

Other than some major disappointments on the question of detaining terrorism suspects and the rights of prisoners, for which Glenn Greenwald is the best source, Obama has by and large stuck to this vision of having progressive(ish) goals carried out by nonprogressives(ish) people.

People often characterize me -- quite fairly I suppose -- as being too kind or not critical enough about Obama, but when he said those things, I knew he absolutely meant it. Who better than Hillary Clinton (neocon in Dems clothing), Rahm Emanuel (noted above) and Joe Biden (good friend of AIPAC) to sell his vision of the future of the Middle East to the hard Israeli (and American) right? Who better than a Republican Secretary of Defense to sell his plan for disengaging from Iraq and adopting a more sane strategy on Iran? Obama, it appears, is quite a fan of the "only Nixon could go to China" logic --the idea that the best people to cut difficult deals are people who can never be accused of being traitors or outsiders to a cause. This logic, not coincidentally, explains in part the Obama administration's cozying up to Nawaz Sharif as a bulwark against Islamist militantism in Pakistan -- who better than the most popular mainstream politician in Pakistan with streed cred on this very issue?

Anyway, I just thought this whole deal with Emanuel and Israel was quite interesting. You should go read the article; it's got some nice tidbits.

Breaking: Bomb Blast At P.C. Hotel Peshawar (Updated Below)

A major bomb blast has rocked Peshawar, extensively damaging the Pearl Continental Hotel - one of the city's few major hotels. The hotel was home to a large number of UN and INGO officials, as well as foreign reporters. Most of the UN officials belonged to the UN Food Program (credit: Dunya News).

It was a suicide blast. The bomb disposal squad reckons that about 500-550 kg of explosives were used which has caused a crate 8 feet deep and 25 feet wide. There were two attackers who first opened fire before driving their car into the hotel gates, which is similar to recent attacks in Lahore and Islamabad.

11 people are dead, 40 injured (Express News). (When I started this post, about 3 minutes ago, there were 5 dead. The injured include foreign women. Geo just showed an African woman being carried by emergency workers.

Around 50-60 cars have been destroyed. Part of the hotel has crumbled.

Incidentally the hotel is part of the Hashwani Group who also own the Islamabad Marriott which was the scene of a horrific bomb blast last September.

PM Gilani is having is very own post-9/11 Bush moment - he was chairing a meeting with law enforcement officials in Karachi addressing the deteriorating law and order situation in the city. He followed this up with a press conference and when asked about the bomb blast in Peshawar he replied (I'm not making this up): "I was only passed a note about the bombing during the meeting and haven't had a chance to find out anything more." (which begs the question, what the hell are you doing sitting here? You're the PM, go find out!)

Update 1:

One of the injured, a security guard, says that there were about half a dozen attackers who scaled the walls before the blast.

As is always the case many of the dead and injured were policemen and security guards. One of the injured is a Nigerian man.

Assistant Inspector General Peshawar has been speaking to a reporter. He looks bored and seems to be entirely incompetent. He speaks with a very heavy Punjabi accent, not really sure why he's in Peshawar.


Update 2:

The death toll has risen to 13 and includes 2 foreign nationals.

Update 3:

One of the dead is a UN official. The lack of light is seriously hampering the rescue work, till now no standby generators and high powered lights have been brought to the area. Rescuers are using vehicle headlights to carry out their work.

Hospitals in Peshawar are requesting people to donate blood.

A point raised by Ahsan in the comments i.e. why wasn't there more security, is exactly the question that several reporters are now asking after a few eyewitnesses reported that the Pick Up which exploded had entered the premises and was in the parking lot.

Moreover one news channel is now saying that the city was in red alert all day and there were reports that a possible suicide attack was imminent. The same reports also indicated two other things 1) an ambulance would be used (which wasn't the case here); and 2) that one bomb would be followed by another at the same place, which is why police officials are sweeping the whole place for explosives.

Update 4:

Geo reports that the foreigner who was killed is a UNHCR official from Russia.

Update 5 (from Ahsan):

The NYT is reporting that the hotel was about to be bought by the U.S. in a bid to increase its diplomatic presence (i.e. probably going to use it as a massive embassy). Take from that what you will. (Link courtesy reader Wasay)

Update 6 (from Ahsan):

If there's one theme running through this set of first-person accounts of the blast, it's the sheer impact of the blast at great distances from the epicenter. Read them for yourself.

Stephen Walt on Federer and English

I know Stephen Walt is supposed to be a great political scientist, but his TV-watching skills need some fine-tuning.

The announcer at *Roland Garros* Stadium reported the scores en francais and French TV apparently got the first courtside interview with Federer after the match (while NBC took a commercial break), but Federer and Swedish runner-up Robin Soderling gave their acceptance speeches in English (with a French translation for the crowd). One imagines the spirit of Charles de Gaulle whirring rapidly in his tomb, not to mention the "Immortals" in L'Academie francaise.

It’s possible that Robin Soderling (the Swedish runner-up) spoke to the crowd in English because he doesn't speak French. But Federer reportedly speaks fluent French, German, and Swiss-German, as well as English, so why wasn’t he addressing the local crowd in their native tongue?

My guess is that this was dictated by the global TV market, and by the growing position of English as the lingua franca of contemporary globalization. The tournament was being watched all over the world, and English is the language that would be understood by the greatest number of potential viewers world-wide.

Nice theory and nice guess. Too bad Federer actually gave his speech in French. He spoke to Soderling in English because the Swede doesn't speak French.

Here's my theory. Federer spoke to the French crowd and the French press in French. He spoke to the non-French speaking Soderling, Aggasi and the rest of the world's press in English. My guess is that this was dictated by Federer being a nice, sensible human being.

UPDATE: In the comments, Ahsan points out that Walt has apologized for his error, making this a rather pointless post.

Live Blogging Pakistan versus the Netherlands

Welcome to the live blog of the most important match Pakistan has played in years. And its against the might of the Netherlands. Watch the brilliant Dirk Nannes bowl us out and knock us out of a competition that is only meant to be "fun".

Pakistan innings

Over 1: Dirk Nannes opening to Akmal. Five runs off an over marked by excellent Nannes bowling and better Dutch fielding - both of which were noticeably missing in our performance against England. First stupid decision of the day was batting first. I would say we need 190 to feel safe. Five off the over

Over 2: First boundary of the day courtesy Akmal. First inane remark of the day courtesy Wasim, who says, "Pakistanis don't buy tickets on the internet." Akmal finishes off the over the over with another airborne four. Risky, but this is a time that calls for risks. 17-0

Over 3: Salman hits a confident boundary, followed by a nervous prod outside off, a horrific swish and an insane attempt to hit an inside-out shot. A single ensures he will guard the in-form Akmal from the strike. Nannes is clocking in at 91 mph, similar to Arafat. I advice everyone to ignore the speed gun.

Over 4: My apologies to Salman. The insane inside-out shot gets him our second six of the tournament. Then he plays and misses. Let me repeat an observation made by Ahsan: Salman deals only in boundaries and dot balls. Which may explain why his career 20/20 strike rate is below 100. Another Salman boundary takes Pakistan to 34-0.

Over 5: Akmal gets the strike after two over and is nearly caught off a lofted shot. Sorry for not telling you who has replaced Nannes but the commentators don't seem to know who he is either. Salman is caught off a drive. He hit a few boundaries but looked very shaky. Btw the bowler is Doeschate, which may explain why no one wants to say his name. Pakistan is 38-1. Malik walks in and Doeschate gives him a leg-side gift that is dispatched to the boundary. And then a drive through extra cover to take Pakistan to 46.

Over 6: Misbah is padded up to come in next. Shouldn't it be Younus? A huge graphic is displayed quoting Younus' "fun" statement. The commentators make disapproving noises. Guys, relax. Younus says random shit all the time. A sedate over where Akmal fails to connect with anything. 50-1.

Over 7: Under 9 an over in the powerplay isn't great but we have some sort of platform. Netherlands players seem to be either 40 or 17. Do they have no one in their mid-20s. An excellent start by Holland's left-arm spinner, with only one poor full toss that Malik fails to dispatch. 54-1 and two tight overs by the Dutch haven't helped our cause.

Over 8: Another nameless medium pacer comes into the attack. Second six of the day courtesy a brutal pull from Akmal. He's moved to 28 despite not getting enough strike. A wide delivery allows Akmal to end the over with a boundary. He seems quite untroubled.

Over 9: Some guy at backward point who looks like George Michael and fields like Imran Farhat drops Malik at backward point. It was a relatively simple chance. Two more dot balls. "Malik started well but has been subdued since." He has only faced 10 balls which should tell you everything you need to know about 20-20. Akmal hits another six. Pakstan is 77-1

Over 10: The left-armed spinner is named Seelar. Which is a pretty cool. His bowling is pretty good too, with lots of changes of pace. A bunch of singles and a couple of dot balls. Akmal, probably frustrated at the tightness of the bowling, fails to connect and is caught at the boundary. Seelar does a hilarious Goofy dance to celebrate. Pakistan is 81-2 at the halfway stage. Not good enough.

Over 11: And its Younus, not Misbah who walks in. Bumble thinks 175 will be enough. I'm not so sure. Only 7 off a good over.

Over 12: There doesn't seem to be any urgency to Pakistan's batting. Or are these supposed to be the consolidation overs? Malik aims one squarely at Younus' head. Regrettably he misses and picks up a couple. Six singles and Pakistan is 94-2.

Over 13: It's been 21 deliveries since the last boundary. The mantra seems to be drop and run at the moment. The bowling figures show many dot balls each bowler has delivered. Which sums up how ridiculous this version of the game is. Only five off the first five balls. Predictably, Malik goes for the six and is caught at deep midwicket for 30 of 18 balls. An excellent over by Peter Borren. He earned that wicket through tight bowling.

Over 14: Misbah comes before Afridi. And gets a boundary with a cut through midwicket. Finally. Hopefully he wants to prove to Younus how stupid it was to send Afridi before him against England. Eleven off the over and Pakistan is at 110-3.

Over 15: Dirk Nannes, who was understandably pissed off at not being picked by the Aussies, is back in the attack. He's probably give them the middle finger this morning. The running is quite poor as Misbah saunters through for a single where he could have got two. Then he mistimes a pull and whiffs at one outside off. I sense disaster. Only five off the over. We need to score at 13 an over off the last five.

Over 16: The wonderfully-named Doeschate replaces Seelaar. I love Dutch names. Finally a sense of urgency from Younus. He had made 10 off 11 balls before he hits a magnificent six, followed by a Misbah inside edge that brings four more. A good over for Pakistan and we are at 130-3

Over 17: I hate these mid-innings interviews. Salman Butt says, "I think there are a lot of Pakistanis in England." Well-said, sir. Alternating singles and twos off Borren, Pakistan get nine off the over. Nothing too inspiring.

Over 18: If we get 40 off the last three overs, we'll be in a decent position. It's been a strange innings. We haven't lost many wickets but haven't looked to score at 10 an over. Until now. Younus slog sweeps Seelar for six and then lofts one straight down the wicket for another maximum. He tries the same again off a full toss but doesn't connect at all and is caught at midon. Younus out for 36 off 20. Misbah ends the over with another boundary. 17 off the over and we're 156-4. We should be set for 180+.

Over 19: What odds would you give me on Afridi skying his first ball? Actually, he whacks it for two. Wasim advises him not to close his eyes and hit. And I advised Zardari not to grin so much. Neither has any chance of working. Schiferli (another great name) bowls a decent over giving up some twos with a precious dot ball thrown in. 164-4.

Over 20: Nannes to finish off an innings that has been pretty even. He starts with an excellent yorker that can only be dug out by Misbah for a single. He follows that with a well-pitched delivery that Afridi easily puts away for six. Then he is bowled. Hands up anyone who was surprised by that. Fawad Alam, with his career strike rate of 188, walks in and can only get a single. Wasim calls Nannes 'Nanas', as in his grandfather. The last three balls only bring four runs and Pakistan finishes on 175-5. Netherlands needs 151 to go through. It could get very tight. I predict the London-Lahore flight tomorrow will have 16 despondent Pakistanis.

A decent but unspectacular effort. Akmal made 41 and Younus and Misbah got into the thirties. Nannes was the pick of the bowlers with 1-26 of his four overs. See you guys in 10 minutes.

Netherlands innings

Over 1: Anyone know why the Dutch are called the Netherlands in cricket and hockey and Holland in football? Sohail Tanvir, who has thankfully replaced Yasir Arafat (what were his parents thinking), will open the bowling. Hollands openers are Reekers, 36 and Kervezee, 19. Just to stress my point about the Dutch players' ages. Reekers, who has the physique of David Boon, gets a boundary off the second ball. But four dot balls and a single mean Holland only manage 5 off the over.

Over 2: This Reekers is one powerful guy. Aamir's first two deliveries are mishit but both go for four. Another Reekers mishit goes high in the air. Pakistani fans wait for what seems an agonizingly long time. But it is caught. 13-1. Bas Zuiderent, who I recall played in the '96 World Cup, is next man in.

Over 3: Tanvir beats Zuiderent all ends up with an away swinger. Then beats him again with a wide one. Fawad misses a direct hit. Nothing new there. Tanvir is bowling really well. Shame he has to rely on Pakistan's fielders. Malik completely misjudges what should have been a catch and ends up about two metres away from the ball. 17-1

Over 4: Muhammed Aamir looks like a clone of Muhammed Sami. He also bowls a vintage Sami half tracker that is mishit by Kervezee for four.Hahaha. Salman Butt at fine leg drops a dolly. That's two dropped catches and a missed run out in four overs. Netherlands are 25-1.

Over 5: Wasim thinks Tanvir is unfit. His pace is certainly down. Yeah, he's definitely limping. Still, an excellent over. Only four singles.

Over 6: Umar Gul takes over from Aamir. His economy rate is under 6. That's quite incredible. Holland were falling well behind the pace with Gul giving only two runs off his first four deliveries. The Tanvir, no longer able to move, allows a ball to go to the boundary. He should go off the field but I guess he wants to bowl his one remaining over. Netherlands are 38-1.

Over 7: Saeed, who's had an excellent start to his T20 career, takes over from an ailing Tanvir, and is hit for a boundary off his second delivery. The ball is following Tanvir, who would have been able to stop that were he mobile. Simon Doull gets credit for the 10th mention of Younus' "fun" statement. A possible stumping is referred to the third umpire but Kervezee was well in. Five dot balls and a boundary so the score is 42-1.

Over 8: Afridi's first ball is a fast yorker and Zudierent, possibly expecting a conventional spinner, is bowled. Pakistan is well on top right now. Afridi's bowling has developed in inverse proportion to his batting. Two runs and a wicket off the over. We won't possibly screw it up from here, will we?

Over 9: Netherlands are trying to force the pace, they're just not very successful at it. Poor Tanvir has to run a lot for a possible catch. Were he fit, he would have reached the ball before dropping it. As it happens, he was nowhere near it. Then, shock, Salman Butt takes a catch as Borren departs. And Netherlands are 47-3. Make that 49-4 as Kervezee is stumped. Game over?

Over 10: Afridi is bowling really tight here. He also missed the simplest of run outs, failing to take the ball cleanly. I'm glad Pakistan can win without sacrificing the comedy routine. At the halfway stage, Netherlands are 53-4. They're going to need to score at 10 an over from here on out. Not impossible but looking extremely unlikely.

Over 11: A delicate dab from Doeschate, who has a reputation as good batsman, gets him three off Malik, who has replaced Ajmal. 8 off the over. 61-4.

Over 12: Afridi bowls De Grooth of his first ball. The new batsman is van Bunge (the best name so far). And he's gone. Stumped second ball. Afridi has the amazing figures of 3-6. One wide and two wickets in a brilliant over. 62-6.

Over 13: Doeschate (pronounced Diskata) isn't giving up. He hits Malik across the line for six. A very good stumping by Akmal (I'm as amazed as you are) and the dangerous Doeschate departs. The new man is skipper Smitts, 36. 72-7.

Over 14: Another wicket for Afridi as Schiferli hits a wide one down Ajmal's throat. Man of the match will be either Afridi (4 wickets so far) or Akmal (41 and 3 stumpings). These are the two players I was hoping would be dropped forever a year ago. Akmal gets hit on the arm after an Afridi faster one is deflected off Nannes' toe. For some incomprehensible reason, Malik decides to make it worse by rubbing his arm. Afridi ends with the outstanding figures of 4-0-10-4. 76-8.

Over 15: Alan Wilkins says, "It could be a run-out," before realizing he's talking about Pakistan. Next ball, another possible run out. A good take by Akmal (what did he have for breakfast today?) off a wide throw and it's too close to call. Benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. 82-8.

Over 16: Yorker specialist Umar Gul takes over from Afridi. Then decides to bowl two quick, short balls that Smits can't reach. Nothing much to report here other than Wasim's boring commentary. Gul shies at the stumps, misses and gives an overthrow. Deja vu, anyone? 87-8.

Over 17: Ajmal, who has 2-15, comes on to finish his spell. Nannes, thinking he was bowled, didn't bother trying to get back to the crease, gifting Akmal his fourth stumping, despite a fumble. Ajmal ends with 3-20, confirming that he and Afridi will be the backbone of our bowling attack in the Super 8's.

Over 18: Comment of the day from Wasim, "Winning is fun." Except when you've taken $300,000 dollars to throw a match but the other team is better at throwing it because they have taken $500,000. Umar Gul bowls Seelar and that's that. The Netherlands are 93 all out. Well, disaster averted in a thoroughly unexciting manner. That's it from me.

Book Review: "To Live Or To Perish Forever: Two Tumultuous Years in Pakistan" By Nicholas Schmidle

We here at Rs.5 love to point and make fun of foreigners (journalists, academics, think tankers) who, despite knowing nothing whatsoever about the country, feel perfectly willing to opine and prognosticate about the country and its people. Earlier today, Bubs blogged about Bruce Riedel and his silly op-edism, and readers can peruse our archives for many more examples.

With that said, there are a number of excellent journalists from outside Pakistan who understand the country and the people in a more than superficial way. One of these is Nicholas Schmidle, a freelance journalist who has written extensively on Pakistan for almost three years now for various publications.

In fact, Schmidle would rank very high on my admittedly short list of favorite foreign correspondents who have written on Pakistan and South Asia. Owen Bennett-Jones would be ranked first. Schmidle would be second. Carlotta Gall would be third, and Steve Coll would be fourth. David Sanger would be last -- if Pakistan-based journalism was football, Sanger would be Papua New Guinea.

Schmidle practices journalism of the best kind, and this is evident in his fascinating and arresting portrayal of Pakistan in his recently released book, To Live Or To Perish Forever: Two Tumultuous Years in Pakistan. Schmidle does not rely on hearsay or rumors. If he hears something, he tries to corroborate by going to the source, even if doing so represents real physical danger. Schmidle does not rely on a handful of sources in air-conditioned drawing rooms or foreign embassies or alarmist think tanks or compromised intelligence agencies. He meets anyone and everyone willing to talk, including terrorist mullahs and naswar vendors. Schmidle is not a drive-by expert, whose interest and study of Pakistan is a passing fad -- he speaks Urdu, conducted almost all his interviews in the national language, and wore shalwar kurtas whenever the situation demanded it. He is basically an anthropologist masquerading as a journalist.

Once you pick the book up, you will not be able to put it down. It's written very lucidly and features in-depth interviews and stories featuring anyone and everyone you've ever heard of. In a way, being in Pakistan as a journalist is easy -- as long as you ignore the threats to your physical safety and life. Why? Because Pakistanis like to talk. Have you ever met a Pakistani who could keep a secret? Me neither. No one is shy, and if there's one thing that stands out in Schmidle's book, it's the sheer number of people who chose to go on the record, despite some highly sensitive information being proferred.

Schmidle's book is exactly what the title suggests: an account of his time in Pakistan, perhaps the most tumultuous two year period in the country's history other than 1970-1972. Just count the game-changing events and processes that we witnessed from mid-2006 to mid-2008: Chief Justice controversies (dismissed in March '07, reinstated in July '07, dismissed again in November '07); assassinations and assassination attempts (BB, Sherpao, Fazlur Rehman); the Presidency changing hands (Mush to Zardari); the Army changing hands (Mush to Kayani); the lawyers' movement; the Taliban violence (2007 had a suicide bombing once a week on average, and claimed more than 1000 lives); the May 12 violence; ethnic tensions rising between the MQM and ANP in Karachi..the list goes on and on. In fact, reading this book gave me a sense of just how crucial the year 2007 really was. It's the type of year that historians will be talking about for a long, long time. Sometimes while we're in the middle of it, we sometimes lose perspective. But you gain it right back when you read Schmidle's work.

But forget the history for a second -- if there's a reason to read this book, it's the stories. Oh, the stories. You want conversations with the infamous Ghazi Abdul Rasheed of Lal Masjid? Schmidle basically became his best friend (I exaggerate, but only a little). You want an insight into Taliban- and militant Islamist violence? Schmidle talks to Maulana Fazlullah and an assortment of radical elements, traveling to places where, forget journalists, the friggin' Pakistani military doesn't have the balls to go. You want to know more about Shia-Sunni tensions in the big cities? Schmidle goes to a 10th of Muharram procession, and even gets invited to Shia Islam by an adolescent. You want to know how many buttons Asif Zardari unbuttons to play with his chest hair? Schmidle will tell you. What about the Balochi low-level insurgency? Schmidle spends days in Gwadar and Quetta, talks to Balochi politicians and locals, and gives you his impressions. What does Farooq Sattar eat as he is driven from Karachi to Hyderabad, and what happens to his mood as they go through Sohrab Goth? Schmidle will tell you. I can't emphasize this enough: Schmidle talks to everyone. E-V-E-R-Y-O-N-E. In this respect, it really is a top-notch book, and I can't recommend it highly enough.

This does not mean I don't have criticisms. I do. Two are primary. First, there is no overarching theme in the book. Schmidle jumps from crisis to crisis, issue to issue, and doesn't really give us any insight on a central thesis he may have. One doesn't know if this was intentional or not, but it doesn't matter, because the reader is often left feeling like (s)he is on a roller-coaster. In many ways, Pakistani society and politics does mirror a roller-coaster ride. But it should be up the author to ground the individual issue areas into a grander narrative, and Schmidle fails to provide us one. In the end, only readers already somewhat familiar with Pakistan will be able to keep pace as Schmidle jumps from Balochistan to FATA to Islamabad to Dhaka in the blink of an eye (the chapters are only about 20-25 pages long on average).

The second criticism centers on the acute pessimism reflected in Schmidle's book. I am in two minds whether this constitutes a valid criticism or not. On the one hand, there is an awful lot wrong with Pakistan, and none of what Schmidle says or reflects is untrue. On the other hand, I think if one were to land on earth from outer space and read Schmidle's book, one would have expected Pakistan to collapse a long, long time ago. To reiterate, none of what Schmidle says is untrue. But in a book -- as opposed to a journalistic article or report, where writers are often constrained by editorial requirements and word limits -- Schmidle should have told us a little bit about how, despite the many challenges Pakistan faces, it continues to trudge along, just barely. In social scientific terms, Schmidle's account overpredicts state collapse.

That said, Pakistanis and followers of Pakistan could do worse than pick up Schmidle's book. Considerably worse. He weaves history into his excellent work as a journalist, and I for one am thankful to him for writing this book. I am also thankful for the following sentence, which to my mind summarizes Pakistani society better than most articles or books:

Connections were a double-edged sword, and knowing the wrong people could land you in more trouble than knowing the right people could get you out of.

Reading To Live Or To Perish Forever, you realize that Schmidle speaks from experience, a quality that underlines the entire book.

Now, if only we could get him to organize a workshop, and have David Sanger attend.

YouTube of the Day

Via Off the Baseline

Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

We all like to snigger, shake our heads in amazement and furiously post blogs whenever a foreign newspaper publishes something ignorant about Pakistan. It is easy to laugh at stories that have a hard-on for Facebook users fighting militants in their own way (that way would be joining a Taliban sux group right before taking the Which Lost Character Are You quiz; guilty as charged on both counts), or using an anecdote from a Karachi Grammar School student, whose only interaction with the Taliban was when he saw Osama after it won an Oscar, to prove that the militants are about to overrun the city.

When Bruce Riedel catches the hyperbole flu, laughter is not an option. He is a scholar at the Brookings Institute (which is still hilariously referred to as liberal) and has been a major architect of Barack Obama’s Afghanistan and Pakistan policy, chairing an interagency review of US tactics in the region that is condescendingly referred to as “Af-Pak.” His op-ed on Pakistan, which would feel at home with the editorial policy of every major US newspaper, was published in the Wall Street Journal last week. If this article is an indication of what he whispered in Obama’s ears, we should all be very frightened.

The main focus of his piece is nuclear weapons, that hobbyhorse of alarmists at every US think tank and media organization. As is my wont, I’m going to discuss it one point at a time.

He begins with a familiar trope:

The Pakistani army, backed by attack helicopters, is fighting intense gun battles in the Swat valley 60 miles outside the capital of Islamabad with Islamic extremists.

Every know-nothing media outlet has used this 60-miles-from-Islamabad description to convey the impression that the capital has been besieged by the Taliban and it is only a matter of time before they took over the machinery of the state. That’s just not true. Even if the Taliban were suicidal enough to stage an armed assault on Islamabad, the army would just saunter over from Rawalpindi and repel them. Islamabad isn’t Waziristan. You can’t fight a guerilla war by hiding in the DVD shops in Jinnah Supermarket.

The fighting has cast a spotlight on the shaky security of Pakistan’s growing nuclear arsenal—the fastest growing arsenal in the world.

The fastest growing arsenal in the world aside is needless fear-mongering. If the Taliban control Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal it doesn’t matter if they have access to fifty nuclear weapons or sixty; it’ll be time to panic. But point taken: Pakistan’s nukes are not secure.

Today the arsenal is under the control of its military leaders; it is well protected, concealed and dispersed.

Oh, so they are secure. No worries, then.

But if the country fell into the wrong hands—those of the militant Islamic jihadists and al Qaeda—so would the arsenal.

Let’s start worrying again. Let’s also define what you mean by the country falling into the wrong hands. Does it mean the Taliban extending their control to further areas of Pakistan (which is admittedly very worrisome) or does it mean they have either defeated or converted to their cause one of the largest armies in the world? The latter is not going to happen; the former is far more realistic, which however awful it would be for the country, would not affect the security of the nuclear weapons.

The danger of Pakistan becoming a jihadist state is real. Just before her murder in December 2007, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto said she believed al Qaeda would be marching on Islamabad in two years.

Benazir said a lot of things that she hoped the Americans were foolish enough to believe so that they would get her back to Pakistan and into power. Seems she was right.

Increasing calls to “secure” the country’s nuclear weapons by force are far from productive—in fact, it’s making serious work with Pakistan more difficult.

Thanks for that. It’s the first sensible thing you’ve said.

Then there’s a lot of blather and arm-chair psychoanalysis of how and why Pakistan developed its nuclear capability and some reasonable recommendations about US policy towards Pakistan.

Every newspaper has run an op-ed about Pakistan’s nukes but I chose to pick on Riedel because he represents the thinking at the highest levels of the Obama administration.

Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are secure. The Taliban is not about to overthrow the government. Go back to scouting Facebook and find evidence that we don’t like militancy. Then stop writing hysterical op-eds.

Advertising Sexual And Reproductive Health In Pakistan: The Touch Condom Song

This is with regards to the conversation between NAA and Ahsan in the last post about Touch Condoms and their advertisements on the Geo Super online feed. Touch Condoms have been launched by Green Star, a non-profit, non-governmental organization that does a lot of good work and is most famous for the "Do Bachey Hee Achey" program.

The launch of Touch Condoms has accompanied by an impressive marketing campaign and during the last year or is its been almost impossible to get away from them. There have been ads in newspapers and on tv, posters and billboards, and even a song that has been playing on a number of channels. Its so weird seeing all these ads, its even weirder for my mother who changes the channel as soon their ad comes on! Here's the song:



Kudos to Green Star for communicating their message and programs openly and clearly rather than going for the whole nudge nudge wink wink approach. just so that we wouldn't feel uncomfortable. Many Pakistani organizations involved in the field of reproductive and sexual health are guilty of being too conservative in their approach and apppear to place a higher value on our comfort levels rather than the clarity of their message.

A case in point: Earlier this year, the Marie Stopes Society Pakistan, another organization that does some wonderful work in this area, launched a website dedicated to answering questions on sex and reproduction. They published an advertisement on the back page of the Dawn Magazine, which stated:

DO YOU HAVE CONCERNS YOU FIND HARD TO DISCUSS

NOW YOU CAN TALK TO US GET IMPARTIAL, FRIENDLY, PROFESSIONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL ADVICE AND SUPPORT.

VISIT srhmatters.org

It was a quarter page advertisement and they couldn't find the space to write sex or reproduction even once. I can understand that NGOs are wary of offending the public, or more importantly an idiot in power, but that shouldn't prevent them from commuicating their programs.

Incidentally srhmatters.org is a great website that offers information on sex, puberty, masturbation, rape, STDs, etc., perhaps more importantly they provide condidential online (via email) counseling on all these issues and more. More people need to know about this website, and more people would have had Marie Stopes not chickened out of advertising the site a bit more clearly.

Pakistanis really do need to come out and talk about these issues more openly and they need access to organizations that can provide them with help, even if the help only involves explaining puberty to a 14 year old.

Pakistan has one of the worst records in the world when it comes to dealing with these issues and before we can resolve them we need to be able to discuss them openly. The situation really is quite grim, according to the Pakistan Red Crescent Society:

Pakistan ranks behind most developing countries in the reproductive health risk index . Pakistan has one of the lowest records in female health and education and its fertility rate of 4.00 and population growth rate of 1.9 is considerably higher than other Asian countries including Bangladesh , India and Sri Lanka

One in 38 Pakistani women dies from pregnancy related causes as compared to 1 in 230 women in Sri Lanka. Almost one half of women are anemic throughout their pregnancies. Maternal mortality is estimated as 350-400 per 100000 live births.. Approximately 80% deaths are due to direct obstetric causes. Hepatitis is the most frequently cited indirect cause of maternal death. About 12% of deaths are due to induced abortion.

Pakistan is one of the few countries in the world where men outnumber women. This unfavorable ratio is mainly a consequence of excess mortality of young girls and women in the childbearing age. Infant mortality and morbidity associated with pregnancy relates conditions are high and the rate of infant mortality from all causes is one of the highest in Asia.

The extent of reproductive tract infections in Pakistan has not been documented. Studies in a comparable setting suggest that women suffer a substantial but silent burden. Reproductive tract infections including sexually transmitted diseases can cause pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, infertility and chronic pain and also increase women’s susceptibility to HIV infection.

Cancers of the breast and reproductive tract constitute a significant proportion of cancers seen in Pakistan. A study involving 5 hospitals in 4 provinces found 19%of women had cancers of gyneacological causes. Cancer of the breast is the most common, accounting for 20% of all cases.

Women’s disproportionate poverty, low social status and reproductive role expose them to high health risks, resulting in needless suffering, many preventable deaths and disability. This unfortunate situation can no longer be ignored.

Live Blogging Pakistan vs. England, T-20 World Cup

Hello and welcome to Rs.5's coverage of this T-20 World Cup match between Pakistan and England. This is my second live blog of the day; click here for my post on the Federer-Soderling final at the French Open. All times will be local (i.e. Chicago).

11:21 a.m. Come on Pakistan. You're better than Holland, so surely you can handle this. Right?

11:22 a.m. The teams: Pakistan have Butt, Ahmed Shahzad, Akmal, Younis, Misbah, Malik, Afridi, Umar Gul, Arafat, Saeed Ajmal, and Mohammad Aamer. England: who the fuck cares? You'll figure it out as I talk about the game. Though I suppose it's worth noting that both Pietersen and Rashid are in.

11:26 a.m. Best national anthem performance award goes to Shoaib Malik, who did the whole "hand on the heart and sing quietly" thing. Younis comes in second, for his serious look and singing along. The rest didn't even bother taking their caps off. Good times.

11:28 a.m. By the way, this is cricket's third world cup in two years. And people wonder why the rest of the world thinks cricket is a goddamn joke.

11:29 a.m. Ravi Bopara and Luke Wright to open for England. David Lloyd: "England cannot afford any slip ups". Yeah, losing to Holland will do that to you. Ian Bishop: "Which Pakistan team will show up here?" God, our reputation really precedes us, doesn't it? Anyway, Arafat to open the attack.

11:31 a.m. A touch of away swing. Come on, Arafat.

11:32 a.m. Bopara Sehwags away a short and wide one away over gully/backward point. Arafat hasn't bowled one within 18 inches of off-stump yet.

11:33 a.m. Straight away we've got some drama. Afridi fields brilliantly in the covers, releases in one motion and hits the stumps. Bopara's dive saved him.

11:34 a.m. Some nip there for Arafat. 142 ks, as Arafat beats Wright.

11:35 a.m. You see, this is why I hate T-20. It makes blogging so bloody difficult. Wright smashes Arafat through the covers, and England are 9-0 after one over. I'm not going to blog every boundary, by the way.

11:35 a.m. Aamir from the other end. Starts off with a widish delivery, but the umpire shows leniency.

11:37 a.m. SHOAIB MALIK, YOU FUCKING BEAUTY! What a catch. Unbelievable. Bopara slices Aamir behind point, and Malik gobbles it up going full stretch to his left. Two hands too. That was traveling. Pietersen in. Where's Mohammad Asif when you need him?

11:40 a.m. Great over from Aamir. A wicket and a run, and on target for the most part. He's pretty quick too, and hits the deck, as they say.

11:42 a.m. Bloody hell. Arafat is bowling at 90mph. When did he become this quick? Has he been referred to Shoaib and Asif's pharmacist?

11:43 a.m. Afridi looks very bubbly. He's all over the place right now. Anyway, Arafat bows full and down the leg side with fine leg up. Third over up, and England move on to 17-1.

11:45 a.m. Aamer has looked very solid so far. Just back of a length, on and around off stump. Pietersen has tried to get to him but not succeeded. Thus far.

11:47 a.m. Wright goes 4, 6, 4 on Aamer. The first was a mishit over long on. The second was most definitely not a mishit. Slogged over midwicket, pretty flat too. Third was en edge of a full delivery, evades Akmal, and England are suddenly motoring: 32-1 after four.

11:49 a.m. By the way, Billy Doctrove is one of the umpires. Need I remind you the last time Doctrove umpired Pakistan at the Oval?

11:52 a.m. Hahahahaha. Wright swings, it flies down to third man, and Umar Gul lets it go right between his legs. The wheels are coming off here, as Pietersen boofs it down to long on for four more.

11:53 a.m. And then six. England are 53-1. Think it's time for a bowling change, at least at Arafat's end.

11:54 a.m. Gully in from Aamer's end.

11:55 a.m. No ball, full toss, four. Things really falling apart here.

11:56 a.m. Another terrible miss in the field, from Shehzad, though to be fair he got a bad bounce. Waz calls the fielding thus far "below average". He's being kind.

11:57 a.m. GONE! Gully bowls a full fast straight yorker, and takes Wright's off stump. Wow, we needed that. The last three overs hadn't gone so well. England 62-2 in 5.something. Owais Shah in.

11:59 a.m. Ian Chappell says Gully's yorker was reminiscent of Waqar, then panics because he realizes Waz and Waqar hate each other. "Of course you bowled those too, but you bowled them left-handed" he explains. Waz ignores his comment, instead choosing to focus on Gully.

12:02 p.m. Shoaib Malik in to the attack, and starts off with a wide well down the leg side. Pietersen steps outside his next one, and sweeps him for four. Akmal tells Shoaib: "Koee baat nahin, Malik". Right. Suppose it's better than him saying it to Kaneria right after missing a stumping, as he is wont to do.

12:04 p.m. No ball, free hit, next ball four. Very undisciplined performance thus far. Misfields, no balls, and not great bowling either. Afridi warming up, as England reach 76-2 after seven.

12:06 p.m. Afridi in to the attack.

12:09 p.m Solid bowling results in six singles. So this is what cricket has come down to: you go for six an over, and suddenly it's supposed to be a good over.

12:10 p.m. Ajmal in.

12:11 p.m. Is Salman Butt the slowest player in international cricket? That should not have been two.

12:12 p.m. Both Shah and Pietersen look exceedingly comfortable here. As soon as I type that, Pietersen smashes Ajmal back to the bowler, who promptly drops the catch. Ah, Pakistani fielding. At least England's run rate has dropped below ten after a while: 88-2 after 9.

12:15 p.m. I think it's safe to say Afridi is our best T-20 bowler. He changes his pace, line and length, spin, trajectory and everything else. He's an incredibly smart cricketer. As long as he doesn't have a bat in his hand, that is.

12:16 p.m. Great over, two off it. Afridi's given away 8 runs in two overs.

12:17 p.m. Nasser Hussain into the commentary box. Best commentator in the world, so the next five overs should be good, as long as Wilko shuts up.

12:18 p.m. This is a measure of dumb our players are: every time an England batsmen sweeps a spinner, Akmal feels it necessary to say "ghoomi gee" (or "it will spin") to the fielder. Shouldn't our fielders know this already?

12:19 p.m. England's 100 up in 10.5 overs. Nass thinks they need 200. I think 170 will do it.

12:21 p.m. First boundary off Afridi, as Shah sweeps for four. Moves on to 23, Pietersen on 36.

12:22 p.m. Make that 42. Top-edges a sweep for six. I really, really hate T-20. It's such an abomination. It's an insult to cricket. It's fucking pathetic.

12:23 p.m. Aamer back in, to replace Ajmal who's been tonked around a little bit.

12:26 p.m. Blah blah blah another six blah blah blah.

12:28 p.m. And another, this one from Pietersen who admittedly has played really well (mainly because Asif isn't around to make him look foolish). England are an ungodly 128-2 after 13.

12:29 p.m. Gully back in.

12:30 p.m. And gets Owais Shah. Fast, straight, bowled, and the leg stump is broken into two. England three down for 128 in 13.2. Collingwood in, and we are reliably told that his nickname is "Colly".

12:33 p.m. Daryl Harper gives a leg-bye, and the crowd starts booing because they wanted KP to get his fifty. Relax, people. He'll get it next over. Surely gratification doesn't have to be that instant, even in this format?

12:35 p.m. He gets it this over, but he gets it luckily. Inside-edges Gully to fine leg, missing the stumps by this much. He's played well though.

12:36 p.m. Ajmal back in, and Nass wants Pietersen to switch-hit him. Because whatever he's done so far has clearly not worked, right?

12:37 p.m. Ooooh. Collingwood gives himself room, and is beaten by the doosra. Just misses getting bowled. Well chuck-, erm, bowled young man.

12:38 p.m. England 139-3 after 15. I call 191 as the final score.

12:40 p.m. Arafat drops Collingwood off Gully, who then hits him for four next ball. This has been a truly mid 1990s fielding performance from Pakistan. Anyway, the over ends with England at 152-3. Four overs to go.

12:44 p.m. And Paul "Colly" Collingwood is done. Tries to smash Ajmal out of the ground, but it's a doosra, miscues it, and Afridi takes a safe catch at long off. Mascarenhas in.

12:48 p.m. And now Pietersen. Ajmal's doosra again, and Pietersen can only egde it to short third trying to deposit it, oh, somewhere in France. Wasn't Ajmal banned from bowling the doosra a few weeks ago? I could have sworn I read something about this. Anyway, England suddenly shakier than they were 10 minutes ago. Some dude called Foster is in. 157-5 with three to go. Ajmal's spell is done, 2-23 in four.

12:50 p.m. Arafat in at the other end.

12:51 p.m. Another dropped catch. Foster glances Arafat to short fine, and Ajmal simply drops it. It was a toughish chance, but come on man. That's the fourth drop of the innings by my count, in addition to two or three run out chances missed (the type where you need a direct hit), not to mention a couple simply going through hands and legs for extra runs.

12:53 p.m. Great over from Arafat, mixing it up and bowling it full. Just five from it. England have just 26 runs in their last four overs.

12:54 p.m. Afridi in for his last over, bowls his first one short, and Mascarenhas pulls it for four.

12:55 p.m. Afridi bowls a 79 mph quicker one. Basically, that's quicker than anything Razzaq has bowled in the last eight years.

12:56 p.m. And that's six from Foster. Fifteen from the over, England up to 177-5. Last over coming up.

12:57 p.m. Fine leg is up. Better not bowl it down the leg side.

12:58 p.m. Two yorkers to start. Great bowling.

12:59 p.m. Another yorker, the non-striker is caught one third of the way down, Gul throws it back and it goes for one overthrow. Bumble's laughing away.

12:59 p.m. ANOTHER drop. Wow. Butt at deep cover drops an absolute sitter. This has to be some sort of record. How many catches is it even possible to drop in 20 fucking overs?

1:00 p.m. And Gul repeats the yorker-followed-with-an-overthrow schtik. England end up with 185-5, just about 15 runs beyond Pakistan methinks. We shall see. I'm getting some lunch. See you in a bit.

1:11 p.m. Worst part about T-20 cricket. The short breaks. My lunch hasn't even heated yet in the microwave. This will be hard. Anyway, "Dil Dil Pakistan" is playing at the ground.

1:14 p.m. Mascarenhas to open the attack. Shahzad and Butt opening. And a single to start.

1:17 p.m. Butt gets a boundary through the covers off the last ball. Solid over, 7 off it.

1:18 p.m. Anderson in from the other end, and beats Shahzad all ends up to get underway.

1:22 p.m. Three wides in the over so far from Anderson. Butt keeps hitting the field when he middles it. 13-0 after two overs; fairly solid start.

1:23 p.m. Nass calls our fielding "diabolical" and "abysmal". Can't disagree there.

1:24 p.m. And Shahzad's gone. Regulation T-20 dismissal: slog attempt, edge, straight up, catch in the circle. Akmal in.

1:29 p.m. England have packed the square area on the off side and Butt just can't it through.

1:30 p.m. Okay, Butt just got it through. Four, and Pakistan move on to 24-1 after 3.2

1:32 p.m. And now gets it over the field, rather than through. Four more, as sweeper goes out on the off side. Fine leg up.

1:34 p.m. And now over midwicket for four. Akmal's been in for 10 minutes and hasn't faced a ball yet, I don't think.

1:35 p.m. Butt finally rotates the strike. Come on, Akmal. Come on.

1:37 p.m. Well bowled, Anderson. Beats Akmal first two balls he's faced. Akmal slices him over the covers for three off the last ball. Pakistan are 37-1 after five. 149 needed from 90. Fairly solid start -- I'm not satisfied but I'm not dissatisfied either.

1:40 p.m. Rate required is basically 10.

1:41 p.m. This Salman Butt is a complete idiot. If he can't hit a boundary, he's not scoring. All the commentators have picked up on this.

1:42 p.m. And Akmal's gone, pulling Broad straight down deep square leg's throat. We're losing this. I know it, I know it, I know it. Sometimes you can just tell. England are up for it, and we're not -- our fielding alone should have alerted us to that fact. We're losing to a team that lost to fucking Holland.

1:43 p.m. Then again, we lost to Ireland not too long ago, didn't we?

1:44 p.m. Malik in.

1:44 p.m. Butt out.

1:45 p.m. Younis in.

1:49 p.m. Farooq just called all the way from Karachi, and asked that I attribute "something meaningful, like 'it's not over until the fat lady sings' or something like that" to him. Consider it attributed dude.

1:50 p.m. Meanwhile, Pakistan are 51-3 in 7.3 overs. Younis is trying to sweep this Swann fellow from about four feet outside off stump.

1:51 p.m. 133 needed from 72. Basically, 11 an over.

1:53 p.m. Adil Rashid keeping things tight at the other end. We've lost this. I don't even know why I'm watching. I stayed up till 3 a.m. reading and woke up at 8 to watch the Federer match. I should go take a nap. This is terrible. We suck.

1:55 p.m. FYI, we're 33 runs behind the D/L par score.

1:56 p.m. Sigh. Another dot ball from Swann. Waz: "Somebody has to tee off". Indeed. Anyway, we're 63-3 after 10. That would be a crap score in a 50 over match, forget T-20.

1:58 p.m. Younis and Malik each sweep Adil for a four. Finally, some momentum. Let's see if we can carry it forward. For whatever it's worth, 11 off the over. 74-3 after 11.

2:01 p.m. Swann has bowled really well. Full credit to him, he's kept it real tight. And if you don't think I'm trying to jinx him, you obviously don't know me well enough.

2:02 p.m. Younis dances down the pitch and smashes it for four. A couple of singles to follow, give us 9 from the over. 103 needed in eight overs.

2:04 p.m. Chappell criticizes the wide call from Daryl Harper. "Rubbish" he calls it. Um, no. Just because "he almost edged that" doesn't mean it's not a wide. A wide is not determined by where the batsman is standing, but by where the bowler is bowling.

2:06 p.m. Anyway, Malik edges Luke Wright to the keeper, and that's that. Four down for 87. Afridi in.

2:10 p.m. FYI, the required rate is 14. Rashid will bowl to Afridi.

2:11 p.m. What is he doing? He somehow top-edges a pull from a long hop right behind the keeper. Ian Chappell is miffed at his loss in batting form/ability.

2:13 p.m. We need 93 from 35 balls. Afridi's on 4 from 10.

2:14 p.m. By the way, our inept play today really shouldn't take credit away from England. They've batted well, bowled well, and fielded well. Pretty simple, really.

2:16 p.m. Younis hits a four, but it doesn't really matter at this point. We need 84 in 5 overs.

2:17 p.m. Afridi, who according to David Lloyd has been "swinging like a rusty gate", safely gives a catch to long on. Waz calls his dismissal "a blessing in disguise...he was trying every shot on every ball." Misbah in.

2:20 p.m. Pathetic. That's all I have to say.

2:22 p.m. As David Lloyd keeps saying, we never actually tried to chase this. I mean, we never actually had to go. Really disappointing. We've now lost three on the trot.

2:23 p.m. Why did Afridi come out ahead of Misbah? Can someone please explain that one to me?

2:25 p.m. Misbah's gone. Waz: "Pakistan in deep trouble". Erm, no. We were in "deep trouble" 45 minutes ago. This is not deep trouble. This is "pathetic and needless final rites". Fuck me, we've played shit today. Only bright spots: Gul, Ajmal, and um, that's it. Oh, Younis as well I guess.

2:27 p.m. By the way, if we hit a four off every ball from now on, we still lose by 2 runs.

2:28 p.m. David Lloyd: "If they play like this against the Netherlands, they will be vulnerable." Yup.

2:29 p.m. We need 61 off 2 overs. I'm going to keep typing our requirement, down to the bitter end.

2:30 p.m. If we alternate a four and a six off every ball from here on in, we can tie.

2:31 p.m. "It's been a weak effort from the Pakistan team" says David Lloyd. Yup.

2:32 p.m. I wonder what the 20 word summary of that "Last of the Summer Whine" guy will be for this? "Three players will never beat eleven (even if the eleven are English), especially if you drop five catches. No way."

2:36 p.m. One over to go. Run rate required is 57. Oh, and we lost a wicket there somewhere too.

2:37 p.m. Gully drives Anderson for four first ball. I love Umar Gul. Tries hard in every game, in every department. What a player.

2:38 p.m. We need 53 off two balls. So our run rate required is 159.

2:39 p.m. Suddenly our run rate required has ballooned to 306. Tough ask, I would say.

2:40 p.m. And we're done. I'm not staying for the ceremony. I leave you with two words: fuck us.

Live-Blogging The French Open Final: Roger Federer vs. Robin Soderling (Updated Below)

All times are local (i.e. Chicago).

8:12 a.m. Alright you madarchod Federer. I woke up at 8 a.m. on a Sunday for this. Don't fucking disappoint me.

8:13 a.m. I am not a morning person. Soderling to serve.

8:14 a.m. Big hitting to start, and two errors from Soderling. 0-30 nice and quick.

8:17 a.m. Soderling double-faults at 30-40. Federer with the early break. Man that first game saw some big shots.

8:19 a.m. Federer: ace, unreturnable backhand, sweet drop shot. Up 2-0 in the second, and off to a good start here.

8:20 a.m. Fucking hell. Federer just hit a drop shot from about 10 feet behind the baseline. I think I'm awake now, though Soderling might not be from the looks of it. He gets broken here, and the first set is over.

8:22 a.m. Yeah, this first set is over. Federer mishits a return and it sort of loops in, with Soderling not even going for it. 3-0 Federer, and really, Soderling seems a touch overawed by the occasion. Also, Federer has just played really well so far. I mean, sometimes we overdo the faux-psychoanalysis in sport -- it's oftentimes simply a case of the other guy/team just doing really well.

8:25 a.m. I'm really happy I'm listening to John McEnroe and not Vijay Amritraj. Just throwing that out there.

8:27 a.m. The score is 4-0, 15-15. We've been playing 15 minutes and Soderling has no winners.

8:29 a.m. Soderling finally holds to get on the board. It's 4-1, but really, this set is over.

8:32 a.m. Blink, and you miss Federer's service games. He's lost one point on his serve in three games. This has been all-out domination.

8:35 a.m. Federer is pulling Soderling around court like a dead puppet. 15-40, and Soderling faces two set points on his own serve. Come on, man. At least make him serve for it.

8:36 a.m. Federer needed both, but there you go. Soderling comes into the net, Federer does his whole "move like a gazelle and hit like an ox" routine and it's over. 6-1, with Federer winning 3 games on Soderling's serve. So now Federer knows how Nadal feels at every previous French Open final.

8:38 a.m. Quick question: has Federer ever been up a set in a French final?

8:40 a.m. Some quick internetting reveals that yes, Federer has been up a set previously. He won the first in the 2006 final against Nadal.

8:43 a.m. As expected, Soderling looks more solid here in the second, getting over whatever nerves he may have had courtesy that first set mauling. 1-1 here, with both players holding relatively comfortably. But Federer is serving in front.

8:47 a.m. Tony Parker and Eva Longoria sighted!

8:48 a.m. Hahahahhahahahahahaha. A streaker (but he's actually clothed, funnily enough) runs on to the court with a Swiss flag and a beret, and tries to put the Beret on Federer, who looks miffed and tries to brush him off like a fly. The guy runs around, jumps over the net, and is then tackled by some dude. Hilarious. Federer should have "thought about using his racket" according to McEnroe.

8:50 a.m. They showed a replay, and Federer looked kind of scared for a split second. You would too if some nut came running at you with a flag and godknowswhatelse. I mean, really -- that guy could have had a knife, right? Federer actually clutched his heart there. Poor guy.

8:52 a.m. Anyway, after all that, Federer manages to hold. 3-2 in the second. The crowd is still buzzing about that incident.

8:55 a.m. McEnroe says that Soderling has at least starting playing better. Of course, he follows with a double fault.

8:55 a.m. And a missed smash. 15-30. Mini chance here for Federer.

8:57 a.m. It's raining a little bit, but it's clay so they can stay on for now. Soderling recovers though, and we're at 3-3.

9:00 a.m. Federer is drop-shotting like it's nobody's business. What a beautiful player to watch at full flow, even at this advanced stage in his career. He holds, and it's 4-3. Business end of the set coming up.

9:02 a.m. By the way, if Federer wins today, it would be the 18th time in the last 20 Grand Slams that either Federer or Nadal won.

9:04 a.m. Oooh Federer had a chance there. 15-30, and Federer had an open court with Soderling looking all at sea at net. Dumped it into the net though. Too bad.

9:07 a.m. Federer rips a backhand winner down the line. There's just something about a one-handed backhand. He follows it up with a bad miss to take the shine off though. No worries, as he wins the next point, and it's 5-4.

9:10 a.m. Soderling gets to a Federer drop shot for the first time. Think he's going to lose this game though. Let's see.

9:11 a.m. Great prediction, Ahsan. Really. Soderling wins the game at love. 5-5.

9:13 a.m. Federer follows with his own at-love hold. 6-5.

9:17 a.m. Some big forehands from Soderling. He's very much in this thing. He gets this to a tiebreak, and anything could happen. One set all? All bets are off.

9:19 a.m. Federer with a vintage on-the-run forehand pass down the line. Beautiful. Deuce for the first time in this match methinks.

9:21 a.m. Tiebreak it is.

9:22 a.m. Aces from each to start. 1-1.

9:23 a.m. Federer hits heavy but also smart, pushes Soderling to a corner where has nowhere to go. Gets the mini break, and follows with an ace. 3-1.

9:23 a.m. One more. Federer has three aces on three points on his serve in the tiebreak.

9:24 a.m. This is getting ridiculous. Federer wins two points on Soderling's serve, the second on another drop shot. 6-1 in the tiebreak.

9:25 a.m. Hahaha. Another ace. Soderling didn't touch a ball from Federer's serve in the tiebreak. 7-1, and Federer takes a two set lead, and follows with his mini jump and trot to his chair. This match is over, right? There's no way back for Soderling. Right?

9:28 a.m. McEnroe says Rod Laver was his idol, but Federer gets his vote for GOAT. We're then treated to a great rally, probably the longest of the match. Anyway, it's 30-15 on Soderling's serve.

9:31 a.m. McEnroe tells us that Soderling once beat Rainer Schutler after being two sets down. "Doesn't bear a great resemblance to Rainer Schutler, Federer" he deadpans. Anyway, Federer breaks Soderling. 1-0.

9:34 a.m. Another ace. Federer has served magnificently today. 2-0, and the commentators start discussing Wimbledon and Nadal's injury. Wow, guess this one is really over, huh?

9:38 a.m. Why do sports programmers always end up giving so much advertising space to erectile dysfunction medicines? They do know that some sports fans are younger than 45, right?

9:40 a.m. Bloody hell. Statistic of the match thus far: Soderling has won nine points on Federer's serve. In the match. That's ridiculous.

9:41 a.m. Ooops! Federer misses a gimme, and suddenly, Soderling has his first break point. Is he going to make this interesting?

9:42 a.m. Not there he isn't. Soderling plays defensively and pays for it. Got to take your chances, man. Deuce.

9:44 a.m. Federer holds, and it's 3-1. He is twelve points away from a truly astounding achievement.

9:45 a.m. This has been the heaviest shellacking in a French Open final since, um, last year, when Nadal just smoked Federer.

9:47 a.m. Another curious fact: do you know that no one has ever beaten both Federer and Nadal in the same Grand Slam? In non-slams, Nalbandian has done it twice and Djokovic once.

9:49 a.m. Federer closes his service game with two aces. Have I mentioned how well he's served today? Eight points away, and the crowd is chanting his name.

9:51 a.m. This has been a truly remarkable performance from Federer. It really has been -- he's looked very different to the guy who struggled and ground his way through the tournament.

9:53 a.m. Soderling holds, and it's 4-3. Let's start talking about Wimbledon. I say Nadal misses the tournament, Federer loses in the quarters, Murray wins, and England tries to pretend that Scotland kinda/sorta still belongs to them.

9:57 a.m. Some wiseass in his column tomorrow is going to say something to the effect of: it says something that the person to give Federer the most trouble on Sunday wasn't a tennis player.

9:59 a.m. Four more points, as Federer holds. 5-3.

10:00 a.m. I would like to thank Roger Federer for two things. First, for playing such awe-inspiring and clinical tennis today. Second, for finishing the match well before the scheduled start of play in the England Pakistan T-20. I hate having to make choices.

10:02 a.m. Soderling holds, and it's 5-4. As he sits on his chair sipping his water, what do you think Federer is thinking right now?

10:04 a.m. Alright, here we go.

10:04 a.m. Soderling error on the serve. 15-0.

10:05 a.m. Federer hits the net with a wide-open court. Jitters?

10:05 a.m. Good serve, return out. 30-15.

10:06 a.m. They trade angled backhands, and Federer misses the down-the-line clincher. 30-30.

10:06 a.m. Wow. Misses a running forehand on the full. Break point.

10:07 a.m. Mishit from Soderling. Deuce.

10:07 a.m. Great serve, great backhand, simple volley. Match point.

10:08 a.m. And he's done it. Of course, because he's Roger Federer, he starts crying. We'll let him bawl here. Outstanding achievement. Brilliant play today. What a champion.

10:10 a.m. By the way, someone should have told Soderling the final was at Roland Garros. Did he get lost on le metro? Paris' subway system is pretty easy to navigate, so that can't be it.

10:13 a.m. Alright, unless something really funny/interesting happens at the trophy presentation, I'm out. I'm going to load up the dodgy feed for the T-20 game. Who knows, you guys might get two live blogs in one day.

UPDATE: I thought this might be a good time to revisit the late David Foster Wallace's classic piece on Federer written in 2006, titled "Federer As Religious Experience". Even if you've read it before, read it again. And if you haven't read it before, set aside half an hour and read it now.

Talk About Knocking a Guy When He's Down

From The Onion (Via Jon Wertheim's Twitter feed)

After losing his first French Open match in four years, a somber Rafael Nadal apologized Sunday for disappointing his "millions and millions of fans," a comment many are calling a gross overestimation of his popularity and overall effect on people's everyday lives. "The people all have faith in me, and I let them down," said Nadal, seemingly unaware that most people were oblivious to the fact that he lost the match, that the French Open was taking place, and that the French Open is a professional tennis tournament. "In the end, it's the [maybe 500 at most] fans who really push me to succeed." When asked if he was disappointed that Nadal had lost in the early rounds of the tournament, Kansas City, MO resident Dale Hughbart, 46, said he hopes Michael Chang wins the French Open because he's a "quick little guy, from what I remember."

Unlike the English, the Americans don't seem to care about sports they suck at.

Blog Recommendations, Reverse Recommendations, Five Rupees Architecture

Now, normally I like to plug blogs that few people know about, so that I feel cool recommending them (like an unknown rock band). That way, when they make it big, I can feel good about myself for finding them before you (again, like a rock band). Unfortunately, two of my recommendations are apparently quite well known, but I only just started reading them, somewhat inexplicably. So I guess this is kind of like recommending Pearl Jam six months after Ten came out.

The first recommendation is Chapati Mystery. The writer, coincidence of coincidences, also happens to be a Pakistani social science PhD student at the University of Chicago. And here I was thinking I had that market covered! Anyway, I found Manan's blog having read this article that was spread far and wide on the interwebs. Check him out.

The second recommendation is A Reluctant Mind maintained by regular reader Tazeen. She blogs from the heart, and has a really good mix of politics and random shit on her blog. So if you like reading us, you'll definitely like reading her.

The third recommendation is Copy Paste Material maintained by regular reader Karachi Khatmal. Now, I bear some blame for not giving KK a shout-out much earlier, since he's bloody hilarious (as people who read the comments on our blog can attest to). I've been reading him for a while, but for some reason, neglected to give the hat-tip. He's also less famous/popular/read than the two above (judging just by number of comments), so I feel good recommending him. Think of it as the equivalent of recommending Mother Love Bone.

All three will be added to the "Pakistan" section of the links you see on your right.

Moving on, cricket fans should check out SouLBW -- it's really good, though the color scheme might lead to a seizure or three. But it's T-20 world cup time, so odds are Pakistan's performances have already led to a seizure or three for you guys (seriously, this Rohit Sharma fellow is no joke...where the hell does India keep finding these batsmen?).

Ok, now for the reverse recommendation. Listen up, Farooq and Nikhil: Your monthly production since you began earlier this year has gone from 27 (in January, when you were clearly very excited) to 11 (in February, understandable since maybe the novelty wore off and it was a shorter month) to 3 (in March, completely inexcusable) to 1 (in April, and it was just a video too boot) to 0 (in May). I wish I had a joke for how I expect negative production from you in June, but I'll leave the funnies to Farooq. From my end, you are being removed from our "Friends" links over on the right -- I refuse to link to a blog that doesn't, for all intents and purposes, exist. See, now you know: it's not so easy to maintain a well-running blog, is it?

Ok, on to other stuff. For some readers who may not be aware, we have an RSS feed for this blog. You can subscribe here, so that you are notified when there's been an update. Also, for those on Twitter, Tan (one of our readers) very kindly set up a Twitter account for us, because we were too lazy and/or hate Twitter. Our Twitter feed doesn't have anything other than links to our posts, but it can also function as an RSS feed as you will be notified when there's been an update.

Also, feel free to consider this an open thread on the latest bomb blast in Pakistan (in a mosque no less, killing nearly 40 people). I'm fast getting to the point where I have nothing to say about these events anymore -- it's just too numbing. But that shouldn't stop you from commenting, if by any chance you have something to say.

On that depressing note, let me wish you a good weekend.

YouTube of the Day

Documentary filmmaker Max Blumenthal (son of Bill Clinton operative Sidney) took this video of Israelis and American Jews after the Obama speech. I imagine this what drunken frat boys at Hicksville Community College sound like.

Mini-links For Thursday (Late Edition)

Some late links (or early if you're back in Asia):

Some of you may have heard of the fact that Pep Guardiola showed a motivational video to his players before the final against United in Rome. Well, the video made its way to Spanish television and then, quite naturally, to Youtube. It interspersed scenes from Barca's season with scenes from The Gladiator.




By the way, I'm pretty sure I would have been ready to go play against United if I had seen that beforehand. I also love this tidbit from a story on the video:

As the lights went up, several players were reportedly in tears, and Guardiola, his job done, did not address his players again before the entered the field.

Well, at least we now have an explanation for Barca's slow start in Rome.

Staying on football, here's a pretty funny column on pampered football stars and how they're incapable of taking care of their shit. Make sure to read the comments to see the poor sod who proffers that he's a PhD student and doesn't make enough money given his contribution to society, and the responses to said sod.

I would like our readers to put their hands together for reader Wasay for sending me two fantastic links. The first is this story about the U.S. accidentally releasing sensitive information on the location of their nuclear sites. As he said in his email, "and they worry about our nuclear safety." Wouldn't it be amazing if our foreign ministry said in a press release "We are understandably concerned about developments concerning the safety and security of American nuclear weapons. While we retain full confidence in our ally's ability to safeguard such sensitive information, we are monitoring the situation closely. The American government should know that Pakistan stands fully behind them should they need any assistance in making their weapons program more secure"?

I won't ruin the second link by telling you what it contains; all I'll say is that it ends up with a man robbing a store being named Nawaz Sharif Zardari.

Finally, here's a super depressing story in The News about some women displaced by the war in the north west. Here's what one of them has to say:

"We have been fooled. We have been fooled by the Taliban, the Army and the government. We knew two years ago that this was not Islam but nobody would help us. Why did the army not do something two years when the Taliban were fewer in number and that when they could be controlled? When they knew exactly where they were. What is the reason for their friendship with these animals? Where were this army and this government when we were screaming for help and going to them?"

Where indeed.

Re-parting of the Red Sea: Live Blogging Obama's Cairo Speech

All times are Pakistan Standard Time

4:13: Obama says salam and the crowd goes wild. He also said shukran after his press conference with in Saudi Arabia. A little pandering goes a long way.

4:15: And a quote from the Quran. Is there any country where he wouldn’t win an election.

4:17 When listing the achievements of the Muslim world, I wish he would say, “Muslims have done…” rather than “Islam has done…” Many of the things he has mentioned have nothing to do the religion and everything with the people.

4:19: He also adopts the local pronunciation of Quran. Same as with Pakistan. I don’t know what he has against Afghanistan but he always Americanizes that pronunciation.

4:21: The seven million Muslims in the US seems a bit exaggerated.

4:22: “There are mosques in all 50 states of the US.” Even Mississippi and South Dakota?

4:25 “America is not and never will be at war with Islam.” Bush used to say this all the time but was never as convincing as Obama. And even with Obama, you just know this is the throat-clearing before he gets to extremism.

4:29: “We don’t want troops in Afghanistan.” We would much rather move them to Pakistan where they are really needed.

4:30: Obama promises $1.5 billion to Pakistan in non-military aid every year. That’s only $28.5 billion less than what Zardari wants.

4:32: Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq have been mentioned. Iran and Palestine must be next.

4:33: “I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo closed by early next year.” Wild applause but surely they must be wondering what he’s going to do with all those prisoners that will not be released.

4:34: Complete silence when Obama emphatically states that the US will have close ties with Israel and lists the suffering of the Jewish people.

4:36: “The situation of the Palestinian people is intolerable.” This is further than any US president has ever gone before. The rest of his Israel-Palestine stuff is typical boiler-plate can’t-we-all-just-get-along rhetoric.

4:40: “The US does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.” Pretty strong stuff. AIPAC just choked on its breakfast (eggs but no bacon).

4:43: Obama made sure to say peace be upon him after taking Propher Muhammed’s name. He doesn’t want to follow the example of Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh and the Danish cartoonists.

4:47: Would Obama’s promotion of democracy have got such cheers if Hosni Mubarak was in the crowd?

4:49: The BBC ticker just said, “Roger Federer on course to win French Open.” That got me more excited than anything Obama has said so far.

4:51: The plight of the Coptic population in Egypt gets a mention. Good on Obama.

4:54: Would it be mean to point out that every Muslim country that Obama praises for electing Muslim leaders only did so because of who their fathers were?

4:56: “Technology can bring mindless violence to our television screen,” says the man whose favourite show is The Wire.

4:58: Obama wants to create a new online system that will allow children in Kansas to communicate with children in Cairo. Sorry buddy, but Al Gore already created the internet.

5:02: Obama is trying to end the speech on a Martin Luther King note. The cynic in me doesn’t like it.

5:04: The third Quranic quote of the night. For those keeping score that’s Quran 3, Bible 2 and Torah 1. I knew he was a secret Jew-hating Muslim.

So, this wasn’t a groundbreaking or historic speech but it did plainly state the direction US policy has been taking under Obama’s presidency. Israel won’t get a blank cheque but there is no way it’s going to abandoned either. The war in Afghanistan and Pakistan will continue. But, one thing this speech made clear is that under Obama the US will be more humble without sacrificing what it sees as it interests.

The Most Pointless Fight On Youtube

A couple of news stories on the decimation of the Tasmanian Devil population through cancer duel me to youtube the little beasts and eventually led me to a video titled: Animal Face-Off: Bear v Tiger - a CGI video made for a Discovery program.



I couldn't endure watching the whole video so I scrolled down to the comments, and boy was I in for a surprise. There are 11,256 comments to the video and more than a few exchanges that go like this:

Shyntaghar
Oh my god. Another disappointing computer animated fight scene. Study the damn tigers man, a siberian tiger, white or not, destroys a grizzly bear. It's nearly as large, just as strong, and a helluva lot faster. Go back to the books man, atleast the animation is decent, 'cause the outcomes are false.

Rexzer
Er, talk about going back to the books. A grizzly bear can weigh up to 1,500lbs, stand up to 8ft, and has a bite force of 1,200lbs...

uchicha913732846
rezxer its not a frikkin grizzley its a Siberian Brown Bear...etc, etc.

---------

A few comments later there is this exchange:

bank80

The bear didn't win by slapping the tiger..it won by breaking the tigers back, the bear is waaay too strong....idiots

loulourocks
still he slapped the tiger and then he pushed him! but its jsut animation in real life i bet d tiger wud win...have u seen siberian tigers killing and eating brown bears or grizzlys i have

bank80

yeah ok loulourocks, is your real name Tarzan. By the way, I really don't care...this tiger vs bear vs lion crap is pointless.

loulourocks

yeah wat d hell is ur name??? is im tarzan who r u hulk? freakboy?? and by d way if its pointless 2 u why do u watch it bank80

bank80

First of all loulourock,you need to learn how to write...The bear won, get over it.

----------

It gets better

rainbowsixguy1

tigers suck boo tigers bears kick ass

manedwolf7

u know what..u suck!!!!!

rainbowsixguy1

you suck tiger balls I bet you got raped by a tiger, tiger lover!!!!!!

manedwolf7

oooo what a brutal comeback, i can see why girls mature faster than guys

rainbowsixguy1

wow your a fag I was being funny dumbass bitch grow up fucktard

manedwolf7

wow you are a retard, by the way i agree with deathapproaches

rainbowsixguy1

yeah cause you guys are lovers that dont want to tell your parents about your secret love fucktards

deathapproaches

btw stop making out with your inflatable guy dolls, and for some tips: stop hanging in gay bars, its not healthy, btu wait your gay, so go fuck yourself :) i made my point dumbass.

rainbowsixguy1

dude I just made a gay comeback try something new gay butfucker:):):):):):):(FUCK YOU!

deathapproaches

Btw, learn how to spell retard wtf? butfucker? its buttfucker, so get a real gf before you say anything else:):):):):):) FUCK YOU stop suck'in your mom's balls and be a real man

deathapproaches

hey shithead i am a chick, go get laid fucker
and me n manedwolf7 have no relation nor personel information, so get get a real dick asshole.

rainbowsixguy1

so get get a real dick asshole that does not even make sense your fucking dumb fucktard, go fuck your self.

dathapproaches

say whatever the hell you want to people fucker, im not gonna respond to you asswipe. I dont talk to gau children so fuck off. have a nice day! fucker.

rainbowsixguy1

ok you are a tard wake up you cant spell gay, and what the fuck is a people fucker are retarded or 7 years old stop wasting my time bitch

deathapproaches

togather? bitch :)

......

These idiots kept at it for a while but I just couldn't take it any more and just had to give up. Now I'm pretty used to reading really inane sexist/racist/bigoted comments on youtube but these comments just take the cake. Why the hell would anyone care about which animal would win a fight, especially when said fight exists only in the imagination of a lazy (possibly stoned) producer at the Discovery Channel?

Further Reading:
Ahsan covered similar territory in a wonderul post titled: The Best Thing About Cricket Clips On Youtube.

Poll Post

You can comment on the poll here, if you so please.

Lost Without Translation

File this story under Department of Things So Stupid You Know Rehman Malik is Somehow Behind It

About 10 days ago, Interior Minister Rehman Malik told reporters that India had provided the government with further information about the Mumbai terrorist attacks (via Saba Imtiaz). Unfortunately, these documents were in Marathi, so we had no clue what they said.

The saga of the untranslated documents isn't over yet:

Pakistan High Commissioner Shahid Malik met Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon and urged India to provide English translation of the Mumbai terror strike evidence...He also reiterated his request that some of the evidence given by India to Pakistan which was originally in Marathi could be translated into English and sent back.

I have two questions for Messers Rehman and Shahid Malik (who are only related through their low IQs). Why does our much vaunted ISI, whose only official job is foreign intelligence, only have a single staffer that can speak Marathi? And even if the Indians are kind enough to provide us with a translation, what reason do we have for believing them, especially since we only asked for this information because we weren't willing to take the Indians at their word?

If I were Indian, my answer to the Pakistani would be simple: Google is your friend. Click on this link and choose from the dozens of sites offering Marathi to English translation.