PCB’s Newfound Coaching Committee Reportedly in Disarray

The Pakistan Cricket Board’s (PCB) newly formed Coaching Affairs Committee—created with the promise of bringing transparency and a streamlined structure to the country’s coaching setup—has barely functioned as intended, with reportedly only one of its six designated members actively carrying out the process.

According to Dawn, the Coaching Committee, formed on July 16, was tasked by the PCB with shortlisting, interviewing, and recommending coaches for various assignments across Pakistan’s vast cricketing circuit. Its membership includes several high‑profile names: Director High Performance Aqib Javed, Director Domestic Abdullah Khurram Niazi, Director HR and Administration Abdul Faisal Malik, men’s head coach Mike Hesson, Head of Coaching Education Shahid Aslam, and GM Academies Imran Abbas.

Yet, according to sources, only Shahid Aslam has been conducting interviews—joined not by his fellow committee members but by GM Domestic Junaid Zia, who was never part of the official panel to begin with. The two have already overseen sessions in Karachi and are now in Rawalpindi, with another local PCB official—also outside the original framework—helping facilitate proceedings at both venues.

This is a far cry from the committee’s stated mandate. In its official notification, the PCB emphasized that the body would bring “transparency, professionalism, and consistency across all coaching‑related operations,” while acting as a crucial support arm for the National Cricket Academy’s long‑term developmental goals.

For a board that has repeatedly promised structural reforms and clear systems, the lack of participation from most members—including figures like Aqib Javed and Mike Hesson—raises uncomfortable questions about execution and accountability.

The PCB had hoped the committee would ensure that future appointments aligned with the board’s coaching structure, policies, and compliance protocols.

For now, however, the perception remains that Pakistan cricket’s coaching affairs are being handled in the same old ad hoc fashion, rather than through the transparent process the board publicly committed to.