While commenting on PCB’s decision to exclude Umar Akmal from all types of cricket for three years, Shoaib Akhtar had criticized the legal department of the Cricket Board and Taffazul Rizvi.
- Rizvi made it clear that he had initiated a defamation and criminal case against Akhtar
- Shoaib Akhtar should be very careful when discussing legal issues: PCB
- Akhtar criticized Umar Akmal’s three-year ban by the board’s disciplinary body
Shoaib Akhtar got into trouble again after PCB legal adviser Tafazzul Rizvi filed a lawsuit and defamation lawsuit against the former fast bowler for allegedly inappropriate comments on him on a YouTube show.
Rizvi, longtime legal advisor to the board of directors, made it clear that he had initiated a defamation and criminal proceeding against Akhtar and filed a complaint with the Federal Investigation Agency under their cyber crime laws.
Akhtar, who has made a video about the three-year ban on the controversial Umar Akmal, also upset the Pakistani Bar Council, which warned him in a statement to be careful with his words while speaking about legal fraternity.
In particular, the council said it was disappointed to hear the comments Akhtar made on Rizvi, a respected member of the legal fraternity.
“Shoaib Akhtar should be very careful when discussing legal issues,” the statement said.
The Pakistan Cricket Board said in a statement that it was disappointed with Akhtar’s poor choice of words while publicly commenting on the circuit board’s legal department and its legal adviser.
“The language used by Akhtar was highly inadequate and disrespectful and cannot be tolerated in any civilized society. The legal advisor to the PCB, Mr. Taffazul Rizvi, has initiated defamation and criminal proceedings against Shoaib Akhtar, while the PCB also reserves his rights . “
Akhtar, who has also recently been in trouble due to his YouTube channel, defended Umar in his video and criticized the three-year ban imposed on him by the Board’s Disciplinary Committee.
He also ridiculed Tafazzul Rizvi and questioned his legal experience by claiming that he (Tafazzul) always had complicated matters between the board and the players and claimed that he had defeated him in this case.