I confronted him: Sohail clarifies 1996 verbal spat with Sidhu

Former Pakistan cricketer Aamir Sohail has clarified his stance regarding his infamous verbal spat with Indian opener Navjot Singh Sidhu during a match between the arch-rivals in 1996 in Sharjah.

While speaking on his YouTube channel, Aamir recalled confronting Sidhu about the latter’s version of events regarding the aforementioned incident.

“In a comedy show, Navjot had talked about an anecdote. I had confronted him about it on a news channel in 2005 when we were talking. He again talked about that incident, and I told him that things had not happened the way he thinks,” said Sohail.

“I also told him that Aaqib Javed is in town, and the three of us can sit together and have a discussion on it. Last time, when I was commentating during Asia Cup, this incident was raised again, and I clarified it. But he quoted this anecdote in a different way, so I think, I need to give a clarification on it,” he added.

ALSO READ: Big names in one place can cause issues: Afridi on new coaching appointments

Sohail then went onto explain the entire incident and what had actually transpired in the middle.

“The incident took place when I was captaining Pakistan in 1996 in a match at Sharjah against India. Sidhu paaji was batting somewhere in the 90s. In the middle of an over, he came to me angrily and said ‘Aamir paaji, teach your fast bowler. He is doing this wrong’, so I asked him ‘paaji, what happened’. So, he said ‘he’s throwing abuses at me’,” he recounted.

“I told him ‘paaji, ignore him. He’s a fast-bowler, they have a habit of talking’. So he said, ‘no, no, say whatever you want but don’t give abuses’. So I said ‘okay paaji, I will tell him after the game, you go on and play’,” he further stated.

The 53-year-old argued that umpires would have penalised the captains if there were abuses hurled on the field.

“If there were any sort of abuses that happened between players, then the umpires, who are really strict towards the captains to maintain the code of conduct, they would have penalised,” he concluded.