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.

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.

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

October 30, 2006

Posted by George Binoy at in Champions Trophy 2006

A brain-dead bowling display

by Dileep Premachandran

'The short-pitch virus afflicted S Sreesanth as well, and his second spell was emblematic of an infuriatingly inconsistent display' © AFP

This rout summed up India's season so far. For most of it, the bowlers have acquitted themselves with credit while the batsmen have been clueless. Today, when the batsmen played smart cricket, the pace bowlers had a collective brain failure. Having strained every sinew to post 249 against the most formidable attack in the world, India gave it away within the space of 14 appalling overs that cost a whopping 101.

There have been many voices in the recent past calling for India to appoint a bowling coach. But there's not much that a Troy Cooley or a Dennis Lillee clone can do if the bowlers refuse to engage their brain cells. Shane Watson plays his domestic cricket at the Gabba and Adam Gilchrist at the WACA, both surfaces renowned for their bounce, and India's new-ball bowlers decided to test them with the short ball. The results were predictably disastrous.

There's nothing wrong with the odd bouncer if you bowl at Brett Lee or Makhaya Ntini's pace. But when you're kissing the deck at just over 80mph, you may as well run in with a placard that says: Hit me. On the very few occasions that Munaf Patel and Irfan Pathan actually pitched it up, the batsmen were in trouble. It made you wonder what they had been watching from the dressing-room in the afternoon, when the incomparable Glenn McGrath bowled six overs with the new ball for 12 runs and the wicket of Sachin Tendulkar.

The short-pitch virus afflicted S Sreesanth as well, and his second spell was emblematic of an infuriatingly inconsistent display. First he got hammered for four after dropping short to Ricky Ponting, merely the best player of the pull shot on the planet. Then he adjusted his length and beat him with a beauty that left the bat. The next one was even better, taking the outside edge on its way to slip. Sadly for India, the entire sequence could have been written around the words 'bolted', 'horse' and 'stable'.

Shane Watson plays his domestic cricket at the Gabba and bowling short to him is a no-brainer © AFP

It was all the more disappointing to watch because the batsmen had done a sterling job on a pitch where strokeplay was never easy. Virender Sehwag set the tone with an innings that owed as much to luck - a dropped catch, and an inside edge that flew past the stumps, not to mention numerous statuesque swishes - as it did to swashbuckling drives through the off side.

It didn't help that he had to do it all on his own early on, with Tendulkar appearing incredibly out of sorts. Once a pillager of Australian attacks, his recent woes against them are perhaps indicative of slowing reflexes. He was never comfortable, wearing one on the helmet from Nathan Bracken's medium pace, and his exit for 10 took his aggregate from the last six outings against Australia to 66 runs. When you consider that he had a century, four 50s and a 45 in the six innings prior to that, it's easy to see why some critics speak of a decline against quality pace bowling.

It was left to Rahul Dravid to show the way instead, and he took a ball less than Sehwag for his half-century, despite never once chancing his arm. Mohammad Kaif played his part in a valuable 60-run partnership, and there were vital late interventions from Mahendra Singh Dhoni and Irfan Pathan. Those who considered it 30 runs short could probably argue that sending Pathan ahead of Raina could have made the difference, but there is no discounting the quality of the bowling. Brett Lee was carted around in his first two spells, but his third was fast bowling at its finest - fast, accurate and with more than a hint of movement.

In the final analysis, the rawness of India's pace resources was their undoing. Between them, Pathan, Munaf and Sreesanth can point to 99 ODI caps, while Lee alone has 140 stashed away. In this kind of match, with everything at stake, that chasm was far too wide to bridge.

Andrew Miller

Kevin Pietersen upstaged Chris Gayle with 10 boundaries in his 90 © Getty Images

When taken in isolation, and given the rash of low scores that this tournament has thrown up, it seemed a pretty impressive performance from England's cricketers and Kevin Pietersen in particular - doubtless he'll be first off the plane, strutting his stuff as if the World Cup is already in his hands, when the team skulks back into London later this week.

But, as we have been repeating ad nauseam in this tournament, there is no isolation available to England at the moment. Far from being the dawn of a brave new world, this was a hollow victory in a dead rubber against opponents already guaranteed a semi-final berth, and no amount of positive spin can disguise that fact. Pietersen was as magnificently belligerent as only he can be, the flaws in the rest of England's performance were manifest, but hey, sod it. The Ashes are around the corner and our boys are back in the groove. Got any more of that bunting?

If you do, why not drape it over Andrew Flintoff's shoulders? His cheery performance may not have reaped many runs or any wickets, but for the first time since his ankle operation in June, he looked like a leader with a full armory at his disposal. He shook off several layers of rust with the ball while cranking his pace up towards 90mph, and until the moment he drilled Chris Gayle to cow corner, he was a batsman in control of the situation and, more pertinently, in control of himself.

Talking of Gayle, he was desperately unlucky to end up on the losing side. To judge by the solemn musings in his recent tour diary, he's not a man who's much enamoured with Ahmedabad - his idea of a good evening's entertainment is "chilling out in the hallways with Marlon [Samuels], Wavell [Hinds] and Sars [Sarwan]," and playing love songs down the phone to his "queen" back in Jamaica.

But he certainly found his release on the cricket field, turning in a coolly brilliant allround performance. His high-profile spat with Michael Clarke last week was a rare glimpse of his fierier side, but today he needed no histrionics to laud it over his opposition. Nothing epitomised his play better than Andrew Strauss's dismissal. For the second week running, Strauss descended into a blind panic as soon as the pace was taken off the ball. He should have been plumb lbw two balls before he was bowled, and when he did depart the crease it was with the same heavenward glance he had given in the last match against Australia. He knew, and England knew, that a collapse was just a faint nudge away. They are that sort of paranoid shambles at present.

And they are not being aided by the lumpen presence of Michael Yardy in the middle order.
Despite the facial wound that leant an air of menace, Yardy has to be the least notorious and dangerous Yardy that Gayle and his team-mates can ever have encountered. His performance was meek from start to feeble finish, from the steepler he dropped off Ramnaresh Sarwan to his decision to walk off the pitch despite Dwayne Bravo looking every inch like a bloke who'd just claimed a bump-ball catch.

And then there's Chris Read. He has been on a one-man mission to oust himself from the team and today's pitiful innings should ensure just that. Back in the Sky Sports studio in Isleworth, Geraint Jones was being smugly diplomatic about his rival's travails, but given that he was just beginning to escape the stigma of that slower ball in 1999, Read's hopeless performance against Bravo can only have battered his confidence back out of shape. After popping countless such deliveries into no-man's land, the inevitability of his demise was tragic to behold.

And so, England end a dismal campaign on a pyrrhic high. Pietersen pulled this match off with a performance that, ironically, will have reinforced the sniffiness with which the one-day game is viewed in England. All it takes is one inspired player and a decent support cast and you can achieve the impossible. It is a blessed mercy that we are able at last to shelve the debate, at least until January and the start of the VB Series.

by Ravi Shastri

Is it time to end the experiment of Irfan Pathan batting at No.3? © AFP

India's decision to go in with four medium pacers in the match against West Indies was a strange one. Playing four medium pacers in Indian conditions is a luxury even a Maharaja in his pomp would turn a blind eye to. Excessive use of medium-pacers on Indian turfs, an obese, overflowing middle order and the serial quarrel over Irfan Pathan at No.3 which the team picks up with the nation every time it takes the field - the Indians are only refining their finesse to shoot themselves in the foot.

We all know the soil in western India has a reddish tinge. In cricketing parlance it means a ticket to party for the spinners at the start and end of a cricket season. Yet India dispensed with Ramesh Powar and picked up four medium pacers. I can understand if you have pacers who can bowl at 140kmph but that isn't the case. Just picking up right and left-arm bowlers doesn't mean variety. There was too much sameness. All you end up doing is under-bowl a few of them and turn to the Sehwags and Yuvrajs. Fifteen overs between them is an admission that the team woke up to the reality late in the game. Sometimes wisdom comes to us when it can no longer do any good.

Now take the case of India's packed middle order. Besides the ones who played, Dinesh Mongia and Mohammad Kaif were resting on the bench. Compare this with the options they have at the top of the order. If some unfortunate injury was to happen to Virender Sehwag or Sachin Tendulkar, India don't have an option to give the team a thrust in the Power Plays. Who are the alternatives they have thought of for such an eventuality?

Clearly, the Indians must, without any further delay, get an absolutely clear idea of the 15 they are going to pick for the World Cup. In my squad, Gautam Gambhir will be a must. You can't sideline players who can take a good helping for themselves in the Power Plays. It is an area where India don't seem to take a heavy toll of bowlers. Even in Ahmedabad on Thursday, they should have promoted Yuvraj Singh to make the most of the field restrictions, or even Suresh Raina, who needs to be given a stage to establish himself as a top-order left-hand batsman rather than allow him to languish at No.7.

Gautam Gambhir must find a place in the squad for the World Cup, argues Shastri © AFP

Despite all the problems at the top, India keep thrusting Pathan at No.3. Bull-headedness is one thing but carrying on in the same vein is foolhardiness. I believe the time has come for Dilip Vengsarkar, the chairman of selectors, to impose his will early in his stint and be hands-on when the playing XI is being selected or the batting order is being pencilled down. Otherwise, the ship, already in stormy waters, is bound to run into rocks.

I can't believe this is the same side which stirred my heart six months ago. The quality of players hasn't worsened drastically, but poor selection and mismanagement of batting positions has seriously hampered the side. More of it and the bottom will come apart.

The pitch for their match against West Indies wasn't a 220-run kind of surface. Even this total was possible due to Mahendra Singh Dhoni's sensible batting. As I said, there are too many men queuing up for a place in the middle order while at the top there aren't enough hands to pick up the riches of the Power Plays.

India are now left to pick up the pieces. Around the same time last year, they staged a revival. Sometimes acknowledging your erroneous ways is the first step to redemption. Hopefully common sense will prevail and Dinesh Mongia will be thought of as an option in the do-or-die game against Australia.

Dileep Premachandran

'What does it say of a man that he keeps getting out the same way time after time?' © AFP

On the eve of this game, one of India's many TV channels broke a story about Greg Chappell having harsh words for his wards before a practice session. In a country where analysis of sport on TV remains laughably slapstick, such things make news - a coach actually having a go at his players? Perish the thought! But after this shambles of a performance, some of those players should be profoundly grateful that they don't play for an Alex Ferguson or a Vince Lombardi. If that had been the case, cups and saucers or boots would surely have been thrown around the dressing room, with one or two repeat offenders banished into the frozen
tundra forever.

The litany of woe started right at the top with Virender Sehwag. What does it say of a man when he plays in the same team as two of the greatest batsmen of all time - and coached by another - that he keeps getting out the same way time after time? Does it show an unwillingness to learn, a man so deeply entrenched in a comfort zone that he can't even make the effort? Or is he another Jerry Lee Lewis, who once proclaimed: "If I'm going to hell, I'm going there playing the piano", the difference being that Sehwag doesn't seem to be able to manage more than a few notes before the curtain rushes down.

The cameo is something that comes naturally to Suresh Raina as well these
days. If he wasn't making a run, you could just write it off as bad form,
or bad luck. But when a batsman manages to get a start, and then throws it
away in a variety of ways, it reveals a deeper malaise. The way
he's being utilised also needs to be looked at carefully. If the
contention is that Raina offers a greater matchwinning option than
Mohammad Kaif, who had three 50s in his last 10 outings, then he should be
batting at No.3 where he has the time to construct an innings.

With teams having exercised caution during the Power Plays thanks to the
prevalent conditions in this tournament, Irfan Pathan's big-hitting
capabilities would surely have been more useful lower down the order. In
conditions that cried out for attritional disciplined cricket, batsman
after batsman chose the Bollywood option. But for Rahul Dravid's splendid
49, and Mahendra Singh Dhoni's wonderfully restrained 51, it was an
abysmal showing, one that would have had Brett Lee and friends licking
their lips up country. Later in the day, Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Ramnaresh
Sarwan and Runako Morton showed how it should be done, with
beautifully paced innings that made easy work of a challenging target
before the inexplicable wobble at the finish.

With the exception of the dogged Munaf Patel, India's bowling with the new
ball was just as woeful. Pathan got some swing, but offered up a four-ball
every so often, while Rudra Pratap Singh's shoddy display merely made the
selectors look foolish for having left out S Sreesanth. An
atrocious bit of fielding on the rope, and two tennis-ball bouncers that
Chanderpaul pulled contemptuously for four summed up his evening.

Both Pathan and RP Singh could have learnt so much from Ian Bradshaw and
Dwayne Smith, who recognise their own limitations and the state of the
pitch far better than most. Bradshaw is one of one-day cricket's invisible
stars, a man who almost guarantees you two or three wickets in the course
of a miserly spell. As for Smith, he slips easily into the sort of role
that Gavin Larsen once performed with such distinction for New Zealand.

And then there was Jerome Taylor, long-limbed and languid in the best
tradition of West Indian quicks. His sterling display, both with the new
ball and later in the innings, was proof if any was needed that there's
always a place for genuine pace. On paper, it may not be the most lethal
attack in the world, but the way Brian Lara, and Sarwan against Australia,
shuffle the pack around has been an object lesson for many.

India's foibles extended to the field as well, with Raina's drop of Chris
Gayle proving extremely costly at the start. A batsman of the calibre of
VVS Laxman has been excluded on the grounds that his fielding isn't up to
scratch, but when those that replace him aren't worth more than 15 or 20
runs with the bat, it makes you wonder about the wisdom of sidelining a
man who has one-day hundreds against Australia and Pakistan.

Harbhajan Singh's continued excellence with the ball made defeat appear
respectable, but in reality it was anything but. Having got their bad game
out of the way in an inconsequential tie against Sri Lanka, West Indies
are looking ominously good in defence of their title, while India look
every inch a side that misplaced their self-belief sometime during the off
season. The chances of rediscovering it on a bouncy Mohali pitch against
Australia must be rated very slim indeed.

Duncan Fletcher: 'the job comes with a shelf-life ... and Fletcher has just reached the end of his' © Getty Images

Boycott's comments came in the aftermath of England's defeat by Australia in the Champions Trophy. He said that Fletcher, who has been in the job for seven years, had reached the end of his shelf-life.

"If you talk to people like John Wright and Bob Woolmer, successful coaches with a lot of international experience, they will tell you the job comes with a shelf-life," Boycott wrote in his column for The Daily Telegraph. "And Fletcher has just reached the end of his.

"I'm not saying he is a terrible coach. In fact, I think he has done a good job. But, after a while, I believe a coach runs out of new ideas and the players get comfortable and complacent with him. He almost becomes too familiar and the players stop listening."

Boycott argued that Fletcher's weakness had always been in the one-day game, where in more than 150 matches since he took charge, England have won under half. In the last 12 months the results have been dismal, with only six wins in 26 ODIs.

He pointed out that Fletcher's constant tinkering with the batting order has not helped. "What is he doing with Michael Yardy? This is a left-arm spinner with just a handful of internationals to his name. And he went in at No 3 against India and No 5 against Australia. It's crazy.

"If I were playing for England and the team sheet went up and Yardy was batting in front of me, there would be hell to pay. I wouldn't let it happen. How do you think it makes other batsmen in the team feel? What sort of message does that send out if a left-arm spinner who bats a bit goes in ahead of you?"

And Boycott was equally scathing about the bowling, singling out the handling of the out-of-sorts Steve Harmison whose action, he claimed, needed remedial work. "But if it is so obvious to all of us ex-players," he added, "what are our coaching staff doing?

"Somebody needs to shake Harmison out of his malaise, but this set-up just seems to be too cosy for anyone to make that happen."

And he aimed a couple of shots at the senior management in the ECB as well, who he described as being "too comfy". He concluded: [David] Morgan (the ECB's chairman) may think Fletcher has a job for life, but that is just a recipe for stagnation. The time to move on is now. The dressing room needs some new personnel with fresh ideas and the ability to stimulate the players."

Fazeer Mohammed

	Chris Gayle ain't happy with Michael Clarke © Getty Images

The table tennis ball bounced past, blissfully uncontested, as I was still rejoicing in the magnificence of following through on a fearsome smash, utterly convinced that the point was already mine.

"Don't try that again if you not prepared for it to come back," said one of my uncles, a better-than-average table tennis player and cricketer who was using my grandmother's dining table to teach me an important lesson that remains as fresh as the day it occurred more than 30 years ago.

Last Wednesday's verbal clash between Chris Gayle and Michael Clarke in Mumbai brought home the relevance of that bit of advice, and also reinforced the belief that when it comes to the concept of "do so ain't like so", Australia's cricketers are the unrivalled world champions.

In his tour diary entry on the incident, Gayle inferred that Clarke was the instigator of the confrontation, and while conceding that his protracted tirade against Clarke deserved some form of punishment, it was disappointing to see the man who triggered the whole thing - at least from the Gayle's perspective - get off scot free.

It also did not go unnoticed that the match officials made no report of the incident until the next day, by which time Ricky Ponting, the Australian captain, had already passed his judgement in implying that the only way the credibility of the disciplinary process would be upheld was if Gayle was brought to book.

Of course, from the moment the matter came within the purview of match referee Mike Procter for investigation, the issue was no longer if Gayle should be disciplined, but what would be the nature of the censure. It was not surprising either that Clarke was absolved.

An outstanding allrounder that he was, Procter clearly lacks an even hand in arbitrating matters that involve Australia, South Africa and New Zealand. An outrageous charge you say? Well, what other conclusion is there after his response to journalists' queries that the Aussies were getting away with an abundance of excessive over-appealing in last November's series against West Indies, stating that players from those countries are more aggressive, and that had to be taken into consideration? In other words, there is one rule for those three and another for everyone else.

It was heartening to hear Ramnaresh Sarwan - who led the side superbly in the field in the absence of the injured Brian Lara - in his post-match comments alluding to the Gayle-Clarke tete-a-tete and suggesting that players who like to dish out should be prepared to get some back.

Sarwan knows only too well how to give back, his instant response to Glenn McGrath's malicious remark on the fourth afternoon of the Antigua Test in 2003 causing McGrath to completely lose his cool. I wonder if John Howard, the Australian Prime Minister, would have been so eager in rallying to the defence of McGrath in the furore that followed the incident if he knew what his compatriot had said in the first place.

Every team in every sport, at one time or another, engages in baiting the opposition, winding them up to try and trigger a loss of concentration. But it is more than a little annoying that, having legitimised and institutionalised an underhand practice as "mental disintegration" (the pretentious terminology of former captain Steve Waugh), the Australians recoil in self-righteous indignation when they find themselves on the receiving end.

Which is why, in the sporting context, if you want to upset the best in the world, sometimes to have to fight fire with an inferno. The opponent strikes a match, you respond by burning down his house. It is an overreaction, but an overreaction with a purpose - to let him know in terms that he can best understand that you're not taking any foolishness.

Lara is a past master at being both an instigator and flame-throwing responder, especially against the Australians, which is why they fear him so. They will always speak in the most glowing terms about Sachin Tendulkar because they think they have his measure as far as beating them off his own bat. But they can't handle Lara, what with the ability to dissect and destruct with his scything blade, while at the same time sallying forth with enough caustic lyrics to keep them on edge.

In this context, I'm reminded of Javed Miandad's attempt to test the sweet spot of his bat on Dennis Lillee's head during Pakistan's 1981-82 tour of Australia. Miandad was no doubt saying more than a thing or two to the fiery fast bowler, which was a bit of a reversal for Lillee, who was accustomed to having the last (very strong) word, especially against timid players from the Indian subcontinent.

Put off his stride by Miandad, Lillee kicked him on the back of the legs on the way back to the top of his mark. As anyone with any sort of broughtupsy would know, to kick someone, even lightly, is just about the lowest form of degradation towards another human being.

It necessitated a strident reaction, and as Miandad drew his blade back in a backlift higher than anything ever managed by Lara, the presiding umpire stepped in to save Lillee from the response he deserved. Do so really ain't like so, and they need to be reminded of that occasionally, even if it costs 30 per cent of a day's pay.

Scenes of jubilation after West Indies thrilling come-from-behind win against Australia in Mumbai © Getty Images

It was like the first lunar landing all over again. Everyone in the house wanted to stay up on Wednesday night to catch the highlights of West Indies' 10-run Champions Trophy victory over Australia.

Even those struggling with the symptoms of the latest flu virus sweeping the country (what's the nickname by the way-Duck-and-Run? Manningitis?) delayed applying more of the old Vicks VapoRub so that they could be alert enough to see the regional side upset the most consistent and efficient unit in contemporary international cricket.

Not that we are all aficionados of the game. Far from it, but as has been reinforced many times over for decades, the fluctuating fortunes of the Caribbean side are a matter of intense interest within the region, even for those who think that Brett Lee and googly are blood relatives.

So chalk up one for "The Lost Boys". As in their last major tournament on the Indian subcontinent ten years earlier, a tense victory over Australia has followed on the heels of a crushing disappointment. Still, it is asking for serious emotional distress to start piling too much expectation onto the back of that battling effort in Mumbai, given that this team redefines the term "wildly inconsistent".

In fact, the best thing is to just savour the experience and hope that the momentum can be sustained in the seven days before the next match against India in Ahmedabad. By then, Brian Lara's back spasms should have eased, Shivnarine Chanderpaul would have gotten over the latest stomach bug to hit the side, and Corey Collymore ought to be back in harness after returning to Barbados to be with his wife for the birth of their first child.

It is anybody's guess as to who will have to make way for the senior returnees, but two who must be assured of their places for some time to come, barring injury, are Runako Morton and Jerome Taylor.

Once again Morton delivered impressively when called upon in yet another makeshift position. It certainly helped to have the assured Lara as mentor and partner in the rebuilding effort from 63 for four, but the manner in which Morton has resurrected what seemed a blighted career is as striking a lesson as can be identified on how any young person can turn his or her life around with the right attitude, guidance and opportunities for redemption.

He finished high and dry, ten runs short of a third one-day international century this year, although the disappointment of missing out on that milestone, especially against the Aussies, would have long been forgotten amid the celebrations that followed the victory.

Clearly the Man of the Match adjudicator had not overlooked him, even if the temptation must have been very great to go with the flow and nominate hat-trick hero Taylor for the award.

The lithe Taylor continues to make his mark with pace and accuracy - two potent weapons - especially in the tense final overs of an ODI, as Mike Hussey, Lee and Brad Hogg discovered off consecutive deliveries. As the first West Indian to claim a hat-trick in one-day internationals - in itself a surprising statistic given the plethora of quality bowlers who have represented the region in the past three decades - Taylor has assured himself of an unchallenged place in Caribbean cricket history.

Now, like so many of his team-mates, he must resist the temptation to rest on those laurels and appreciate that the job gets even harder in seeking to maintain or possibly exceed those standards if he really wants to be a part of the long-term turnaround in the side's fortunes.

But maybe the most significant aspect of Wednesday's victory was the confirmation, once and for all, that Ramnaresh Sarwan - for all of his apparent reluctance to take on the responsibility and generally casual attitude - has the makings of a good captain. Sarwan not only marshaled his troops and brought the changes effectively, but also regularly consulting with team-mates on tactics. After leading Guyana to victory in the Stanford 20/20 earlier this year, his performance makes it crystal clear that he is the man for the full-time job, possibly after the World Cup when Lara will be signing off on his ODI career. Lara is likely to remain in the Test squad as senior statesman and mentor, not to mention star batsman still after all these years.

Again, it bears repeating that the defeat of Australia in the cauldron of a prestigious competition, as hugely encouraging as it is, may yet prove to be just another crest in the endlessly turbulent sea of West Indies cricket.

Next Thursday's clash with India will be a much clearer indicator of whether they have taken their game up to another level in terms of consistency and commitment, and if, as the years go by, we will look back on the win as a brief, bright spark in the vast emptiness of contemporary Caribbean cricketing misery or a giant step towards reclaiming a glorious legacy.

Houston, we want to believe.

by Anand Vasu

Runako Morton's innings of 90 has certainly re-established his credibility in the West Indies side © Getty Images

Life's come a full circle for Runako Morton and put him down in a good place. It was with the Champions Trophy, in Sri Lanka, that his name became known internationally, and now the same tournament has given a platform to close some chapters and open fresh ones. His unbeaten innings of 90 inspired West Indies to a famous victory against the Australians, who fell short of 235 by only 11 runs in a thriller. But what Morton did, was give a large following of fans something to remember him by, besides the events far and near, neither of which are particularly flattering. It's said that the incomparable Lawrence Rowe had so much time to play the ball that he whistled to himself as he cover-drove; if Morton had a song on his lips on the day, it would have been that Bob Marley anthem, Redemption Song.

The first thing Morton will be keen to erase is the memory of what happened in the Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka in 2002. Although selected to play in the squad, he excused himself, and left, after telling the team management that his grandmother had died. It was subsequently learned that one of his grandmothers had died sixteen years earlier, and another was very much alive. Morton, who was also expelled from the St. Georges Cricket Academy in Grenada in 2001 for reasons of indiscipline, served a one year ban from participating in activities that took place under the auspices of the West Indies Cricket Board. Having sat out, he returned, only to be involved in a stabbing incident less than a month after the end of his ban, about which little is known. It all just seemed a bit too colourful for anyone's good.

But what he made headlines with most recently, was anything but colourful. In the DLF Cup in Malaysia, against these very Australians, he came in to bat at No. 3, facing the second ball of the innings after a Brett Lee yorker had nailed Chris Gayle in front of the stumps. Morton then played the most inexplicable innings you could hope to see in one-day cricket, carefully blocking 30 balls - without ever getting off the mark - before the 31st put him out of his misery, and he was lbw to Nathan Bracken. He had spent almost an hour at the crease, recording the longest duck, in terms of balls faced, in the history of one-day cricket.

Now, after playing an innings of character from a position of 63 for 4 where West Indies were in serious danger of folding up meekly, Morton can genuinely hope that he's put his colourful past behind him, and be remembered purely for reasons cricketing.

The talent has always been there for all to see - hundreds against New Zealand and Zimbabwe were already in the bag - and on the day a reminder came first ball. Shane Watson pushed one in a touch full, outside the off, and Morton gave it the treatment, thumping it back down the ground for four. Still, with wickets having fallen at regular intervals, and Brian Lara batting as low as No. 6, Morton had a significant role to play, and he did the job with panache.

A punch off Brett Lee through point here, a flick through fine-leg off Andrew Symonds there, and Morton was onto his half-century - the first milestone of the day. An appreciative crowd applauded, and there was relief and joy in equal measure for Morton, who held his bat up in acknowledgment. But the job was not quite done yet. Lara's decision to bat at No. 6 meant that a couple of quick wickets at any time could lead to a situation where he could run out of partners.

Morton ensured that it never came to that - apart from one mis-hit towards cover where Ricky Ponting dropped a catch he would take nine times out of ten - playing smart cricket. Lara and Morton put on 137 for the fifth wicket, pushing the score to 200 when Lara played a tired shot and was dismissed for 71. Morton, though, continued on, and ended unbeaten on 90, taking his team to 235, a score that they defended with admirable enthusiasm and nous.

At a press conference in Ahmedabad, very early in this tournament, Lara was asked about Morton's chequered past. His answer was unequivocal, "Morton is one of the most popular members of this squad," he'd said, adding that all that happened was well in the past, and bore little relevance to the present. Those words would have gone some way in cleaning the slate, but it's actions - like those of Morton's today - that will do the job once and for all.

Preserving their cool: Abdul Razzak and Shoaib Malik after seeing Pakistan home © Getty Images

On the day Pakistan landed in India for the Champions Trophy, in Delhi on
October 8, Younis Khan and Bob Woolmer addressed the media. In the
previous 24 hours, the country's cricket captaincy had been changed twice
and the chairman had changed once and one would have expected them to be
discussing serious matters before the press conference took place. For
most of it, the two communicated by scribbling messages on a piece of
paper but don't be fooled into thinking they were matters of national
interest. It was simply a discussion about whether to grant a television
channel an interview.

On the day before Pakistan's opening encounter of the Champions Trophy, in
Jaipur yesterday, the same duo addressed the media. In the previous 24
hours, the team's two premier fast bowlers had failed dope tests, nobody
knew what the future held in store and one would have, again, expected
them to be discussing serious matters before addressing the press. Before
they began the press conference, both - coughing intermittently -
communicated some thoughts in hushed tones. Surely this time it was
serious. Instead they were trying to out-guess each other on the number of
questions that were likely to be posed. One of them said 60; the other
reckoned it would be 70.

These may appear insignificant incidents but they convey quite a bit about
how this bunch managed to stay cool when the roof had blown off. Over the
last week, of the seven teams that visited Jaipur, it's been Pakistan who
have, ironically, appeared most relaxed. People spotted them in
restaurants, movie halls and tourist sites. It was a side that appeared to
be thoroughly at home with their surroundings, thriving amid the fans and
banter.

Younis spoke passionately about the period, adding that it had no doubt
helped alleviate the pressure. "We've had a lot of fun over the last
week," he said at the end of a thoroughly satisfactory day. "We played
hard cricket, practised hard and had some competitive games amongst
ourselves. What I couldn't do as a youngster, I wanted my boys to do. I
encouraged them to see movies, to have fun. We missed Inzamam a lot and
spoke a lot about him, about his captaincy and his professionalism. But we
wanted to forget the pressures. One day before the game we got another jolt
but I always felt the boys were fit and wanted to play good cricket. For
me, before this game, winning or losing wasn't important, all I wanted
them to do was to play good cricket. And we did."

And good cricket they played. A packed house of neutrals rejoiced in
Pakistan's fightback with the ball before cheering every run in their
run-chase. Their very unpredictability, their sheer bloody-minded
bounce-back ability, was a joy to watch. Just when the tension reached the
highpoint, they found in Abdul Razzaq a matchwinner who sliced through it
like a Rajasthani sword through silk. The standing ovation they granted
Pakistan after the triumph was in direct contrast to the afternoon's
events when the Shiv Saniks, a Hindu fundamentalist organisation, held
banners asking Pakistan to 'Go home'.

Younis Khan didn't make much of a contribution with the bat but his cool
countenance no doubt proved crucial. "There was definitely a bit of
pressure," he said, "but I don't normally put myself under pressure. Of
course, if we'd lost people would have got a chance to say things against
us. But the boys stood together, even though they were under pressure. I
was asked at the toss if I'd slept OK and honestly I slept very well.
Whatever pressure was there, it didn't affect my sleep."

Over the last few years, Inzamam-ul-Haq's monk-like cool, with an emphasis
on religion, has played a vital part in keeping the side together. It came
as no surprise when the side got together for a namaaz after the
game, thanking the God almighty for this fine win. Younis mentioned the
importance of faith, he added that their religious beliefs always kept
them strong. He didn't mention it but sometimes you wonder what this team
would do if controversies decide to take a back seat. The more the
trouble, more the joy.

by Osman Samiuddin

Abdul Razzaq celebrates a remarkable victory © Getty Images

One-day wins aren't supposed to mean this much are they? Or even engage as emotionally as this? Certainly not piddling opening round games of tournaments. But if Australia were watching proceedings at Jaipur tonight, players such as Ricky Ponting and Andrew Symonds might have smiled to themselves knowingly and thought, "Ah yes, but they often do".

Over three years ago, on the eve of their opening match against Pakistan at the 2003 World Cup, Australia lost Shane Warne, the muse of their 1999 triumph, to a drugs ban. They were four down for not much early on before turning on Symonds's own redemption innings and winning comfortably. Pakistan did something similar here and they might have done so with greater odds stacked against them.

Between their last international and this one, they had seen three changes in the team leadership and one in that of the board. A tour of England, disastrous on and ultimately off the field, was only just past. Bereft of their regular captain and leading batsman, losing two of their best bowlers on the eve of this match, in such dramatic fashion, running into a red-hot Sri Lankan side, careening head first into a bloodthirsty Sanath Jayasuriya; they needed all this like you and I would need a hole in the head.

And yet, here we are. Many people will be genuinely dumbfounded. Others will coolly claim they were expecting Pakistan to pull off something as audacious as this precisely because of the turmoil that has hounded them. It is, they claim, just what they do. But inside even they will have been surprised, if only because the extreme turbulence of the last couple of months was exacting even by Pakistani standards.

The nuts and bolts of this win are not, ultimately, as significant as the result itself though they are worth recalling. Coincidentally (or otherwise), as was the case through last year, when Shoaib Akhtar was out with injury and Mohammad Asif plying away for Sialkot and Pakistan A, many contributions stood out. Feel free to choose your own critical one; Abdul Razzaq's late bursts with ball first and then bat, Pakistan's trio of spinners (not quite the golden Indian quartet but you can imagine them being successful in an ODI-kind of way here), Imran Farhat's chancy surge as Pakistan began their reply or even Mohammad Yousuf's composure for all but the 78th ball of his innings.

Personally, I'll jump for Shoaib Malik's masterpiece of pace, intelligence and nerve. He's had a rough few months himself, hopelessly out of form and shuffled out of his favourite position up the order by Younis Khan. He began his innings as if acutely aware of all this so that when Yousuf was out, he had meandered uncertainly to only 13 off 29 balls. But as he has shown repeatedly, the nuances and delicacies in timing a pressure chase in these conditions are not lost upon him. He only hit two boundaries but the sweetest - a six off Murali to bring up the 200 - was the moment when a win became tangible. Surreptitiously, an itchy start turned into a hustled finish.

All put together, it made for a deeply stirring spectacle, one that tugged away at the very soul of those watching it. There is something just so incredibly attractive about watching triumph in adversity, and nothing captures it better in life than sport. It is the type of allure that draws in support from neutrals irrespective of nationality. That the match was tense will have relieved many in a tournament lacking atmosphere thus far but that Pakistan won it will please many more. The air over Pakistan cricket has been lately funereal and the support feels like that reserved for the bereaved.

As a footnote really, they have started the tournament with a win. Not much should be said about their chances for the rest of the tournament, though the bubble of feelgood within which they were floating on the field - to Younis Khan's eternal credit - will be duly noted by South Africa and New Zealand. For the next few, precious days, they can rest easy, having reminded a whole lot of people - and it really needed reminding - that despite being eternally good value for drama in cricket, when they want to, they play one hell of a game too.

by Dileep Premachandran

Good times are here again for Irfan Pathan © Getty Images

Less than a month ago, Irfan Pathan's nascent career appeared to be in danger of slamming into the buffers. While his team-mates finished practice and went into the dressing room to prepare for a winner-take-all match against Australia at the Kinrara Oval, Pathan was encouraged to bowl at one stump with Jeff Thomson in attendance. His body language was poor, and there was no zip in his bowling, and the little spell in full view of the media and the crowd fuelled endless debate about whether he should be retained in the squad.

Luckily for him, the 14 for the Champions Trophy had been named much earlier, and Pathan, despite bowling six insipid overs for 54 runs in Malaysia, had a berth at the expense of Sreesanth, lively and hostile in the one outing he was given. Pathan's slump was all the more perplexing because he had enjoyed such a stellar season in 2005-06, contributing weightily with the bat and almost guaranteeing a breakthrough each time he was handed the new white ball.

He had cut a swathe through top orders, picking up 49 wickets from just 25 games, but the long journey to the Caribbean appeared to take away his allround mojo. In seven subsequent matches, he could score only 88 runs, and his seven wickets came at a cost of 33.28 apiece. More worryingly, the economy rate had ballooned to 6.13, and he was struggling to nudge 75mph on the speed gun.

Though they wisely rested him for the last two matches in Malaysia, the team management needs to be commended for not giving up on an individual whose fortunes are inextricably linked to India's one-day form. When he bats and bowls well, he gives the team enviable balance and potency, amply illustrated by 21 wins from 29 games last season. With no other quality
allround replacement on the horizon, benching him necessitates weakening either the batting or bowling, and against teams like Australia, that doesn't bear thinking about.

It needs some spring sunshine to alleviate a winter's depression, and for Pathan, the glimmer of hope was perhaps a sighting of Andrew Strauss, who he had perplexed consistently on England's tour of India earlier this year. From the first delivery he bowled, he was swinging the ball away, with the speed gun showing figures closer to 80 than 70. The combination
of uneven bounce and swing was a dangerous one, but it still needed a wicket to put the spring back in his stride.

When it came, it was the most priceless one of all. Andrew Flintoff had come up the order to try and inject some life into England's Egyptian-Mummy Power Play displays, but when he played all around Pathan's stock ball into the right-hander, the sense of relief was palpable. With
the burden partially lifted from his shoulders, Pathan then troubled Kevin Pietersen as well, cramping him for room with deliveries that darted in, and beating the outside edge with the odd one that moved away.

Though he didn't get his man, the dismissal of Strauss had something of the pre-ordained about it. Throughout his forgettable 32-ball stint in the middle, Strauss had been moving about his crease like a shoeless man on ice. The Light Brigade charge summed up his desperation, and epitomised the team's cluelessness on a pitch that demanded the sort of application
shown by the admirable Paul Collingwood.

The only way Pathan's day could have improved would have been with a dashing 50 in a perfunctory run chase. But though he played three peachy drives, that wasn't to be. And it was perhaps just as well, given that it would only have invited the sort of "He's back" headlines and hype that he can well do without.

In any case, it wasn't as though he had scripted the win all on his own. It helped immensely that Munaf Patel was so incisive at the other end. Having done nothing to inspire confidence in his first few outings in coloured clothes, Munaf has been a revelation since, dropping a little
pace and gaining much by way of control. He was a real handful on a tricky surface and while Ian Bell's wicket might have been fortuitous, his McGrath-esque refusal to give the batsmen anything to hit helped Rahul Dravid tighten the noose.

The captain played his part, on a day when pretty much everything clicked on the field. Even when Pietersen threatened a revival with his muscular approach, Dravid kept a slip in, and the combination of Munaf and Sachin Tendulkar rewarded him suitably. By the time both new-ball bowlers had left the fray to gulp down energy drinks on the boundary rope, the damage
was done, with Harbhajan Singh and Ramesh Powar only required to administer the last rites. Given England's suicidal batting, that was a formality.

by Andrew Miller

The decision to send Andrew Flintoff at No.3 fell flat in England's face © Getty Images

Eight interminable days into the competition, and the Champions Trophy is still searching in vain for a contest, any contest, remotely worthy of such lofty billing. If anyone thought that last week's diet of drivel would come to an end once the so-called "big guns" came out to play ... well, they forgot to take into account England's unrivalled ineptitude in one-day cricket.

Ignore the nonsensically close finish to this match - had it not been for a momentum-altering tea interval (which doubtless allowed Duncan Fletcher to have a few strong words with his underperforming charges), India would probably have romped to victory inside 20 overs. Instead, they slammed on the brakes when the spinners entered the fray, and turned a cakewalk into a stodgefest.

"I was pleased with the character the side showed," claimed Andrew Flintoff afterwards. "At one point, we thought if we got 160 or 170, we would be in the game, but as it turned out, even with 125, we did compete well. We managed to pick up six wickets and there was a glimmer of hope. But with another 30 or 40 runs on the board, it might have been a different story."

But they didn't, and instead the match was won with almost 20 overs to spare. Nobody should be remotely surprised. Until their late blip, India's performance was as committed and focused as the fervent support that they received from the Jaipur faithful; England, meanwhile, were as hangdog and supine as they had been back in this country in April, when they lost five of their six completed ODIs against India, including four in a row while the series was up for grabs.

This match, like so many of the worst one-day encounters, was decided inside the first hour. India bowled magnificently from first ball to last. Irfan Pathan rediscovered some of his mojo after an awful six months, Munaf Patel reprised the pace and aggression that had derailed England on his Test debut at Chandigarh in March, and when the seamers had done their bit, Ramesh Powar teased the lower-order into a flurry of self-destructive slogs. It was pitiful because it was so predictable.

In the build-up to this game, much of the hype in the England camp had stemmed from Flintoff's position in the batting order. In the absence of Marcus Trescothick, many observers felt that Freddie would be thrust in at No. 1, to lead from the front and belt the Indian openers back into the submissive state they had displayed in Kuala Lumpur last month.

Who knows whether the tactic was seriously discussed in the dressing-room, but if it was, then England bottled it, settling instead for a fudged statement of intent. Ian Bell has many merits as a one-day batsman, but he was never likely to carry the attack to Pathan in the manner that the situation demanded. By the time Flintoff arrived at the crease at 10 for 1, Pathan had a nerve-soothing maiden under his belt, and Captain Fantastic had a nagging sense of impending crisis to cloud his aggressive intent.

With Rahul Dravid fretting about the evening dew, England had been given an unexpected chance to bat, but they handed the advantage straight back with a display of untimely timidity. At present, of course, nothing much matters to England except the Ashes, but imagine if their opponents had been Australia and Pathan had been Glenn McGrath? Would England have been so willing to let their old nemesis dictate terms? Of course they wouldn't - they've have wanted to spank his 36-year-old backside straight into retirement. Let's see what mindset they adopt next Saturday.

This was such a disjointed fixture, it is hard to fathom what we've just witnessed. Ordinarily, a one-day international between England and India, in India, would be one of the most anticipated matches in the calendar, and true, the local crowd and the enthusiastic fireworks-display team did their best to crank up the hype.

But in fact, this game was more of a farewell than a grand hello. In terms of mindset and priorities, England and India were poles apart. Mentally, one team is halfway to Australia already ("Why [the] fight for the Ashes starts here" trumpeted one British Sunday broadsheet, as it embarked on a vast preview of next Saturday's showdown with the Aussies); the other has eyes only on the World Cup prize in the Caribbean in March.

England and India won't be seeing much of each other in the next few months. Appropriately enough they didn't see much of each other on the pitch today either.