Michael Holding

	McGrath gets enough movement off the pitch to create doubt in the mind of the batsman as to which balls to play and which to leave © Getty Images

Fast bowling is a young man's job with all the effort and stress that the body goes through to propel that ball down to the other end. But there are exceptions to every rule and in recent times two gentlemen have gone a long way towards proving that point; Courtney Walsh successfully stretched his career into the late 30s and now Glenn McGrath is seeking to do the same.

Most fast bowlers have already started to lose a fair amount of pace as they approach their mid-thirties, and their existence in the team has begun to depend more on guile than speed through the air, but even the most gifted find it difficult to exist past the age of 35 or so.

It is never an easy decision, for a sports personality, to go on longer than people would expect for fear of falling well below the high standards set earlier in youth but better training methods have certainly helped to push up the retirement age. Fast bowling is no different and both Walsh and McGrath have benefited from not having been tearaway fast bowlers in their youth, as they perhaps have a bit more petrol in the tank than the men who regularly visited speeds of over 90mph.

McGrath's speedometer now rests around the 80mph mark, and is much more frequently under than over, yet he remains a thorn in the side for most batsmen. His participation in this Ashes series was again under question but he responded by taking another five-wicket haul in the first innings and 7 wickets in all in the [Brisbane] Test. And he did this by simply doing what he probably has been the best at for years, bowling a very controlled line and length just around the offstump with very few bad deliveries.

He has never been a big swinger of the cricket ball but gets enough movement off the pitch in either direction to create doubt in the mind as to which balls to play and which to leave. He also has a very effective bouncer, which you wouldn't expect at that pace, but again his control puts it in the right place. His deliveries seem almost to defy the laws of physics by apparently quickening off the surface of the pitch; of course that's impossible but deception is a great tool for any bowler.

The job will be to survive his spell with the new ball and at the moment not many would be willing to wager against him winning that battle

Irrespective of the basic skills or fiery pace of a fast bowler, the surface prepared for the game will have a say in the effectiveness of the individual. Glenn McGrath stands at about 6'5" and, from my experience, the pitches in Australia have always been a joy for pacemen of height and Brisbane with its good pace and bounce was no different.

The news is that the other pitches will not be as kind. Even Perth apparently is not the fast surface of years gone by that the Windies pacer bowlers enjoyed to the extent that they never lost a Test at that venue before the turn of the century. If that is true, it will be very interesting to see how he performs in the rest of the series.

By the second innings at Brisbane, Pietersen and Collingwood realised that the longer you spent at the crease, and as the kookaburra ball got softer, there were certain liberties you could take against the great man. The job will be to survive his spell with the new ball and at the moment not many would be willing to wager against him winning that battle.

Glenn McGrath is a great and has been a great for some time now. Some say he can continue until the age of 40; for me personally the jury is out and I will wait to see how he fares in the rest of the series. McGrath should know his body better than anyone else and, if he applies to his career the good senses so evident in his bowling, he will not overstay his welcome. In the meantime, those not encumbered with the task of scoring runs against him can sit back and watch his mastery.

Bob Woolmer

	Mohammad Yousuf, Woolmer says, is now calculating in his shot selection, deadly in its execution and determined in its application © AFP

When I started my stint with Pakistan Mohammad Yousuf was Yousuf Youhana, a very fine player whom I admired, who timed the ball well and was an obvious choice for the Pakistan team - though judging from the feedback on my website not everyone agreed. He was, in fact, the first player I bumped into as he religiously (excuse me) came to the gym at the academy where I was and still am billeted.

Yousuf is a quiet man, a dedicated professional when it comes to batting and training. I always begin discussions with batsmen by asking questions to find out their likes and dislikes, what they consider important. When I threw those questions at him he was immediately receptive and willing to discuss his technique.

He is having a dream year: eight centuries (and counting) and breaking Viv Richards's record of most Test runs. Absolutely amazing, which leads to the obvious question: Why?

There were two areas that Yousuf and I have worked on technically - his balance and the ability to play the left arm in-swing bowler - and in both cases I think we have been successful. I say 'we' because the coach and player create a partnership. Interestingly, he has the high bat-lift that Sehwag, Lara and Ponting use. It is a technique that Ted Dexter shared with me when he was advising me before a series against West Indies many moons ago.

I didn't last long enough to test it, unfortunately, but I now understand why it works. The key is not to hold the bat firmly with the bottom hand; by having it raised, the bat speed increases in the impact area, which gives the impression of superior timing. It is a wonderful gift.

Like all great players he plays under his eyes - also known as playing late - and, if it could be measured, it would be interesting to see how well he watches the ball.

He still has weaknesses, as do all batsmen, but his main one is when he takes his pads off. I compare it to him stepping out of a Ferrari and then, as he goes in to field, driving a farm truck and changing his pace alarmingly. When he is batting so well perhaps you can forgive him. Perhaps.

There were two areas that Yousuf and I have worked on technically - his balance and the ability to play the left arm in-swing bowler - and in both cases I think we have been successful

However his fielding is more a mental problem; Yousuf is very quick over 20 metres and has run out many a player from mid-on. Like most run-machines I have met, the smile on the face fades a touch when the fielding sessions start - I believe he could be brilliant in the field if he just put his mind to it.

Yousuf is on record as crediting his conversion to Islam for being a major factor in his recent successes. His conversion initially caused him problems and he stalled as a player, losing some form as he wrestled with the enormity of the change. There was a period when the new Yousuf was so distraught that that he even saw his batting shoes as a factor in his mini-slump.

Gradually, though, Islam has helped him focus on his skills and has shaped the way he practices and the way he trains. There is no doubt that his religion has encouraged a new serenity at the crease, where he is calculating in his shot selection, deadly in its execution and determined in its application.

His religion has also influenced the way that he handles his life generally, which proves that when you are at peace with the world you can focus on work, family and sport with time to spare. It is, in fact, an interesting study of the effect of religion on an individual.

Oh by the way and as a footnote I suspect the search for the perfect batting shoe has ended.

Yousuf now works with our trainer Murray Stevenson every day in the gym, partly to strengthen his right (throwing) shoulder. He also practices avariciously on a marble slab for 40 minutes working on the bouncing ball and, when it is angled, dealing with the ball that nips back and nips away. He bats sensibly in the nets, which has been the hallmark of most great batsmen. His hunger for runs and desire to score big are similar to all the great players of any era and certainly Yousuf now moves into the great player category.

I look forward to seeing him continue as there are few better sights in cricket when "Mo Yo" is in full flow.

Hanumant Singh: always Chhotu to the ones who loved and respected him © Rameshwar Singh

The difference between cold news and hard reality was brought home like a slap in the face at 4.30pm in Chandanwadi, Mumbai where Hanumant Singh was cremated. Until then he had been merely a former Indian cricketer who had featured in 14 Tests and then faded away in debatable circumstances, through injury. At the crematorium, however, with Mumbai's cricket fraternity coming together to pay their last respects, Hanumant Singh became Chhotu, as even those much younger to him referred to him.

It was a chance for captains of the team then known as Bombay, who had played against Hanumant in as many as seven Ranji finals, to show the respect they had for their Chhotu. Madhav Apte, Ajit Wadekar and Bapu Nadkarni were all right at the forefront, consoling Sangram Singh, Hanumant's son and himself a cricketer, and it was ironic that the one captain who had played against Hanumant who was missing - Polly Umrigar, had died earlier this month.

Bishan Singh Bedi had flown from Delhi to Mumbai to be at the funeral, and the man who would have most wanted to be there, Raj Singh Dungarpur, was away in his home town of Dungarpur, campaigning for the Bharatiya Janata Party ahead of forthcoming legislative assembly elections. He took the first possible flight to Mumbai, but by the time he made it, the funeral was finished, and some said that was perhaps a good thing, for Dungarpur would not have liked the Chhotu he saw.

More than three weeks of being in intensive care, kept alive by machines and given a chance to fight a combination of Hepatitis B and Dengue that had ravaged his liver, kidneys and lungs, had taken their toll, and the Hanumant that lay before the gathering bore no resemblance to the Hanumant who had, till as recently as November 4, been in Rajasthan, his home state, working as chairman of the selection committee.

Those who could be there were there; those who couldn't, showed their respect in other ways. Indian cricketers playing South Africa at Port Elizabeth wore black armbands, as did another set of cricketers at the Bombay Gymkhana. They were trainees of the England and Wales Cricket Board Academy, many of whom Hanumant had coached.

One of the things Hanumant was known for, besides, as Vasu Paranjpe so succinctly put it, "driving through the on-side with such comfort that Chhotu was compared to Peter May, was his reading of the game. This would come out when Hanumant chatted about cricket, which was frequently. Some years back, over a cup of tea with some journalists, he made the point that VVS Laxman was repeatedly being dismissed caught on the off side because he was playing across the line. Unable to quite understand what he was saying, he was pressed for more; he summoned a bat and demonstrated how Laxman was actually playing across the line from leg to off, rather than the other way round, the common definition of the term "playing across the line."

When Hanumant's funeral ended, it was fitting, though ironic, that most of the gathering made their way to the CK Nayudu hall at the Cricket Club of India for a condolence meeting to mark the death of Pahlan Ratanji Umrigar. It had been organised much in advance with the Bombay Parsee Punchayat earlier, and today fitted into the mood of things. Those who spoke of Polly kaka, and their audience, both reflected a time when cricket was a different game, and not just in the sense that one-day cricket had yet to be invented or that cricket boards did not measure success by the size of their coffers. The common thread was that Umrigar and Hanumant loved cricket to the extent that neither could give it up once their playing days were done.

Nari Contractor, visibly emotional, demanded that the Mumbai Cricket Association name its indoor school after Umrigar. Piloo Reporter, the former umpire who showed up in sports shoes, black trousers and a white shirt as though he was going to umpire a game, referred to the sobriquet 'palm-tree hitter' that Umrigar had picked up on the 1951-52 tour of West Indies, where he cleared the fence repeatedly. "The palm tree has fallen," said Reporter, in a reference to Umrigar's height and stature.

Apte, who shared a room with Umrigar on more than one tour, spoke of how the big man would carry a saree of his newlywed wife Dinoo, and keep it under his pillow as he slept.

There was no mention of contracts. There was no sign of a sponsor. There was no talk of burn-out. There wasn't an agent in sight. What there was, was a roomful of people saying "thanks for the good times," and good-bye, to two of their own.

by Dileep Premachandran

Zaheer Khan was dynamite with the new ball at Newlands, at the slog he was poor © AFP

For more than half the innings, it was a near-impeccable bowling display. Zaheer Khan provided the incisions at the top of the order and Anil Kumble tightened the noose with his legspin. But in the final 10 overs, near-perfect became perfectly abysmal as Justin Kemp and Andrew Hall ravaged the bowling for 113 runs. Kemp smashed seven sixes, and Zaheer's last two overs went for 31 in an unforgettable display of power-hitting.

If it had been a one-off, it could have been dismissed as an aberration. After all, the South African batsmen had clobbered 96 from 9.5 overs against Australia as they overhauled 434 at the Wanderers in March. But India have a history when it comes to late-overs ineptitude, and a failure to finish teams off.

At Newlands, they had South Africa 76 for 6, and allowed them to escape to 274. A couple of months earlier in Kuala Lumpur, with a place in the DLF Cup final at stake, they had Australia reeling at 117 for 6, only for the last four wickets to add 96 on a surface where run-scoring was never easy. The same bowlers who had appeared so menacing and incisive in their opening spells got hammered late in the innings, with barely a yorker finding its target.

The yorker, whether reverse-swung or otherwise, has been an integral part of the problem. Munaf Patel bowled it beautifully on Test debut at Mohali against England, but has found it difficult to do the same with the white ball. And the attempts to pitch full in Cape Town played straight into Justin Kemp's hands, with his devastating straight swings sending the ball soaring over the fence.

As Brett Lee and several others have shown often enough the fast, well-directed, swinging yorker is an invaluable weapon at the denouement of a one-day innings. But it's also a delivery that leaves no margin for error. Get it wrong, and a potentially wicket-taking ball becomes a full toss, and a free hit for a batsman.

Bowling Anil Kumble at the slog could be a temporary option © AFP

The cleverly disguised change of pace is an equally potent delivery, but there too India's bowlers have a way to go to attain Steve Waugh or Dwayne Bravo standards. Bowling length balls with barely a variation in pace is a recipe for disaster, and once Kemp started teeing off, India had no answers.

The magnitude of the problem is best illustrated by figures. In 80 innings since the last World Cup, India conceded 4358 runs between the 41st and 50th overs. They took 173 wickets at 25.19 and leaked 6.44 per over. In the same time-frame, Australia also bowled in 80 innings, picking up 196 wickets at 20.07 and conceded 6.05 per over.

Since Manoj Prabhakar was eased out of the game by Sanath Jayasuriya's strokeplay at the 1996 World Cup, India have struggled to find someone adept at bowling at the death. Ajit Agarkar and Zaheer are the most experienced in the end overs, but neither has been as effective as they can be with the new ball. The new crop have also learnt the hard way. Munaf and Sreesanth bowled beautifully initially in the warm-up match against Rest of South Africa at Benoni, but once Albie Morkel and Jacques Rudolph decided to open out, they were clueless.

Turning to Kumble and spin might be a short-term answer, but with modern-day batsmen using such heavy bats, even a mis-hit could comfortably clear the rope. In the biggest game that India have played in recent memory, Ricky Ponting and Damien Martyn walloped 109 from the final ten overs of the World Cup final, effectively ending it as a contest. Once or twice, Ponting lofted the ball one-handed, such was the wretched bowling on display. To avoid repeats of that fiasco and the Cape Town one, India have to find answers to an issue that could replace Fermat's Last Theorem as the problem no one can solve.

Sambit Bal

When conditions are demanding batsmen like Laxman have the skill to see out the tough periods © AFP

The most unfortunate of events has led to one wrong being righted. India have lost their captain and best batsman to a finger injury, and Rahul Dravid is quite irreplaceable at the moment. But the tragedy has opened a door for VVS Laxman, who should have been on the flight to South Africa on November 12 in the first place.

There were several plausible reasons to keep Laxman out of the one-day team. One, he can bat only at number three; he is too reliant on subtlety and touch to be able to summon the violence required in the later overs. And for the top three slots, he has been competing with Sachin Tendulkar, Dravid and Virender Sehwag. Unlike the last World Cup, it was never a case of Laxman v Dinesh Mongia. Mongia was picked this time for a specific role: to bowl five overs of flat and stump-to-stump left-arm spin, the kind of which can be handy on slow and low West Indian pitches, and bat at No 7.

Two, he is a poor athlete. He can only field in the slips and is a liability in the outfield during the slog overs. Not the best fielding side, India can carry only so many men under the harsh lights of top-level international cricket. Also, he can't pinch a single or convert a two into three and always presents the threat of a run-out while at the crease.

Three, one-day cricket is a young man's game and, being on the wrong side of thirty, Laxman isn't part of the future. Tendulkar and Dravid select themselves and it makes sense to groom young players around them.

However, the circumstances have changed in the past few months, and changed circumstances warrant flexible thinking. On pitches that haven't been conducive to batting, some Indian batsmen have been exposed for their technical shortcomings and inability to adapt. Sehwag has continued to fail, Yuvraj Singh has lost form and Suresh Raina hasn't been good enough.

Most importantly, pitches in West Indies, Malaysia and in India during the Champions Trophy have changed, if only slightly, the pattern of one-day cricket. Seam, spin and indifferent bounce have tested batsmen and demanded application and technical adaptability. It has made for interesting cricket and raised the importance of primary batting skills. Unless the pitches change dramatically, the World Cup is likely to see 250-run totals rather than those in excess of 300.

A batsman like Laxman can be a misfit and a liability even on flat batting pitches where batsmen can plonk the front foot down and swing through the line. If you are looking at scoring over 300, you need batsmen who can clear the ropes every once in a while. One Dravid is enough to rotate the strike.

To chase 250, though, you need solid and sensible batting. And when conditions are demanding, you need batsmen who have the skill to see out the tough periods. Raina is a promising batsman and electric in the field. Mohammad Kaif is a fighter, a team-man and brilliant in the inner circle. But on batting pedigree, they don't equal to half of Laxman.

Too often in the recent past, Laxman has batted like a man with his place on the line. Some of his doubts are perhaps self-inflicted. But to get the best out of him, he must be made to feel wanted and secure

When going got tough for batsmen in the Champions Trophy, Australia found a saviour in Damien Martyn. He didn't need to hit the cover off the ball. He was deft and skillful. He created the angles and found the gaps. Laxman is a batsman in the same mould. But too often in the recent past, he has batted like a man with his place on the line. Some of his doubts are perhaps self-inflicted. But to get the best out of him, he must be made to feel wanted and secure.

When the Dravid-Chappell regime began, Indian cricket needed a shake-up. The team had become stale and lethargic. Some players needed to go, some needed to be woken up, and new players needed to be tried. In Munaf Patel, India have found a bowler for the future. And having served a necessary sentence, Zaheer Khan is back, fitter and hungrier. But India must now pause, catch their breath, reassess their options, and choose the best available talent.

Peter English

The Australians huddle around Glenn McGrath, who showed their is still plenty of fire in the belly © Getty Images

Once again only Andrew Flintoff managed not to burst. The series is young but he is already in danger of carrying as much weight as Andy Flower when he was dragging Zimbabwe. The burden is a worry for his left ankle, which is still being strengthened after surgery.

As captain Flintoff is caught between using himself as the best option or waiting uncomfortably in the hope one of his team-mates eases the workload. Matthew Hoggard briefly lifted when he accounted for both Ricky Ponting and Adam Gilchrist, but the score had already ballooned to 467. Flintoff employed himself intermittently and reliably. He waited an hour before bowling in the morning and it took a cut Ponting boundary that brought up the 400 to stir a brilliant short spell.

A frightening lifter that might have brushed Ponting's glove was immediately produced, but half a dozen replays could not prove whether Steve Bucknor called correctly. Nine's new "Hot Shot" technology was absent and conspiracy theorists remembered Ponting's contract with the station. A play and a miss and a ball moving away that twisted the bat in Ponting's hands finished the over. It was a remarkable collection to a humming batsman on 167.

Michael Hussey had also been causing problems and Flintoff decided he would copy last year's approach to Adam Gilchrist and go around the wicket. A vicious off-cutter upended the off stump and sent it spinning in the direction of fine leg. Michael Clarke, who was playing for his short-term future, narrowly escaped the rest of the five-over spell and raised a half-century.

The England fielders were as slow as the over-rate and Flintoff was forced back to try and close the innings. He had returned 4 for 99 when Ponting saved him some energy with the declaration at 602. Fortunately for England Flintoff's dressing-room rest was not disturbed by McGrath's return to the game.

For 11 months there have been questions over whether McGrath would make an Ashes impact. It took only three overs for him to let everybody know he would continue to be an England menace. Wickets 137 and 138 against the most familiar enemy came in consecutive deliveries. While the first dismissal relied on Andrew Strauss' poor swipe, the removal of Alastair Cook could have been arranged at any time over the past decade.

Two excellent bowlers were on display but only one worked with assistance. Flintoff was let down throughout the first innings while McGrath was able to combine with both Brett Lee and Stuart Clark, who took care of Paul Collingwood. Australia have stuck together and despite Flintoff's effort England appear to be falling apart. They will be mashed if they cannot muster something substantial on day three.

by Peter English

The peaks were high but the lows were disturbingly deep © Getty Images

In the winter Michael Clarke added a smart tattoo to his left forearm. Don't be concerned, he's not going through a mid-life crisis. There's no new fast car or a plan to copy Michael Slater's reckless batting. The message Carpe Diem, scrawled thickly but neatly on his skin, is not to show his love of Latin but acts instead as an unwashable reminder. All he needs now is an Ashes day to seize.

During Clarke's Test introduction his exuberant grip clenched around the game with spectacular home-and-away debut centuries. He knew his control would loosen and the form slump would arrive, but he did not expect the highs to be such striking peaks and the lows to be so deep. Allan Border Medallist on one starry night, he was dropped for failing against England and West Indies in the same year. Since then he's been starved of first-class action and submerged in the one-day order.

Lack of opportunities combined with the rise of Shane Watson to oust Clarke from the original Test unit, which he re-entered in Bangladesh in April. Rather than getting bitter he remained upbeat and arrived in the team through the backdoor on Tuesday when Watson was ruled out with a hamstring injury.

At the squad's first training session on Monday he was still on standby. He said he hadn't scored enough runs and didn't deserve a spot. The tempo of his voice was calm. He even cracked a joke about his lack of results. The situation might not have been ideal, but he wasn't weighed down by it. It showed Clarke had grown up. Australia's golden child has entered cricketing middle age.

Off the field Clarke has shown impressive maturity - and the sensible head that is missing when he considers an aggressive downswing to a ball requiring non-negotiable defence. While he struggled to turn starts into something significant in England in 2005, Clarke was also sitting at Shane Warne's side and offering support. The 24-year-old novice was listening and counselling the worldly 36-year-old as he dissected the breakdown of the long-term marriage.

'Now I realise it's just a game' © Getty Images

In Cardiff it was Clarke who woke Andrew Symonds by pouring water over his head and dragging him into the shower after his pre-Bangladesh bender. Less than a year later in a Cape Town nightclub Clarke was again the sound reason as Symonds was threatening his career - caught in a heated argument with a Cheetahs Super 14 rugby player. Seize the friend, save the day. Clarke's a valuable man to have in Australia's corner.

Of course good extra-curricular deeds don't translate into steady run-scoring. They don't guarantee places in squads and it was Watson's injury that allowed Clarke an opening. As he waited for news on Watson, Clarke considered the past 18 months. "With age and with time you learn about your own game," he says. "My preparation is much better than it was. I've just got to bide my time and when I get a chance I have to grab it."

At the beginning of his career everything happened in a hurry. Now he has learned to adjust to a slower pace. "Whether I'm scoring runs or not, I accept things now," he says. "Before it was real highs and real lows, now I realise it's just a game. I've got to expect there will be times when you fail. When you're doing well you have to make the most of it."

Slight technical alterations were achieved during the off-season and he has a genuine desire to play straight early in the innings rather than to think about it and then submit to his aggressive instincts. He has worked on balance to avoid his head leading his body towards the off-side and some unplanned knee flexes have been added to his bat tapping.

In Australia's first training session of the week he launched a string of straight sixes off a batch of junior slow men before refocussing. They are not shots that will regain the Ashes.

"It's always in the back of my mind that I lost my first Ashes series and I'd love another chance to be part of winning the series," he said. "It's Australia's biggest series for a long time. The guys just want to get out and play. Given the chance it would be very special."

Clarke first learned of Carpe Diem when watching Robin Williams lecture his school students in the movie Dead Poet's Society. A sweatband will cover most of the tattoo when he bats, but the message is already inscribed in his mind. He's just waiting for a chance to follow the advice.

by Andrew Miller

As both captains have said, it's time for the talking to stop. Tomorrow's eagerly anticipated first Test contains a number of head-to-heads that could prove pivotal in the destination of the Ashes. Here, Cricinfo takes a look at seven of the most important match-ups

Ricky Ponting will be judged on his captaincy, Andrew Flintoff on how he leads if England fall behind © Getty Images

Ricky Ponting v Andrew Flintoff

The most successful England captain in Australia in recent years was rugby's Martin Johnson, which is why Flintoff's door-frame-filling captaincy could yet prove to be a masterstroke. He has the skill and popularity to lead from the front, and a sturdy brains trust to guide him in the big decisions, but he will only be truly tested if and when England fall behind. That's when Ponting, older and wiser after his mauling at the hands of Michael Vaughan in 2005, could come into his own. He has proved himself as a batsman annually but, ultimately, he's going to be judged on his captaincy.

Shane Warne v Kevin Pietersen

In any other circumstances, Pietersen's move to No. 5 in the order would be seen as retrogressive, as Warne himself was suggesting only this week. But then again, who better to appear at three-down in the mid-afternoon session, with the ball going soft and the spinners beginning to take hold? Only Pietersen has the eye and the chutzpah to beat Warne at his own ultra-attacking game and, as the Australians themselves have pointed out in the past, he can be a notoriously slow starter against the quicks.

Adam Gilchrist v Geraint Jones

Warne's none too impressed with Jones's reinstatement either. Nevertheless, he did what he had to do in 2005, clinging on to the catches that really mattered, and combining with Flintoff superbly in the pivotal partnership at Trent Bridge. Moreover, the pacy pitches will suit his cross-batted game. As for Gilchrist, it's a question of hunger as much as anything. By his own admission, his struggles from round the wicket were mental as much as technical. If he atones for 2005 with one of his typical Ashes performances, the battle will be more than half won.

Matthew Hayden v Matthew Hoggard

Here's an interesting decider. Round one, in 2002-03, went emphatically in favour of Hayden, who bullied a young and insecure Hoggard into utter submission, cashing in on his undisciplined inswinging line to deposit him over midwicket at every opportunity. Last summer, however, it was an entirely different scenario. Aided by some cunning field placings, Hoggard swung rings around his nemesis, reducing him to a leaden-footed shell of a batsman. Hayden has since reinvented his game, stripping it of much of its former bombast. But the scars could still be there to be picked at.

Justin Langer could be one serious blow away from retirement, and it could be Steve Harmison who delivers it © Getty Images

Justin Langer v Steve Harmison

On the last opening morning of the Ashes, a vicious rising delivery from Harmison clanged into Langer's elbow, and thus ignited a never-to-be-forgotten contest. And once again, this battle of the openers promises to be a microcosm of the summer's action, for each man embodies the strange fragility that lies beneath the surface of each camp. If Harmison is off-colour, England could be hung out to dry. But Langer was 36 yesterday and is arguably one serious blow from retirement. Something similar could be said for most of his team-mates.

Glenn McGrath v Ian Bell

There was a moment in Jaipur during the Champions Trophy that summed up Bell's new improved attitude to the game. Peeved at his lack of success, McGrath picked up in his follow-through and winged the ball at the batsman. Instead of flinching, Bell stood tall and looked his opponent up and down with wry amusement. How different the scene had been at The Oval last summer, when McGrath dismissed him first-ball on that fretful final morning to deliver a miserable pair. The youth has gained experience, but Mr Experience can't regain his youth.

Brett Lee v Andrew Strauss

Is this the match-up that could decide the Ashes? Quite conceivably. None of England's top seven has played an Ashes Test in Australia before, but Strauss excelled on the bouncy wickets of South Africa two winters ago, and in the absence of Marcus Trescothick, it is up to him to blunt Australia's sharpest tool. Lee is now 30 and knows that this is his time. Expect a plethora of cuts and pulls and high-octane action, because as England know from experience, attack is the best means of defence against the Aussies.

by Osman Samiuddin

Brian Lara's 34th Test hundred was a rollicking affair © Getty Images

The few spectators who came down today didn't know it, but they actually had a choice of two games to watch at the Multan Cricket Stadium. One was the second Test between Pakistan and the West Indies, where the tourists were pushing for control against a disciplined attack. Aggressive seven-two fields, with three slips, were set for the batsmen and Pakistan clawed back some ground by taking four wickets. On this track, that many in a session takes some doing and with still a lead and Dwayne Bravo in, lower-order to follow, ostensibly the game hinged.

But the other game spectators could choose to watch was Brian Lara having a lark. The decision proved a no-brainer. At 37, after 16 international seasons, 129 Tests and 33 hundreds, there shouldn't remain much room for surprise from Lara. We know he's a genius, that he moulds sessions and games as he desires, that there isn't yet a shot in cricket he can't play, that no spinner, no tear away fast bowler or medium-pacer can claim to have his number. There isn't a type of innings he hasn't played: monstrous epics, match-winning hands, gritty match-saving ones (a more recent addition to the collection), lone ranger, last man blazing classics. Yet he still has the capacity to leave you awestruck.

Danish Kaneria, pasted by Lara across Kingston, Bridgetown and Lahore, said before this Test he intended to go back to the drawing board to combat the man. Three balls to him, the last of which was deposited over long-on for six and Kaneria needed to go back again. Thereafter, cruelty after cruelty was heaped upon him though it isn't often that the manner it is meted in is so elegant and dapper. The pace of assault was harsh, never
the conception.

Kaneria didn't bowl poorly; he troubled Daren Ganga; got the ball to do funny things, made it to drift, to land on the spot. But to Lara, it became a football, tossed up by a child. One over, he twice jumped out and drove over extra cover for four, before sweeping fine for another. Kaneria got Ganga next over, Lara upped the ante the one after. The people behind the long-on fence tried to catch another ball, after which Lara stood up and cut through covers.

The apogee came the next time they met, however, a union that had already ceded four boundaries and two sixes to the West Indian. The turf then became a dance floor, Lara its Travolta. Over six balls, he jigged up the pitch, went back once and then danced down thrice more for four, six, six, six and four, all between the straight and square leg. More than the twenty-six runs, the footwork should be recorded. Sixty Lara runs from 29
Kaneria deliveries in that period was murder, nothing short.

Kaneria couldn't even claim special attention. Around the wicket, Abdul Razzaq gave Lara a platform from which his off-side game was shown off. Around point, the grass was burnt by drives, cuts, whippy flicks and glides. Having hit two boundaries from Razzaq's first over of the day, Lara hit three more in his sixth, the first bringing up a 48-ball fifty.
For Pakistan's first-change, a short, useless spell thus ended. As a fourth hundred in four Tests against Pakistan approached, he slowed down, though that is relative. Having been 92 off 63 balls, he eventually got the landmark off 77, the fifth man to score a century before lunch. Shivnarine Chanderpaul's 100th Test stood, typically, overshadowed.

After lunch, the two games finally melted into one, for not even Lara could continue like this. His ravenous appetite for runs and his side's need for a lead happily converged. Mohammad Hafeez annoyed him as a fly might an elephant and eventually even that was nullified. The shots came, not as often, but regular enough to sustain a run-rate of fractionally under four through the day; no batsmen could manage three on the first two
days. Even Kaneria was later spared, the tiniest victory found in two maidens to Lara late in the day.

Few wrongs in cricket have been righted as emphatically as Lara's record in Pakistan during this series. Before the first Test at Lahore, he hadn't passed 44 in four matches, an almighty aberration erased through two hundreds and a fifty. If there exist few reasons, as the legend goes, to remain in Multan, on November 21, 2006, the dust, heat, beggars and graves for which the city is famous, were all forgotten amidst one man's singular
charge to make it, briefly, the most enchanting venue in the world.

by Tony Cozier

'A Test average of 38 - and falling - after six years in international cricket is unworthy of a batsman blessed with the special touch' © Getty Images

The shock at Ramnaresh Sarwan's omission from the eleven for the second Test yesterday was surpassed only by Brian Lara's frank explanation for the decision.

"It's a time for Sarwan to reflect and come back strong," Lara told the world at the toss. "He is one of our main players. We know that. There's no doubt about it. It's an opportunity for him to spend some time off the field and see what it's like and come out back into the middle maybe more energetic and more purposeful."

It marked an unmistakable change in a policy that readily accommodated deceptively talented underachievers in the West Indies team in recent times. The names Carl Hooper and Marlon Samuels spring readily to mind. Lara's message was loud, clear and long overdue. It would have registered large, not only with Sarwan but with everyone vying for selection.

It was that, from now on, no one is guaranteed a place, not even the vice-captain, not even a quality batsman with 64 Tests and over 4,000 runs to his name recently ranked No 2 at ODI level. Sarwan's character will be sternly tested by this development.

Only a few days before the Test, he was acknowledging his slump in form and saying that he was "more determined than at any other time...to put together a score in this Test match". Now he must wait, perhaps even until next summer's tour of England, for his next Test.

He has come through adversity of different kinds before - the death of a cherished girlfriend midway through his first overseas tour, several blows to the helmet from unsympathetic fast bowlers, the initial loss of the vice-captaincy - and ought to come through this as well. But it is a unique experience for him, watching a Test match from the pavilion. It is the first time he has been dropped since his difficult period in Australia in 2001.

A Test average of 38 - and falling - after six years in international cricket is unworthy of a batsman blessed with the special touch. Most irritating, after all this time, is his failure to eliminate the errors that have repeatedly brought his downfall. He has been caught 13 times in Tests off the hook or pull. His square-on position early in his innings has exposed him to slip catches and lbws. Repeatedly, rank carelessness has cost his wicket at crucial times, most recently in the second innings of the first Test and the first innings of the last against India last season.

All of this would have been noted on coach Bennett King's laptop and in Lara's consciousness. There is a lesson to be learned from the player who took Sarwan's place in Multan. Runako Morton is short on genuine class, big on heart and determination. There is no certain selection for him. He has had to depend on the shortcomings of a batsman with twice his ability and his own hard work to squeeze in.

© Trinidad and Tobago Express

Steven Price in Harare

The news that Peter Chingoka has survived the internal firestorm of the last year to emerge still as the chairman of the new, improved Zimbabwe Cricket is about as surprising as Robert Mugabe winning the last/next presidential election. In Zimbabwe it's more who you know than what you stand for that matters.

Chingoka's tenure as ZC chief - well into its second decade - has hardly been a success. Admittedly - and even his critics acknowledge this - up until about 2003 he could justifiably claim to have done a decent job. But, mirroring the decline of Zimbabwe as a whole, the last few years have been a catalogue of failures. The exodus of talent, the collapse of established internal structures, allegations of financial mismanagement and intimidation have all been to the fore. On the field, the side has become an international joke, and not a very funny one at that. And much of the blame for that must rest with Chingoka.

So how come Teflon Pete remains at the helm? The key is that he has friends in high places, both inside and outside the country.

One thing Chingoka has always been good at is cultivating relationships, and this has ensured that he has been able to call on friends when the heat has been on Zimbabwe. Of late, he has made sure that Zimbabwe has backed India within the ICC, and that loyalty has been rewarded. The ICC inspection carried out in August by Percy Sonn and Malcom Speed further endorsed his grip[ on power. Sonn and Chingoka are old mates, so there were hardly any surprises there, but more importantly the ICC realised that it was far better dealing with Chingoka rather than an unknown quantity. In Zimbabwe, more often than not the person next in line is far worse than the one in charge, and in cricketing circles that also applies.

The ICC hierarchy is not stupid either. They realised that whatever the faults of Chingoka, he was likely to be in situ for some time and so they would be better backing him and trying to work on change through official channels rather than alienating him. That might have meant them looking the other way when confronted with some unpalatable internal issues, but they would argue that is a price worth paying.

Within Zimbabwe, Chingoka plays a shrewd political game, remains a skilled operator and has the knack of being able to stay one step ahead of the opposition. Opponents have come and gone in the last year, and all the time Chingoka has survived.

What has been irreparably damaged is his reputation. Those close to him suggest that he is concerned about his legacy, but it is hard to see how he can emerge from the shambles with much in the plus column.

All Chingoka can hope is that things do start to get better before he finally steps down. There are occasional signs that the crisis may have bottomed out, mainly because it would be hard to see how it could get any worse. For now, he's still there and Zimbabwe cricket needs to accept that and make the best of a bad situation.

As the last year has shown, fighting Chingoka only produces one winner.

	The Australians finally emerged victorious in a tournament that has eluded them © Getty Images

The Champions Trophy is a much maligned tournament. The fact that it was created with the sole purpose of making money to plough back into the system irks some. Others suggest that it takes the shine off the World Cup. For certain people just the fact that it is a one-day tournament makes it a waste of time. The 2006 edition provided enough good games, clear trends on which teams and players are on the rise and which are on the wane, and plenty to talk about. To me, it was West Indies' tournament, which Australia won.

The noise and the chatter

When the tournament began there was a very real danger that the rumbling spat between the ICC and the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) would blow-up into a full fledged crisis. With the Indian board either taking shots at the ICC, or replying to remarks made by the ICC, in the media, there was the chance that sports pages would have been filled with Malcolm Speed and Lalit Modi, rather than hard cricket. That this tournament began with a qualifying round - and this inevitably yields one-sided matches, meant that it took some time before the cricket was hot enough to push out the officials from the sports pages. Once things began to fall into place, though, it all changed.

The champions

Chris Gayle made this tournament his own. There are plenty of batsmen in the world capable of scoring 474 runs in a tournament, but few who can do in the crowd-pulling manner that Gayle did. His hitting - against any sort of bowler, on any kind of pitch - was reminiscent somehow of an era when West Indies dominated cricket. It's easy to romanticise these things, but Gayle is just such a throwback to a time when a batsman had to worry more about his off stump than anti-ambush marketing clauses that you make the exception in his case. He clowns around at press conferences, celebrates taking catches of wickets, or scoring hundreds, with anything from the sublime to the ridiculous, and just bats on regardless.

Another star was Jerome Taylor, the leading wicket-taker. Loose limbed and athletic, he ran in with pace and purpose, and really it should have surprised no-one that he did as well as he did, including becoming the first West Indian to pick up a hat-trick. Then there was Damien Martyn,
repeatedly coming in to bat after a wobble, steadying the ship with serene batting. There was Stephen Fleming, handing out lessons on how to adjust to different conditions and bat on tricky pitches.

The form book

The early phase of this tournament made it impossible to predict any result with a degree of certainty. Pakistan beat Sri Lanka, West Indies beat Australia, West Indies beat India, New Zealand beat South Africa, South Africa beat Pakistan . The fact that the tournament was played in three different venues, each providing differing pitches, meant that teams had to adapt quickly, and often it was the team that displayed the most tactical nous, and cricketing intelligence, on the day, that won, rather than the better team. This meant that the tournament was wide open for a lot longer than pundits initially expected.

Chris Gayle exhilarating batting was a throwback to an earlier era © AFP

The pitches

There was only one really bad pitch all tournament, the one at the Brabourne Stadium for the South Africa-New Zealand match. It deteriorated too rapidly, crumbling in the second half, making it next to impossible for South Africa to chase a target. Another one that came close to being unacceptable was the green seamer at Mohali where South Africa rolled Pakistan over, and here too the batsmen had little chance of mastering the bowlers.

Barring those two matches, the pitches for the tournament were fine, with the only odd losing captain whinging from time to time. The pitches certainly weren't of the kind people take for granted in India - flat batting strips where even 300 is not safe, and they certainly made for
better cricket in many ways. Captaincy became a crucial element as strategy played a huge part in each match, and high quality batsmen willing to apply themselves were in demand.

The bits and bobs

Although the crowds largely stayed away from the games through a combination of India's poor performance and the high prices of tickets, when they did make it to the grounds they were treated better than is normally the case. The stadia in question, at Ahmedabad, Mumbai and
Mohali, have improved out of sight, and it's now realistically possible to get a seat, something to eat, and reasonable amenities at the ground. The organisation - and though there's always plenty of room for improvement - was a cut above the ordinary for India. Credit must go to all parties involved - the ICC, the BCCI and the local associations, but mostly to the men who ensured that through all the bickering, the work got done. They're the officials whose names you don't see in the papers, and the ones that play the most vital roles.

The result

The best team in the world qualified to play the final against the team playing the best cricket in the world at the time. You couldn't ask for more, if you were fair. And in the end, as has been the case in many grand finals now - the 1999 World Cup final in England, the 2003 World Cup final in South Africa, and now this - the Australians just blew away the opposition. West Indies had one of their off days, Australia were too strong overall, and go into the Ashes having won the one tournament that eluded them. West Indies had mounted a creditable defence of their title,
and played with pride, something that gives you the hope that they can give a good account of themselves when the carnival travels to their part of the world, for the biggest tournament around, not far from now.

Kevin Mitchell

'Michael Clarke did the right thing when he waved away appeals for a 'catch' he had scooped up from Jacob Oram' © Getty Images

The notion that a cricketer would cheat has always been seriously at odds with the supposed spirit of the game, and too unpalatable to contemplate. It is a naive
view and it ignores both history and human nature.

When Dwayne Bravo emerged somewhat less than exuberantly from his outfield tumble and roll to send back Michael Yardy in England's final match of the Champions Trophy in India with a catch that video replays showed had bounced in front of him, you did not have to wait long for the head-scratching in the commentary box.

The pause reflected obvious misgivings. But it also underlined the reluctance of commentators ever to draw the instant conclusion that a player would do something underhand. In football, the outraged response to a foul or dive is in-built; in cricket the default reaction is: surely not!

I'm not calling Bravo a cheat. Only he knows how right or wrong he was to claim that catch. But it didn't look good. It was a decent piece of athleticism that put him in position to attempt it in the first place, yet he hardly celebrated accordingly.

There followed the sort of moral confusion cricket has had to face with increasing regularity. It is a game saddled with impossibly high standards from the past. It has also become, over the past decade, a game scrutinised to an unprecedented level by TV cameras. There is no hiding place.

Bravo was charged with failing to "conduct play within the spirit of the game". This arose from repeated viewings of the slow-motion film which left no doubt the ball had bounced up from the turf into his hands.

The buck was then passed to the match referee, Mike Procter, who didn't so much drop it as bin it. He will say he had a tough call to make. The evidence was incriminating, no doubt, but the bounce was small enough for Procter to judge, purely on the player's say-so, that Bravo may not have been aware of it. Procter chose the word of the player. The expensive, hi-tech video evidence became suddenly, curiously, ludicrously irrelevant. It was like being presented with the body, but agreeing with the accused that he could not be sure if he meant to pull the trigger.

The mantra from older players goes that in times gone by there would have been no dilemma: before super slo-mo, the snickometer, Hawk-Eye and all the other gadgets, players were scrupulously honest. If the ball fell short, they would not claim it; if they got an edge, they walked.

Well, we all know that was not universally the case. And how could it be? Cricketers then might have lived in an age more obviously imbued with a sense of fair play, uncorrupted by the sort of money available today, but they were just as fallible and weak as any gold-digging, passport-swapping, bet-taking soldier of fortune in the modern game.

'It was a decent piece of athleticism from Bravo that put him in position to attempt it in the first place, yet he hardly celebrated accordingly' © AFP

If Bravo was guilty, it was in his lack of side. He pouched the chance and walked slowly back towards the bowler with little show of emotion. Into that look and stroll could be read several interpretations: he is one cool dude, he was waiting for the video replay, he wasn't sure at all if the ball had smacked him square in the hands with no deflection ... or he at least briefly suspected that the ball had had the sting taken from its journey by the ground.

In effect, he gave himself the benefit of the doubt. So did Procter. But the match referee's version was, in my opinion, just as flawed. "Television replays appeared to show the ball bounced but Dwayne thought he had taken the catch cleanly," Procter said. "From my experience as a player I know that can happen, but we needed to ask the question to make sure it was a
genuine mistake by the player. For that reason the umpires were right to lay the charge but, after we all talked it through, I had no reason to disbelieve Dwayne's version of events."

That is clearly nonsense. The reason he had to at least seriously doubt "Dwayne's version of events" was what his eyes told him when he examined the replay. The reason he had to believe him was he found it uncomfortable to come to the conclusion that Bravo would try to deceive him. And maybe the player didn't. Perhaps he was totally innocent. And, given the parameters,
Procter had no choice but to acquit.

Yet, despite his eminence as a former player, I have to take issue with Procter's logic, and, by
inference, that of Bravo. Bravo said he had no doubt he caught it; Procter said that sometimes it is hard to tell. You can't have it both ways.

A few days later, Michael Clarke did the right thing when he waved away appeals for a 'catch' he had scooped up from Jacob Oram. He knew it had bounced first and he said so instantly. Anyone who has played the game, at any level, knows there is a different feel between a ball that lands at unimpeded speed square in the hands and one that is even minimally slowed
down by hitting the ground. Indeed, a half-volley invariably nestles in the hand much more gently than a ball that flies above the turf. And certainly a genuine catch has that unmistakeable "smack" about it. Did Bravo know? I hope his take on it was genuine. But, if
he was in the slightest doubt, he should have called for the replay himself, and accepted the decision. Those last three words should be what cricket is all about.

Fazeer Mohammad

Brian Lara scored his 33rd hundred but it wasn't enough to help West Indies salvage a draw © AFP

So where do West Indies go from here?

To say 300 kilometres south-west to Multan is the obvious answer, but may not be the one most are looking for in the aftermath of the heavy defeat at Lahore. The deeper, more analytical response, is just as self-evident, except that too many people are seeking solace from umpiring errors and an assortment of other excuses so as not to face up to a fundamental reality.

As well as the Caribbean cricketers have progressed as a unit in one-day internationals during the course of this year, too many of them still don't know how to play Test cricket. It's not just about the results, which are damning enough, but the repetitive manner in which they tend to subside, at home and abroad, which underscore that reality.

They are all capable of individual brilliance, and we have seen several of those flashes in the very recent past from batsmen and bowlers alike. But a Test match, like a cricket team, is the sum of its parts. It's no use dominating opponents for a session if the effort can't be sustained, day in day out, until victory is achieved.

We like to highlight turning points in a match - a key wicket, a brilliant catch or a straight six off the most threatening bowler-because it is easy to hinge a result on one or two incidents. However, in a contest as protracted as this, these are essentially just points along a graph, and the overall effort must be anchored in a solid base of discipline and perseverance, qualities that demand a high level of concentration.

Talking about bowling a consistent line or going back and across is the easy part compared to developing those intangible elements in players, the vast majority of whom are the products of a popular culture of instant gratification.

Just look at what happened yesterday at the Gaddafi Stadium.

Another masterful hundred from Brian Lara, superbly supported by Shivnarine Chanderpaul, finally put some real backbone in the West Indies effort and threatened to give the home team a few worries heading into the final day. Yet from the moment of Lara's demise, the fight went out of the side (Chanderpaul's wild swipe at Danish Kaneria shortly after was immediate confirmation) and the last six wickets tumbled for 53 runs.

Anything new in that? Close your eyes and call a cricket venue anywhere in the world and there is a very good chance that almost the exact scene would have been played out in that arena at some time over the past 11 years.

Bravo, who 29 months after his Test debut has not yet experienced what it is like to be in a winning Test team, seemed in the mood for some playful old talk with his fellow countryman, except that Lara wasn't particularly accommodating and at one point in the brief exchange looked as if he was uttering a few stern words

For Lara, it must be an increasingly deflating experience, never mind the usual empty platitudes about learning from this latest setback and staying positive and focused ahead of the next match. What else can he say at a post-match ceremony, that we should forfeit the remaining Tests and play 12 ODIs instead so that everyone can return to preparing for the World Cup?

Maybe I'm reading too much into it, especially from this distance, but a little exchange with Dwayne Bravo while both were standing in the slips during the formalities of Pakistan's second innings appeared much more revealing of Lara's true feelings. Bravo, who 29 months after his Test debut has not yet experienced what it is like to be in a winning Test team, seemed in the mood for some playful old talk with his fellow countryman, except that Lara wasn't particularly accommodating and at one point in the brief exchange looked as if he was uttering a few stern words.

Again, it may have been nothing, but you never know. It must be galling for Lara to have now scored 5226 runs in vain for West Indies. Vain in the context of at least not losing Test matches (something he has been talking about more and more over the last few months), though clearly not futile in terms of the sheer delight he has brought to fans of the game around the world for the incomparable elegance and style with which he embellishes an insatiable appetite for runs.

Some of Lara's greatest performances - the 688 runs with a double-century and two other hundreds in three Tests in Sri Lanka in 2001 stand out-have come in the midst of comprehensive defeats. In the single-mindedness of youth and the desire to rack up more and more runs and records, the legacy of being a champion batsman in a woeful Test team isn't all that relevant, because the mind says there is still time to make a difference in the winning column.

But time is running out, and even if the evidence of his 33rd Test hundred and third in as many matches against the Pakistanis reaffirms his pre-eminence among contemporary batsmen worldwide, Lara is increasingly haunted by the stark reality that too many of his runs are only of personal statistical value.

Like millions of Indian cricket fans and their obsession with Sachin Tendulkar, many Trinis now don't seem to mind too much that the West Indies have been beaten again, so long as their hero has gotten another hundred.

Those indulging in that short-sighted consolation would do well to appreciate, as Lara certainly does, that his Test career has, maybe, another couple years to run and that the game, and the team, are always bigger than the player, never mind how great that player is.

Peter English

Leap of faith: Brett Lee leads Australia's bulging pace contingent © Getty Images

Australia's selectors have unveiled their forceful plans to liberate the Ashes urn. Ricky Ponting will have six fast men to choose from for the first Test after he was handed an artillery-laden squad of 13. The heavy-handed approach shouldn't come as a shock - the tactic is currently very trendy among powerful Western leaders - but it's hard to remember even West Indies teams of the 1980s rustling up so much firepower.

While two of the brigade will be surplus to Ponting's requirements in Brisbane next Thursday, the selectors' opening-game intent cannot be misread. The side may be old - only three players are under 30 - but England will have to dodge many speeding bullets to prove last year's 2-1 win was not a one-off. Adam Gilchrist's gloves will be pounded and the visiting batsmen will fidget like secretaries desperate to escape a board meeting.

Merv Hughes, an Australian intimidator of a previous era, was in the MCG room in his role as selector when the squad was announced. The panel wanted flexibility and could barely conceal its glee at having so many quick options. "The inclusion of extra pacemen in the squad reflects one of the strongest starts to the domestic season of young talent in recent memory," Andrew Hilditch, the chairman of selectors, said. All six bowlers are in form after McGrath, Lee and Watson warmed up in India.

Mitchell Johnson, the soft-talking left-arm golden child, and Shaun Tait, the brash right-arm slinger, were catapulted into the squad and will jostle for the third fast-bowling role with the more calculated Stuart Clark. Whoever wins the appointment after a week of pitch and weather analysis will appear in the slipstream of Brett Lee and Glenn McGrath.

Shane Watson has a chance to make another point in the first Test © Getty Images

While Watson can be used for shock or stock value with the ball, his primary duty will be to perform in a middle order that could mimic any England shakes. Watson will form Australia's stomach with Gilchrist, who might be in his final Test series, and Michael Hussey, but each player has ground to conquer. Gilchrist was silenced in 2005 and his off-stump starts to shudder whenever Andrew Flintoff goes around the wicket. Hussey has never played a Test series against England and has considered ways to avoid the second-year blues suffered by the omitted Michael Clarke.

Watson will appear in only his fourth Test and hasn't beaten his opening effort of 31 against Pakistan in 2004-05 when he began his career as a No. 7. Five games of opening in the Champions Trophy will not be able to compare to an Ashes Test even for someone who has shown himself as a big-innings player for Queensland and Hampshire. Watson's multi-skills won him a trial last year but he popped a shoulder against West Indies and spent half the season in rehabilitation.

Now Watson has nosed out Clarke in a crucial decision and extra weaponry has been added in favour of a specialist batsman. Allrounders in five-man bowing units have not been significant parts of Australia's history and England were derided when they went this way in the 1990s. The new look for the first Test will be exciting, but force doesn't always work and it isn't a sure-fire way to cover other potential deficiencies. Just ask the West's most senior decision makers.

Andrew Miller

Marcus Trescothick: touring life has taken its toll © Getty Images

Contrary to popular perception, international cricket is not a glamorous lifestyle. The demands of the modern calendar have sucked almost all the spontaneity out of its participants. When it's not a match, it's a training session. When it's not a training session, it's another internal flight. And when it's not an internal flight, it's another bout of navel-gazing in another soulless hotel.

Writing for Cricinfo in his Champions Trophy diaries, the West Indian opener and bon viveur Chris Gayle said, without irony, that the highlights of his days were "chillin' in the hallways" with his equally bored team-mates. No wonder Trescothick admitted in the early weeks of this tour that he had "fallen out of love with the game". But if there was any lingering doubt that Trescothick has a terrible and debilitating problem, today's news has quashed the sceptics once and for all.

The Ashes is everything to this England side - that much is apparent from their indifference towards all other contests - and with a World Cup coming up in four months' time as well, even the most wavering professional would surely be expected to rouse their interest for one big final push. Not Trescothick though. He turns 31 on Christmas Day, and with a young daughter, Ellie Louise, to think about as he sits alone in his hotel-room, he seems to have switched off what little interest he still retained in the international game. Why was he allowed to tour in the first place? The questions are sure to be asked of the ECB, even as they prepare their latest smokescreen.

This case brings to mind the struggles that Graham Thorpe went through in a near-identical scenario four years ago. Like Trescothick, Thorpe's woes began in India, when he flew home ahead of the second Test in a bid to salvage his crumbling marriage, and continued through a dire English summer that reached its nadir in a desperate performance against India at Lord's. After retiring from one-dayers and opting out of the rest of the series, Thorpe initially declared himself available for the Ashes, but then back-tracked before the plane had even lifted off.

Thorpe, like Trescothick, had been one of England's most committed tourists until the moment he snapped, and made ten consecutive tours for the Test and A team before opting out of the South Africa series in 1999-2000. He is now a coach at New South Wales and understands better than anyone the difficulties that cricketers face in the modern game. "The moment you say I am struggling to concentrate because of 'X', the way the media is you are going to throw more pressure on yourself," he said last week. "[Trescothick] has to be able to deal with it."

But he hasn't dealt with it. Who knows what was being murmured from the slip cordon during those two brief innings at Canberra and Sydney? What abuse was being hurled from the stands, along with the racial slurs that have (so far) been shrugged off by Monty Panesar. Whatever he's encountered in the warm-ups, you can bet that worse would have followed once Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath got stuck in at Brisbane. That is not to criticise Australia's attitude to the game, incidentally. Test cricket is a test of mental technique as much as physical, and Trescothick's undoubted successes at the highest level - nearly 6000 runs including 14 hundreds - are proof that his mindset has held together better and longer than most.

But when your mental game becomes so fragile - whether you've lost your nerve against the pacemen or lost your appetite for the battle - there's no amount of net practice or gym work that can get you back to match fitness. England's short-term loss may yet be to their long-term advantage - as perhaps it was when the veteran Thorpe was himself jettisoned in favour of younger, hungrier campaigners at the start of the 2005 Ashes. But if, as is widely being assumed, Trescothick has played his final role on an England tour, what a sad way for a fine career to peter out.

Jayaditya Gupta

	Indian players are expected to receive performance-linked incentives by the board from the coming season. Will it work? © AFP

Money can't buy you love, and it didn't need Malcolm Speed to remind us that it doesn't guarantee success. Yet the Board of Control for Cricket in India is sticking to its first principles concerning money: More begets more. And so the changes they are proposing - emerging in bits and pieces in the media -- in the system of contracts for Team India's cricketers revolve around this very premise.

If we are to believe those scraps of information, the BCCI proposes, in addition to the basic wages that will remain largely the same, performance-linked incentives or bonuses for players from the coming season. At one level, it is in keeping with basic management or corporate practice: If there's a windfall, spread it among your employees but make them work for it.

Performance-linked incentives exist across all top team sports, even those aimed at individual players and apparently contradicting the underlying concept. In the NFL, for example, the provisions include incentives for team wins and for the defence and offence en bloc; individual incentives in what is a statistics-heavy sport range from the predictable - individual touchdowns and yards rushed - to the lateral, including personal physical condition (weight control).

Top footballers in Europe earn a fat basic wage, topped up by bonuses ranging from feats as individualistic as goals scored, shots saved and international appearances, and as interlinked as team wins and points secured.

It can also be argued that cricket, unlike football, is a far more individual sport. A bowler needs no other condition than his own ability to dismiss a batsman, a fielder depends only on his personal brilliance to effect a run-out. Player statistics are far more individual-centric than in, say, football, and one man can literally win a game single-handed.

And yet. And yet there remains a nagging doubt over what the BCCI is proposing. It stems from the fact that we're talking about the Indian team, which itself is a pretty accurate reflection of the bizarre structure within which it exists - not just in the context of cricket, but in the context of Indian attitudes to sport.

In the more economically well-off countries, sport is an end in itself; it does not, suo motu, offer any tangible gains other than the benefits of staying fit and healthy and, in a team sport, picking up the essentials of teamwork. Indians are not overly driven by the idea of either fitness or teamwork; sport becomes a tool for personal enhancement, and cricket is the Do-It-Yourself kit with best prospects.

Indians are not overly driven by the idea of either fitness or teamwork; sport becomes a tool for personal enhancement

And, within the context of sport, Indian cricket goes a step farther by celebrating - whether by the public, by the players, by those who run the game - the individual over the team. It is changing, but ever so slowly. It is still common to see public distress over the team's defeat being soothed by the fact that one player had had a brilliant game - or worse, that one player had flopped. We are yet to emulate the Australian way (or even, as Speed reminded us, the New Zealand way) of placing team before individual.

Instead, the cricketers are usually playing for their place in the side, whether the one out in the middle or the one in the ads - and it's getting increasingly hard to tell one from the other - when they need to play for the side, first, last and every time. We saw it in the last days of Sourav Ganguly's regime; it's little coincidence that, once again, contracts are in the air and the team is at sixes and sevens. Injecting individual incentives into this mix is scarcely likely to improve things.

One way out - in theory at least - is to evaluate the players in a qualitative manner, not based merely on statistics but giving weightage to match situations. That would take care of the problem above but raises another question: Who will judge the players in such detail, and with a certain objectivity? You would have to account for the minutiae of match situations: Pitch conditions (a fast bowler presented with the flattest of tracks), the state of play (the No 7 in an ODI scored only 20 but he did it off 10 balls at the death) or even the captain's instructions to a particular player. We have a shortage of qualified people to do the job and those who can, have more lucrative commitments on hand.

Perhaps it's not even a question of whether money should be the motivating factor but whether it can. The underlying principle of sport is the element of competition, and the fuel that drives every sportsman - whether the kid in Shivaji Park or his idol in Cubbon Park - is pride. The higher one goes in any profession, and India's cricketers are at the top of theirs, financial incentives offer diminishing returns. The BCCI needs to think several times - and as laterally as possible - before fixing incentives.

'He drinks alcohol, has an active sex life and he's been part of anti-doping awareness programmes' - Intikhab Alam on Shoaib Akthar © Getty Images

"We didn't have any doubts in our minds about what we have announced," Intikhab, the former Pakistan captain, told Bigstarcricket. "They were not able to convince us of their innocence. It was crystal clear. They admitted themselves that they had been taking dietary supplements. They are both adults and players have to be responsible for their own actions. Sometimes you have to take these decisions. We have done a good job."

Intikhab was certain that the tough, albeit sad, decision had to be taken as it would set an example for the young cricketers of the future. "It's sad that it happened but now the youngsters coming up will be very, very careful. We had to set an example.

"If the players just got their strength from good old-fashioned fitness work and didn't abuse their bodies with these supplements, they would still be playing."

Intikhab also said he didn't know why the two players declined the chance to give a second B test and suggested the only reason could have been that their retest would also have been positive.

Intikhab rubbished speculations that the panel was unfairly harsher on Akhtar than Asif. "If people read our statement they will understand," Intikhab asserted. "He [Shoaib] drinks alcohol, has an active sex life and he's been part of anti-doping awareness programmes. Shoaib has been around for the last ten years and the written statement that his spokesman gave about him taking dietary supplements and not consulting a doctor, shows he was negligent."

On Asif he said: "We decided to ban him for a year because his English is not that good, he comes from a remote village where he would not have been educated on the dangers of drugs in sport and so he doesn't understand."

Dileep Premachandran

'If Loots Bosman's skin wasn't a golden brown colour, his appearance in the middle on Thursday afternoon would not have raised any eyebrows' © Getty Images

If Loots Bosman's skin wasn't a golden brown colour, his appearance in the middle on Thursday afternoon would not have raised any eyebrows. Had it been Neil McKenzie or Jacques Rudolph walking out to replace Boeta Dippenaar, there would have been no talk of quotas or targets.

Those who whisper from the shadows about discrimination and hidden agendas usually have one of their own. The decision to jettison Dippenaar, who had struggled 57 balls for 16 runs spread over three innings, made perfect cricketing sense, especially with the Australian behemoth lying in wait on Sunday - should South Africa see off the challenge posed by Brian Lara and friends.

Unfortunately, an eminently sensible cricketing decision, vindicated by Bosman playing some fine shots in his 39 on what was hardly a batting paradise, will now be hijacked by what can best be called the Kevin Pietersen brigade. A few days ago, Pietersen was quoted in a feature on the BBC cricket website, talking of a friend "who is a better player than me".

Not surprisingly, Grant Rowley is white, and hasn't played for the Dolphins since 2004. "At the end of 2003/4, I should have been given a contract, it's as simple as that," he told BBC Sport. "I was passed over while guys who averaged mid-20s were given contracts." In a society aspiring to make right the wrongs of the past, and one where even cricket teams have targets when it comes to previously disadvantaged communities, you can only feel sorry for men like Rowley, who end up paying the price for the sins of their ancestors.

Yet, at the same time, it beggars belief that so little is written or said about those players of colour who missed out in the dark days of Apartheid. Thanks to England, the world got more than a glimpse of Basil D'Oliveira's talent. But how many more were there like him? As a cricket
journalist, it shames me to admit that I'm barely aware of any of the great coloured cricketers of that era. When we talk of the what-might-have-been generation of South African cricket, the names mentioned are almost always the same - Graeme Pollock, Mike Proctor, Barry Richards, Denis Lindsay, Eddie Barlow, Clive Rice and Vincent van der Bijl. Not a coloured face among them.

When you look at Makhaya Ntini run in with such elegance and power, you wonder who his predecessors were. When you see Herschelle Gibbs bat with unfettered abandon, as in that epic 175 against Australia, you wonder how many more there were like him whose talent was confined to the Cape Flats. For every Grant Rowley, there were dozens with darker skin that weren't even allowed near a cricket stadium in the old days. In a perfect world, Rowley wouldn't meet the same fate as those men. Unfortunately, we don't live in one.

Dileep Premachandran

Chris Gayle's devastating hitting ensured that the script was almost finished by the time South Africa had bowled 11 overs © AFP

Having used the short ball to such lethal effect while annihilating Srim Lanka and Pakistan for a combined total of 230 runs, South Africa must have walked out for the evening session quietly confident of defending 258. But instead of a seaming pitch and timid batsmen intimidated by the
short stuff, they found themselves up against a man who brooks no answers when in the mood. Chris Gayle's early mauling was decisive, and after that, the game petered out into an ending as predictable as the average Hollywood love story.

In another sport, Gayle's nickname would have been The Beast. Back in the 1980s, John Mugabe, a fearsome middleweight who extended Marvellous Marvin Hagler in one of boxing's all-time great bouts, had that moniker. Gayle is a cooler heavyweight version who uses a cricket bat instead of fists, though you sense he'd be handy with those as well. His devastating
hitting, in combination with some delightful strokeplay from Shivnarine Chanderpaul, ensured that the script was almost finished by the time South Africa had bowled 11 overs.

In that time, Shaun Pollock, Makhaya Ntini and Andre Nel, so immense in the surge to the semi-final, were given a proper working over, with Gayle's glorious off-driven six off Pollock emphasising the batsman's dominance. Jacques Kallis, who went into the game with 35 wickets at 20.74 against West Indies, stemmed the tide initially, conceding just two from his first couple of overs, but the next three went for a whopping 31. By the time Graeme Smith decided to risk a second Powerplay and bring back the likes of Nel and Ntini, West Indies were 141 for 0 from 24 overs. Game over, and goodnight.

Though the pitch did ease out, South Africa didn't help their cause by bowling far too short. Against someone as tall as Gayle, and on a surface that was nothing like that at Mohali, the short-pitched tactics failed miserably. Gayle may have worn a couple on the body, but several withering pulls for four and one for six off Kallis suggested that the bowlers would have been better served pitching it up.

Later, Mickey Arthur, South Africa's coach, defended his bowlers, saying that West Indies had come out with a plan that took the game away. "They attacked us upfront," he said. "They never let us settle. You're only as good as the opposition lets you be, and they were full value for the win today."

West Indies had done the hard yards earlier in the day, never allowing South Africa's big-hitting batsmen to get away. Smith, Kallis, Justin Kemp and Mark Boucher managed just 54 between them. Kallis, who averages over 50 against West Indies, pottered around for 16, and the run-out that ended a 92-run association between Herschelle Gibbs and AB de Villiers proved absolutely crucial. "The run-out cost us 25 runs," said Arthur. "Anything around 280 would certainly have been a winning total."

Even after they beat both India and Australia at the DLF Cup in Malaysia recently, some were still reluctant to consider West Indies genuine contenders in the big tournaments. But whatever the rankings might say, they have enough talent to upset anyone, as they proved by turning over
Australia at the Brabourne Stadium in what will now be seem as hors de oeuvres for the final. Brian Lara's 71 was instrumental in that triumph, and subsequent failures will matter little. When it comes to the big stage, few can match the man.

South Africa were at the receiving end during the World Cup in 2003, and though they still hold a 26-12 lead in the head-to-head stakes, West Indies also knocked them out of the last Champions Trophy. To be fair to them, they were blown away by some exceptional batting. "When Chris Gayle plays well, West Indies will win," said Arthur with a rueful smile. "He
scores his runs at such a rate." Australia will have their plans for him, but the man who describes himself as "flamboyant" and "pretty to watch" will certainly take some stopping if he crosses the boundary line in Beast guise.

Kamran Abbasi

Wings spread in celebration of a kill will become the stuff of legend © Getty Images

Icarus flew too close to the sun but he had nothing on Shoaib Akhtar. The Rawalpindi Express, the world's fastest bowler, the world's flashiest cricketer. The man who flew too close to the sun too often has finally set fire to his wings and will fly no more. The sight of
Shoaib spreading his wings in celebration of a kill will become the stuff of legend, a DVD classic, a spook story that mothers will tell their would-be superstar children: "Lose touch with your humility,your senses, and your mortality, and you will end up like him, the man from Rawalpindi, whose pride knew no bounds and whose stupidity knew
no limits."

For let's be clear, this is no two-year ban for Shoaib Akhtar this is a life sentence. Pakistan cricket has lost its most exciting bowler and the world has lost a great entertainer. Worse still, with the ban on Shoaib and Mohammad Asif, Pakistan are no longer serious contenders for the next World Cup, unless one of their many reserves grows in stature by several miles over the next months. On the evidence of the Champions Trophy and this summer's tour of England, such an outcome is not worth a wager.

Shoaib began with great promise, a bug-eyed, floppy-haired, handy-bendy, lightning-fast showman. The run up was exhilarating, the effort exhausting. The ball was full, fast, and
swinging. The celebration and the agony were sheer entertainment. The stress on his body and the recurrent injuries were evidence enough of the huge price he paid for becoming the world's first 100mph bowler.

But despite his high speed Shoaib rarely struck you as an athlete who looked after his body -- although the drugs inquiry has revealed a bewildering cocktail of potions that Shoaib and his gormless advisers pumped into his body. A member of Mensa would have struggled to know
what was in that cornucopia of medicines and bodybuilding pills.

Indeed, the first half of Shoaib's career was a bizarre obsession with breaking the 100mph barrier as if it mattered more to him than taking wickets

Fast life, fast bikes, and fast bucks were part of the package, the package that propelled him to break the speed limit also propelled him to madness elsewhere. Indeed, the first half of Shoaib's career was a bizarre obsession with breaking the 100mph barrier -- as if it mattered more to him than taking wickets -- interspersed with bad boy behaviour of rock star proportions. Once he had the record you hoped he would move on, and he did in a Shoaib kind of way, promising more control and less addiction to speed. Yet, right to the end, the injuries disturbed his career, the rumours of late-night partying -- to the detriment of his cricket -- hounded him, and the promise of going faster continued to spew from his lips.

Perhaps more than any Pakistan cricketer, Shoaib has divided opinion.Is he villain or hero? Is he master-blaster or high-class fool? The best guess is that he is probably both, a classic flawed genius, a unique talent balanced on the edge of ecstasy and damnation. Whatever
he was, we must not forget that there were times when Shoaib was very very good, the most feared fast bowler on the planet, and as big a box-office draw as you could hope to find. Shoaib was good for cricket but his cricketing success ruined him.

The box-office draw © Getty Images

Shoaib emerged under the shadow of Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis, but he held his hero to be Imran Khan. For much of his early career his selection was not automatic, Pakistan's legends were not willing to be dislodged and Shoaib at times complained that he was being wasted. But when he bowled Sachin Tendulkar first ball in Kolkata, you knew that the time of the Rawalpindi Express was about to come. And it did. The 1999 World Cup may have ended in calamity for Pakistan but it made Shoaib a superstar, propelling him to the first rank of the world's fast bowlers, and launching him into first place in the rankings for flamboyance. A sumptuous career beckoned, a destiny to be fulfilled.

It almost ended there though. Shoaib's action was beyond the comprehension of umpires and match referees and it was condemned as illegal. But the University of Western Australia showed that Shoaib's action was a quirk of nature, an extreme of hyperextension. It was enough to
secure his return, and perhaps one of the most memorable moments in his career followed as an Australian crowd welcomed him back to international cricket with the warmest reception that a Pakistani may have ever received there. Australia, and the world, had been attracted
to his corny "simply the best, better than the rest" rhetoric. But just like the accusations of partying without leave and of an unprofessional approach, just like the injuries and the fatigue,
complaints about his action never subsided, even after the ICC changed its throwing laws.

'A few overs of pumping energy, supreme speed, and control could bring the best teams to their knees' © Getty Images

In between all this, in between the rows with the cricket board and medical inquisitions, in between the bans for ball-tampering and unprofessional conduct, in between the Bollywood offers and the chicken dances, Shoaib remained a match-winner. The world's best teams and the world's best batting line-ups withered in the face of his thunderous assault. A few overs were all it took for Shoaib to transform the complexion of an innings, of a whole match. A few overs
of pumping energy, supreme speed, and control could bring the best teams to their knees. Reverse swing was his inheritance. Short balls were inevitable. But his slower ball became a precious deadly weapon.

For my money, Shoaib's best performance was delivered in the murderous heat of Colombo, in the face of a hammering by an Australian team in its prime, Shoaib reduced one of the finest middle-orders in
the history of Test cricket to rubble. Fifteen balls five wickets, including Ricky Ponting, Steve Waugh, Mark Waugh, and Adam Gilchrist. The Tendulkar-golden-duck series and last year's defeat of England occurred at both ends of his career and will rank as his most influential performances, each a memento of what might have been had injury, hyperextension, partying, irresponsibility, and Nandrolone not intervened.

My contention has always been that Shoaib is an outstanding talent whose failures are also the failures of management. I still believe that. But Pakistan's Icarus has crashed to Earth and we can't see his future for dust. His fans will be devastated, his enemies laughing. No kind of sporting hero takes drugs to enhance performance, and if Shoaib did that wittingly his reputation deserves to be dust too. Notwithstanding something extraordinary, this is the end of his star-crossed cricket career. What an almighty waste.

IS Bindra: set to challenge the essence of the way the ICC operates © Getty Images

This weekend's meeting of the ICC executive in Mumbai is likely to be one of the most important - and possibly rancorous - in its 97-year existence. It could also change the ground rules for the way the game is governed.

In one corner is the ICC itself, in the other the Indian board. The two have been at each other's throats - in the veiled language of the diplomatic world - ever since Jagmohan Dalmiya's downfall in September 2005. Of late, however, the gloves have come off and the Indians have adopted an increasingly belligerent approach

Lalit Modi's comments in the last fortnight will not have helped either. Increasingly, it appears as if he is being used as a tactical loose canon, allowed the freedom to fire off in every direction to make the core of the BCCI itself look far more reasonable. Bindra himself has acknowledged the "excessive zeal and volatility [Modi] occasionally exhibits when the other side is refusing to see reason". Modi, however, will not be at the meeting and his comments will have little relevance.

But the reality is that the ICC is now on the back foot. The Indian board is now using the clout that their financial muscle gives it and has established enough reliable support among other members of the executive to enable it to challenge and dictate the direction that the ICC is taking.

The Indian board has chosen the ground it wants to fight on - the Members Participation Agreement (MPA), which deals with advertising during ICC events, and the global marketing rights for 2007 to 2015 which are up for grabs.

MPA
The BCCI won't sign, claiming that it infringes the rights of the member board and their players (not something that it has seemed bothered about in the past) while the ICC seethes that despite being sent the agreement months ago, the BCCI only raised its concerns in the days before the deadline for signing expired. Without the agreement the ICC could refuse to allow the Indians to participate in the World Cup - clearly that's not an option - but were they to allow them to participate without signing then no other country could be held to it. Expect a fudged compromise with both sides claiming that the other climbed down.

Global marketing rights
This is where the battle will be fought as these rights are worth more than a billion dollars. As things stand, the BCCI cannot tender for the eight-year deal to market all ICC events, but that obstacle will be removed if the ICC's own commercial arm - ICC Development International - votes to remove its own bar on member countries bidding. That is likely, which will leave the BCCI free to submit a bid. The existing holders, Global Cricket Corporation, and Zee TV are also believed to be interested. Victory here would give the Indian board massive commercial and political clout - it would give them the chance to cement their financial grip on the game as it could possibly earn massive sums, and so shape the way the game develops.

Champions Trophy
Cynics point out that the leading countries could make far more from hosting their own ODI tournament than they do from the Champions Trophy. Those same cynics might also claim that the recent paltry crowds and substandard pitches (which have still led to some good games) work in India 's interest and back their claims that the event is not worthwhile. However, if the BCCI wins the global marketing rights, then the Champions Trophy is here to stay as it is a real cash cow for whoever owns those rights. If it doesn't, then the BCCI is likely to make sure that it is unlikely to happen again - at least in its current format.

Zimbabwe
Speed and Percy Sonn visited Zimbabwe in July on a fact-finding mission and their report is due to be submitted here. It is widely expected to give the Zimbabwe board a clean bill of health and to dismiss those opposing the Peter Chingoka regime as no more than disgruntled and bitter has-beens. Issues such as the flawed proposed constitution and continuing claims of financial mismanagement will again be brushed aside. Given Sonn's close links with Chingoka, few expected anything else. Zimbabwe will be formally welcomed back into the Test fold from November 2007.

The Oval compensation
The English board are out of pocket but Pakistan won't pay, insisting that the ICC employed the umpires for the fourth Test at The Oval, and it was the umpires' fault the game was abandoned. The ICC cannot agree to this as it would open the floodgates, so this will be quietly passed to its own Disputes Committee. Expect a further impasse on the subject. The future of Darrell Hair is likely to be discussed, although there will be no formal announcement to that effect.

Drugs
The ICC has not emerged from the recent incident involving Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammed Asif with credit. It has been accused of not doing enough and of not doing it efficiently. But the onus remains largely with the boards, and interestingly India has yet to sign up to the WADA agreement. The end result will be much rhetoric and several indicatives, and the players will be bombarded with even more leaflets warning of what they can and cannot do.

Osman Samiuddin

Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif: uncertain futures © Getty Images

In the run-up to the final verdict of the drugs tribunal on the charges laid against Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif, few bets were placed on the outcome. Some predicted harsh punishment. Others, cynically mindful of the nature of internal inquiries, thought lenient judgments would emerge, based possibly on technicalities and legal loopholes. After reading the report, however, few can argue that in accepting the tribunal's recommendations of a two-year ban for Shoaib and a one-year one for Asif, the correct decision has been taken by the PCB.

Mundane and plodding as such reports often are, this one is a must-read. Forget for a moment the minutiae and assess it as a whole. Broadly taken, it reveals a comprehensive and fair trial for both players, one where both were offered the fullest opportunity to defend themselves. Once digested, you cannot help, on the evidence presented, but conclude that a just verdict has been reached. Firm no doubt, but fair nonetheless.

In the details though, there is significance: on basis of the statements they provided, neither player conjured a satisfactory explanation, not even - some will note - that their mothers provided them with the medication. Shoaib's experience, the fact that he was a signatory to a drugs awareness programme the PCB organised in 2002, worked against him. He delayed in giving a sample, admitted to using an array of supplements, vitamins and medication, some of which he didn't name. He was vague about whom he sought advice from for taking such prescriptions, claimed he hadn't seen WADA's list of banned medication provided to players and has regularly sought medical help from outside the PCB. In short, he hasn't helped his case.

Asif's background, his inexperience and his ignorance, on the other hand, has aided him. He wasn't part of the last drugs awareness programme and there appears to be some doubt about whether he received the list of banned substances. The tribunal concluded, a touch bewildered, that he probably wouldn't be able to comprehend such documentation anyway. He admitted using a protein supplement but stopped when he was told to lay off by the team's physiotherapist, but couldn't provide any defence otherwise.

Firm and fair it is, but deeply depressing also. The temptation exists to say, in Shoaib's defence, that his body is a uniquely fragile creation, wracked by genetic disabilities, worsened by the rigours of bowling at a pace few have equalled. He said just before the Champions Trophy that he dreamed of playing just one day without pain, an admission now simultaneously haunting and revelatory. The pressures of staying fit or recovering from an injury, on such a being, are unfathomable.

The temptation exists to say, in Shoaib's defence, that his body is a uniquely fragile creation, wracked by genetic disabilities, worsened by the rigours of bowling at a pace few have equalled

There remains now only a bare sense of fulfillment about a career even rock stars might think excessive, blotted as it is by injuries, suspect action, disciplinary problems and now a drugs ban. We thought he had finally settled after that astounding series against England and yet, not for the first time, we were all wrong. At 31, a two-year ban is as awful as it sounds and the fear is that his career will remain unfulfilled. Some will say good riddance, others will mourn his absence; rarely has it been different.

The tragedy with Asif is of a different kind, though tragedy it is. At the age of 23, a one-year ban is no end, but the stain will persist in every article, discussion and interview about him from hereon in. By all accounts, a potentially wondrous career awaited him, a fast bowler unique still in a country that has produced some of the breed's greatest. That he will return is not doubted but how he will respond, only he will know.

Finally, as odd as it feels, the PCB deserve tribute. Once the results of the tests had arrived, they acted swiftly. Both players were immediately called back, therefore sparing unplanned embarrassment at the hands of an ICC dope test. An independent tribunal was immediately set up and, but for an unusually long break for Eid, a verdict was reached in good time.

And face it, if a way was found to spare their two premier strike bowlers - on current form among the best in the world - you would not have been wholly surprised. Disgusted perhaps at the lack of justice, but not altogether shocked. So for accepting the tribunal's findings, further praise. Anything less would not only have been an abominable precedent for younger players, it would have reflected poorly on Pakistan and cricket in general.

Lest the board get carried away though, they should be directed immediately to point 35 of the report, which minces no words in condemning the PCB's unsatisfactory manner in advising and cautioning its players in doping matters. "We have found much 'passing of the buck' between the various PCB officials who have appeared before us," they admonish. Therein lies the tale: Yes, the crisis was handled well eventually, but really it might not be altogether bad if such crises were prevented from arising in the first place.

Shoaib Akhtar: his career is in ruins © Getty Images

Cricinfo Staff

Shoaib Akhtar has been banned from cricket for two years and Mohammad Asif for one, after being found guilty by the Pakistan Cricket Board of using the banned substance, nandrolone.

Both men tested positive in the build-up to the Champions Trophy, and were pulled out of Pakistan's squad on October 16, the day before their opening game. The ban could effectively end Shoaib's career, because he will be 33 by the time the ban is lifted.

The testing had been conducted internally by the PCB, and a three-man tribunal comprising barrister Shahid Hamid, the former captain Intikhab Alam and Waqar Ahmed, a medical expert, had conducted an inquiry.

Both men had been recovering from injuries in the weeks and months building up to their positive tests, with Shoaib suffering from knee and ankle problems and Asif fighting back from a shoulder problem that forced him to miss much of Pakistan's tour of England last summer.

Shoaib initially denied any misconduct, saying: "I have not knowingly taken any performance enhancing drugs and would never cheat my team-mates or opponents in this way." But earlier this week, both men declined the offer of a retest on their B samples, which implied that they did not question the results. Both men are, however, entitled to appeal against their ban.

"We gave a full chance to both the pacemen to fight their cases and after a thorough inquiry we feel they failed to prove their innocence," said Hamid, the chairman of the panel. "The process of doping was investigated carefully. We made sure the tests were conducted properly, samples reached the laboratory in Malaysia safely and there was no error in testing in the laboratory.

"Both the players were satisfied and accepted the tests and gave their point of view but after a thorough inquiry and bound by the Wada (World Anti-Doping Agency) and the International Cricket Council (ICC) we reached the decision."

Hamid explained why the two had received different sentences. "Akhtar contested the case saying that he has been on a high-protein diet which contained beef, chicken meat and other dietary supplements and he also said he took some herbal medicines from a Hakim (herbal expert) but he couldn't prove them."

Under the ICC's doping rules, a two-year ban is the minimum penalty for a first offence. However, the PCB said all along it will take its own decisions, since the tests were conducted internally. As a younger member of the squad, Asif, 24 next month, has been let off comparatively lightly, and can be expected to fight again for his place next year. For Shoaib, however, the final curtain could be falling on an eventful and controversial career. Both players do, however, have the right to appeal and, if they do, a separate tribunal will be conducted.

For Pakistan cricket as a whole, the verdict marks the end of an unpalatable three-month period, which began with the ball-tampering controversy at The Oval, which led to the first forfeiture in Test history and a four-ODI suspension for their captain, Inzamam-ul-Haq.

Younis Khan, Inzamam's stand-in, then resigned on the eve of the Champions Trophy, claiming he did not wish to be a "dummy" captain, only to be reinstated following the resignation of the PCB's exasperated chairman, Shahrayar Khan.

Tim de Lisle

'Some of the thunder being heard in India at the moment should really belong to West Indies 2007' © Getty Images

The other night, outside Baker Street station, I bumped into the Guardian's sports diarist, Paul Kelso. After a few minutes we somehow got on to the subject of cricket. "The Champions Trophy," he said, "has been good fun, hasn't it?" My instinct was to disagree - that, after
all, is what fellow journalists are for. But then it dawned on me that he had a point.

It has been fun, mainly because it has been unpredictable. Hardly anyone would have guessed that the semi-final line-up would include not one Asian side. It's like a last four at Wimbledon, with the two top seeds (Australia and South Africa) joined by two surprise packets (New
Zealand and West Indies). And although these two remain the outsiders, both of them, unlike most of those plucky tennis players, do have a chance of lifting the trophy. New Zealand have some form as a thorn in the Aussies' side, and West Indies, who giant-killed Australia, must be
able to do the same to South Africa - though they still don't look more than an average team. If they do go all the way for the second time running, they will have climbed every mountain.

So what is the tournament's secret? Mainly, it's been the pitches, which have been quite untypical of both one-day cricket and the subcontinent. Sporting and quixotic, they have behaved as if determined to right the imbalance between batsmen and bowlers. They have been so variable that gameplans have come undone and matches have been won or lost by individuals showing the ability to adapt, from Runako Morton to Damien Martyn. It's been a series of exams that the students couldn't easily cram for.

Champions Trophy is too money-driven, too forced. It is still squished uncomfortably into the calendar. Its qualification stage is too long, relative to the main tournament

Improvisation has been rewarded, but experimentation has been punished - both Duncan Fletcher and Greg Chappell, with hindsight, would surely have opted to mess around less with their line-ups and batting orders. Anil Kumble would have won matches; Andrew Flintoff, feeling his way back from a major injury, would have been happier in his natural
habitat at number six.

The pitches are not the only factor. Partly it's that it is a long(ish) time since the big eight nations were gathered in one place - the last time was two years ago, when the Champions Trophy was held in England, and that didn't really take off. Partly it's that this tournament
happens to fall at an interesting point in the arc of some great careers. Brian Lara is hanging in there, and has typically mixed failures with the ability to make runs when they are most needed.
Sachin Tendulkar, who has already done more batting than anyone else in international history, has turned back the clock. Glenn McGrath has been raging against the dying of the light, quite effectively.

Mainly it's that there aren't any minnows, or haven't been since Zimbabwe and Bangladesh crashed, predictably, out of the qualifying round. The World Cup has become a minnowfest: half the matches are mismatches. In the Champions Trophy, you don't have to endure Sri Lanka
v Canada in order to enjoy India v Australia. The Champions Trophy is like the Super Whatevers (six last time, eight this) without the long tedious preamble. And with England involved.

Which doesn't mean the Champions Trophy is entirely a good thing. I wrote a few weeks ago that it was misnamed, mistimed and misconceived, and at least two of those still hold true. It's misnamed because a team doesn't have to be a champion to take part. It's mistimed because it
comes too close to the World Cup: some of the thunder being heard in India at the moment should really belong to West Indies 2007.

As for misconceived, well, it certainly looks better than it did a month ago. But that could be accidental, as the main factor, the unorthodox groundsmanship, does not appear to have been deliberate. The Champions Trophy still has big flaws. It is too money-driven, too forced. It is still squished uncomfortably into the calendar. Its qualification stage is too long, relative to the main tournament. And it is still a shocker in terms of environmental impact - made worse
this time by the dismal decision to use chemicals to glue pitches together and even to undo the dew. Cricket needs to work with nature, not against her.

Tim de Lisle is a former editor of Wisden. His blog is
http://blogs.cricinfo.com/ashesbuzz
and his website is http://www.timdelisle.com