« August 2008 |
| October 2008 »
September 29, 2008
UAE, Vanuatu or subcontinent?
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/29/2008 in Pakistan cricket
From Antony Chettupuzha, India
In a recent post, TJ recommends that the PCB temporarily (I've take the liberty of assuming he meant this) relocate to the United Arab Emirates, until security conditions in Pakistan are acceptable for Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and England (and some might add the West Indies too) to tour. This he contends will allow Pakistan to continue playing cricket matches while allowing their opponents not to fear losing their lives in the process. I found this very interesting for a number of reasons.
First the choice of the UAE is interesting, I've heard reports of the PCB trying to come up with a deal with the UAE for a 3 year period. But you wonder why these matches can't be shifted to India (or even Bangladesh) where there is good infrastructure and no dearth of available stadiums and interest to draw large crowds. Maybe some people like to associate Pakistan with that region and so it seems fitting that it should be the neutral venue for the "home tests", but I see no reason why these matches should not be hosted in stadiums that have hosted Test cricket in the past.
Second, are the costs incurred by the PCB for shifting these matches outside the country passed on to their reluctant guests? These countries do after all have an obligation to play a certain number of matches with Pakistan, and if they decide not to despite getting official clearance from the global governing body, shouldn't they foot the bill for forcing the event to be hosted elsewhere, just as they should if they outright cancel?
But the point I am most interested in is best summarized in a hypothetical scenario; Let us assume New Zealand has suddenly acquired a reputation for attacks on people of Asian origin. The four subcontinental teams decide not to tour New Zealand, landing a crippling blow on New Zealand cricket's income. Imagine if Vanuatu, which is experiencing a financial boom and has an operational stadium with one more on the way, now has an associate level cricket team. How many of you honestly think Cricket New Zealand would consider relocating to Vanuatu until conditions in New Zealand improve, or that such a suggestion would even be entertained? I also guess what I mean to ask is, would NZC go that far to "host" these few nations? Perhaps they would if they were fighting for the survival of the game in their country. Perhaps they wouldn't if the Asian boards had to pay compensation for every canceled series. I don't know.
The question remains that if a country is unable to host cricket matches, should it seek a temporary suspension until an environment of normalcy returns? Some might argue that this would kill the game in that country forever, so perhaps we can only sit back and admire the fact that despite these extremely trying times, the passion that Pakistanis have for the game is forcing them to seek an alternative "home" venue. Again some might argue that the PCB is forced to turn to this option due to financial obligations. But no matter who you are the one point that is indisputable is that the situation becomes infinitely more complex when it is not all, but only some countries that cannot tour.
Comments (20)
Australia minus the arrogance
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/29/2008 in Australian Cricket
From Anand Kumar, India
There is something different about this Australian side which has landed in India. I am not speaking about the composition of the team or the skill of its players. I am referring to the attitude with which it has left its shores.
There is nothing new about new untested players in Australian squad. Ever since Damien Martyn retired, Australia has been dealing with a slow exodus of its colossus players and dealing very well. It is no stranger to seeing new players in their team trying to fill up big boots. The likes of Damien Martyn, Justin Langer, Glenn Mcgrath, Shane Warne, Jason Gillespie, Brad Hogg, Stuart Macgill and Micheal Kasperowicz have gone out of reckoning in these last two years, some on their own terms and a few on selector's terms. And prior to that we of course had the Waugh brothers, Andrew Bichell, Paul Reifell and some more.
There has been a steady exodus happening in Australian cricket since the turn of this decade which has come to characterise them. In last 2 years, this exodus was massive but what happened along side was that every loss was equalled by some one else who came up and grabbed the opportunity. I am not trying to say that now there is panic in Australian dressing room and they have lost their sleep. But something is different.
Have a look at the things they have said in last few weeks. Micheal Hussey said Australian team is not yet settled for India (that was two weeks back). Any Australian would not have said anything like this even a year back. Matthew Hayden has said that he believes he will be the target and even went as far as to admitting that Harbhajan Singh will be quite a threat in the upcoming series. Even a year back, any Australian would have instead gone ahead and said that they will dominate the opponents lynch pin. Ricky Ponting while trying to egg on Jason Krejza could not muster anything more than saying that he spins the ball a long way. Does he spin it more than Murali, I am sure not and if spins even close to him, why didn't we hear more about him before? Uni-dimensional spin alone is not going to pose any problem for Indians. What has caused this uncertainty in Australian minds? Challenges are not new to them. Well, we will never know. It can be anything.
May be they have hard done by the sudden departure of both Brad Hogg and Stuart McGill. A trip to India with spinners even they have heard less about would have been a humbling experience. Probably, they understand that there has not been one really exciting player they have produced in two years or so and that is worrying. Or perhaps, all that happened in last summer down under has actually shook them.
The captain had been one of those hit the hardest. But most unsettling must have been Symonds' absece from the team. He was a vital cog and is out of the team for non-cricketing, non-fitness and non-doping issues. This might be commonplace in Pakistan but not in Australia. What is clear to me is that this team has come with an undercurrent which is very un-Australian. They are not missing 'Australian ability' as much as they are missing 'Australian arrogance'. And that in the end may be their undoing.
Comments (8)
September 28, 2008
Cricket on drugs
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/28/2008 in Extras
From Brendan Layton, Australia
Drugs are the most temperamental subject in world sport. It taints athletes and their records, and their actions can simply be described as cheating their sport and cheating themselves. Cricket has been rocked by drug dramas in recent years, with the Akthar/Asif controversy and now the revelation that West Indies players Xavier Marshall and Tonito Willett have tested positive to a substance that has not yet been disclosed.
The Akthar/Asif story was a disgrace. Both players were found guilty, both were suspended and then had their penalties overturned by the PCB, an absolute insult to the cricketing community. Shane Warne was caught using a diuretic and was banned for a year, although he probably should have been banned for longer. Although we are yet to figure out what Marshall and Willett were caught taking, they will face serious sanctions from their board that already has enough on its plate.
Drugs has rarely reared its ugly head in sport, but to stamp it out, boards and, specifically the spineless ICC, need to show initiative and either ban players for life or send them packing for a long time. It is the only way to make sure it does not harm the reputation of the game.
Comments (0)
UAE, Pakistan
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/28/2008 in Pakistan cricket
From TJ, New Zealand
I am concerned for Pakistani cricket. I'm concerned for cricket in general - the only good news in recent times being Sri Lanka cricket's recent decision vis-a-vis the ICL, but I'm concerned most for Pakistani cricket. It was after all the Pakistani fast bowlers of the 1992 World Cup that made me fall in love with this game.
There are many ills to the game in that country, and like other subcontinental nations they seem cursed to endure incompetent or self interested bureaucrats being in charge. I don't expect that to change any time soon. Neither do I expect the violence that plagues their country at present to subside. Violence that will surely continue to deter teams from touring there. This means either we don't see any more Pakistan matches, or we see the ICC force play. Neither is acceptable. We want to see Pakistan matches, but we don't want to see them play opponents who are in fear for their lives.
This is why I suggest that the Pakistani cricket board re-locate to the United Arab Emirates. There is a seizable Pakistani diaspora in the UAE who I'm sure would appreciate the opportunity to watch regular cricket. And of course, there are no major security concerns in the UAE. If the Pakistani team and board is based in the UAE, in addition to saving money on travel costs to attend ICC meetings, they can work with the local UAE team to help them towards more success.
Finally, I'm sure any self-interested bureaucrats will enjoy the lifestyle Dubai offers (or the more conservative Sharjah if that's more to their taste).
Comments (3)
September 21, 2008
Ready. Fire. Aim.
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/21/2008 in Extras
From Faisal, United Arab Emirates
I think Cricinfo needs some low brow contributions as well. So its left to me start it off I guess.
1 - Mohammad Yousuf feels he deserves to be in the Twenty20 squad for Pakistan and he has "nothing to prove" to anyone about his credentials - anyone out there recall any inning this guy has played that might have remotely put Pakistan in a position of strength against the major test playing countries. He's pretty good against West Indies on flat Pakistani tracks.
2 - Tendulkar feels that Aus-Ind is a greater rivalry than Pak-Ind. Well I guess that would make sense - if you can only score runs against Australia but not South Africa, Sri lanka, England - maybe he has a vested interest there.
3 - Speaking of Australia - I have a million dollars right here for any player willing to go to Baghdad - any takers? Alright one at a time fellas, don't run me over on the way to the plane.
4 - Is it just me or is there way too much print being wasted on Andrew Symonds? He is a sub-standard Aussie test player. Believe me, scoring against India is not a benchmark. That would make Zaheer Abbas peerless
5 - Javed Miandad wants a professional to run the PCB - you know the kind who hasn't been fired 4 times (count with me 1,2,3,4) as national coach
6 - Jacques Kallis was bitterly disappointed with being left out of South Africa Twenty20 squad - yup, he was made and he showed how wrong they were with his performances in the IPL: I believe his Twenty20 strike rate is slower than this test rate. Recall reading how bland Graeme Hick was to watch as a player - he had a "mechanical" approach to run-making. Funny, you can say the same for Kallis.
Enough venom for now
Comments (7)
September 20, 2008
Return of the Great Dictator
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/20/2008 in Bangla cricket
From Dhasaradhy Jagannathan, United States of America
The 'New Scoreboard Cricket' is a fantastic game that records scores meticulously. Sometimes, scores are settled as well and that is when human ego clouds the shining sun, the game itself. The arrogant "I am bigger than the game because I govern those who play them" statement is made rather powerfully, in contrast to the politically correct "The game is bigger than individuals" statement captains regularly say.
If the game was bigger than individuals, players would not be punished for just playing the game. A Ten year term is only a little short of a fourteen year life sentence handed for a murder.
For something as challenging to the game as tampering the condition of the ball or making a racist remark against an opponent, a ten year ban was not handed by the governing body of the game. But, challenge to the authority of the individuals who run the game and a sledgehammer comes down and crushes those who play the game. The BCCI does not like the ICL, which is understandable. Nobody likes competition. But it is the insecure who would want it killed.
Champions, on the other hand try to rise above it. By arm twisting the ICC to crack the whip on ICL and instruct all the members of ICC to shun the ICL, the individuals who represent BCCI won. Unfortunately, the game lost. Cricketers can now be punished for playing the game and desiring to compete against the best. The Ten players who have been banned by BCB did not bring disrepute to the game. They merely wanted to play it. They have a lesson to learn - The desire to play the game is not important. It is important to play the game for the individuals in BCB and the BCCI.
The desire to play the game alongside some of the best international players can now cost the dream of representing your country. If you dream of scoring big, be sure you represent the right bunch of individuals. Big scores are not important if they came on a game you played for another set of individuals, Mr.Habibul Bashar.
Some things are more important than the game and the score with the administrators is definitely one of them. Your scores when you played for the nation hardly matters when they want to settle scores with you. Welcome to the new scoreboard of the game. A few individuals are more important than this game.
Comments (0)
Les enfants terribles
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/20/2008 in Australian Cricket
From Vipul Gupta, India
I do not think that many people would have been surprised by Symonds conduct. As I am sure not many people would have been shocked when Harbhajan slapped his 'younger brother' Sreesanth in an IPL match last summer. The one trait that is comman to all these 3 gentlemen is that they are of a 'slightly' volatile temperament and believe me I am trying my best to put it very mildly.
All three have been involved in on field controversies on numerous occasions in their careers. Things had already started to heat up in India itself and it came to a head with Roy alleging that Bhajji had passed a racist comment against him in the very eventful Sydney Test Match. Unfortunately the only person who displayed any grace and dignity in this entire unsavoury episode which threatened to derail the series was Kumble, the Indian skipper who personally requested Ponting to withdraw his appeal. But the Aussie skipper was adamant and he felt that he could not let his 'mate' Roy down by withdrawing the appeal and it was his stand which put both the CA and the BCCI on a collision course which threatened to fracture the entire cricketing fraternity.
Come to think of it, the crazy juvenile antics of these players was about to bring this great game to its knees. Such mavericks are found everywhere and it is up to the people who are occupying the positions of power to control them and not allow the events to get out of hand. I am afraid that the subsequent events have only put a big question mark on Ponting's wisdom and judgment and by that token of logic even the CA cannot be spared. I am sure that by the end of his career Ponting will be regarded as a great batsman and a good captain, but as a Statesman, not at all, which Anil Kumble proved that he was in that series.
One also cannot help but wonder that things might have been different for the unity in the Aussie dressing room were it not for the IPL's Twenty20 tournament held in India. I am sure that the salary offered to Roy must not have gone down well with some of the greats in the Aussie team because compared to them he was just a toddler starting out in the Test arena. It was amusing to see the sensitive Symonds lament the fact that how the CA had bowed in to the BCCI's financial power when he himself did not think twice of accepting the Deccan Chargers offer, which itself is a brain child of the BCCI.
It might be argued that it is in the nature of the beast that such players have serious temperamental flaws and although they might be adorning this great game as jewels it is very important for the authorities concerned to recognize this particular breed of players and to understand that they cannot be allowed to hold the game of cricket as hostage by their actions and any incident should be nipped in the bud itself before it snow balls into anything major. Surely, as a die hard cricket fan this is not asking for much , or is it?
Comments (2)
September 16, 2008
The future of cricket is here
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/16/2008 in World cricket
From David Balme, New Zealand
Had the Champions Trophy gone ahead as scheduled, this tournament would be only relevant for who is here - not in Pakistan. Now it is a tournament that previews a Border-Gavaskar Trophy, and gives a window on the future of New Zealand Cricket.
New Zealand need to find a couple more international players to make an international team, they have been described as rebuilding, this means the only international players they had last generation are gone; not that the house fell down, as it seems to be doing as I write with Bangladesh. But rather, some have moved down the road to the rest home and none have yet stepped up from high school to fill there boots. India has home advantage, they are at home, yes, but sometimes you wonder if this is a blessing or a hindrance with the scrutiny they get. More importantly they have a large group with international experience. This reflects a combination of the Indian selection panel being indecisive, and the amount of cricket played by India. At least a couple of the top order they would put out could be a near automatic selection in the top team in New Zealand.
The New Zealand A squad is a mixture of those who have been in and out of the NZ top squad, and seasoned domestic campaigners who have strung two good seasons together. Reflective of its true strength would be a comparison of the batting averages, only Fulton has a first class average over 40. The batting might struggle either against Australian pace or Indian Spin. Their strength is they will become a team faster than the other two sides. The weakness is the question; do they have a quality anywhere on the field to succeed? Particularly can they conquer a tendency to face to many dot balls between the power plays and over 40? Players to watch Overall: Peter Fulton: A right-hand top order batsman. Tall, able to play pace and spin, correct all around the clock, and with a full ODI hundred. Fulton is near unique in the current NZ domestic scene, he averages >40 in First class and >30 in List A cricket. Last year was a terrible time to step up to the test number 3 spot.
Batting: Neil Broom: A right-hand middle order batsman. Broom had been a quiet achieve, with lots of contributions, but to few big scores. His average in the high 30's in both forms shows ability, but the chances to step up under pressure have not occurred - this is a chance to shine.
Bowling: Jeetan Patel: Off-Spinner. Patel has not got a great record, welcome to the life of a spinner in Australasia, but has played above himself in a NZ shirt. Also a death bowling specialist, something NZ always needs. These should be his conditions for a change.
Australia A have the most battle hardened players on show, it is clear that in the last two decades, anyone regularly making an Australian domestic team could be close to international cricket elsewhere. Their strength is aggressive batsmen capable of big scores fast, and aggressive pace bowlers capable of big halls. The weakness is spin.
Cameron White has yet to show even a domestic level of spin ability, he should be targeted by the Indian batting. Players to watch Overall: Cameron White: A right-hand middle order batsman, and Leg spin bowler. His batting should win games, captaincy might win games, and his bowling could lose games. Using his bowlers well and stepping up his own bowling effort will be the keys for success.
Batting: Adam Voges: A right-hand middle order batsman. Seems the most likely to step up a class, particularly in the one day arena. Hits hard and often, also very at good at closing an innings. Voges needs to learn how to score hundreds to become an international, hopefully this is the message from the selectors. As such he should bat higher than 6.
Bowler: Doug Bollinger: A left-arm quick, Bollinger had a very poor record till last season he sparked. Could play in the Border-Gavaskar, left arm quicks are valued everywhere.
A Point to Prove, Shaun Tait: Has shown in the past that he is the quickest bowler around at the moment. Is he well rested, or will the scatter gun miss the target. He needs to learn control and some variation in is second life.
Possible Performer: Peter Siddle: Has had good reviews and has also been noticed by the Australian selection panel. His record looks excellent. If he can stay fit enough to show it.
India A This is a line up some nations would want to swap with whole sale. It's time that the players who have been there step up, and the ones who want a go to show that they have got it. The batting is a mix of those who couldn't keep a place higher up and those who deserve a go. It looks, skilled, inventive, hard hitting, and competent. The pace attack is not sharp, but should be skilled. The spinners are useful with Chawla's leg spin likely to be telling. It is a surprise that a third spinner has not been selected.
India A's strength is that they have the longest middle order in the competition with some capable batters right down to the more experienced bowlers. Both the other sides look a bit weak at this level after number 6. The weakness is teamwork. So many of the players in this India A side will be looking out for themselves, they may forget that the team needs to win too.
Selecting a batting order here will be a nightmare. The biggest problem will be leaving quality players too late in the order to have an effect. Badrinath should bat high enough to show his class as a constructor of big innings as he has never been given the top team chance the others have.
A Point to Prove, Robin Uthappa: Is capable of more than he has shown recently. He also has the advantage of 50 overs to bat. He should be capable of influential innings.
Enjoy the tournament.
Comments (1)
September 14, 2008
Jason Who?
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/14/2008 in Australian Cricket
From Michael Sheppard, Australia
The recent selection of Darren Patinson by England only a couple of months ago looks positively normal when put alongside the strange picking of Jason Krejza for India, an off-spinning bowler with batting potential, who only last year was forced to travel interstate to find a first class birth.
Bryce McGain, as Andrew Hilditch pointed out, deserves his place in the touring squad owing to his amazing season in Jason Crejza, on the other hand, achieved very little of note - except for increasing an appalling average and being caught for 'drunk driving'.
Beau Casson has a right to feel aggrieved. His all-round talent greatly contributed to the success of the New South Wales side in claiming the Pura Cup. He also acquitted himself admirably, though not spectacularly, in the West Indies earlier this year. Perhaps the selection panel felt that selecting two wrist spinners in McGain and Casson would not sufficiently utilise the Indian pitches, which Andrew Hilditch seemed to indicate by stating that Crejza was a selection purely on account of the conditions.
But why Crejza?
I admit, Daniel Cullen has not been bowling at near his best for some time, but in his last match for South Australia he claimed 4 vital wickets before suffering an injury. By not picking Cullen, the selection panel has indicated that they feel they made a mistake in awarding him a contract for the past two years and for playing him against Bangladesh in 2006.
This selection reminds me of the controversial selection of Nathan Hauritz over Stuart Macgill some years ago, or not selecting Macgill for any of the Ashes tests in 2005 when Warne was destroying England single handedly. Incidentally, in both series Australia lost. In my opinion, those were mistakes then, and the selection of Crejza over Casson or indeed Cullen, is now.
Comments (4)
Where is Pakistan?
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/14/2008 in Pakistan cricket
From Brendan Layton, Australia
I'm taking time out to lament to decline of the Pakistan cricket team, which has fallen from world beaters to chugging along side the West Indies in a struggle to catch up.
Pakistan once boasted one of the most formidable line ups in the world. In the 90's, they had players of the calibre of Wasim Akram, arguably the greatest left arm quick of all time; Waqar Younis, his incomparable (And injury ravaged) sidekick; Inzamam-Ul-Haq; the chubby and dominant batsman as well as class acts such as Saeed Anwar, Ijaz Ahmed, Saqlain Mushtaq and Mohammad Yousuf. Pakistan has not won a series since 2006, and that was against the West Indies. The last series they played was against India, in which they lost 1-0, and they haven't played since. Nor are they slated to play anyone within the next 9 months.
What happened to Pakistan cricket to bring it down the notches it had scaled to reach amongst the top three in world cricket?
As much as we would like to say cricket and politics don't mix, it is unrealistic to believe it. Pakistan's unstable political climate and unfortunate status as terrorism target is not conducive to attracting cricket teams, sponsors, or fans. To further my point about politics, South Africa was isolated from world sports for decades due to its apartheid policy, a purely political reason for isolating it. A similar issue is going on in Zimbabwe, yet I have already raised my annoyance at the lack of initiative on that problem.
Their cricketers have battled controversies which have tagged along like dead weights. The match fixing accusations, ball tampering, Shoaib Ahktar's histrionics, the drug disgrace surrounding Shoaib and Mohammad Asif, and the forfeited test have all contributed to Pakistan's state of mind. Their bizarre selection policies have also contributed, with players who have made successful forays overseas such Yasir Arafat all but ignored (Arafat did manage one test, in their previous series against India). Mushtaq Ahmed churned out hundreds of wickets for Sussex and helped the county to its first championships, but was not picked again.
Cricket wants a strong Pakistan team. While the board has become something of a little brother to the powerful BCCI, the health of cricket needs more competitiveness and what better time with plenty of money in the game to encourage it? There is going to be another Wasim there, another Imran, another Javed. Pakistan needs to go and find them, not only for its own sake, but for crickets.
Comments (10)
September 11, 2008
Let there be flight
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/11/2008 in Extras
From Apoorv Singhal, India
With a great wrong 'un, comes a great responsibility The true test of spinners shall come, when at the gates of heaven, God shall ask them each to bowl an over, and not bowl a single variation. Saqlain Mushtaq discovered radium but suffered the consequences of his own ingenuity. The incessant use of his wrong 'un started to make him intent on getting the batsman out purely by deceiving him through different variations, and not by the merit of the delivery itself.
The loop, the deviation, the dip, the bounce, the tempting flight that brought the confident batsman out of his crease started to look more ordinary by the match. Of course, the selectors in his part of the world do not really help the cause. And of course, he was not the only one to catch the disease. Both Harbhajan Singh and Anil Kumble in their prime (yes, in the past tense) used the old trick of getting batsman out. Flight the ball. Let the batsman become instinctive in playing late. And then bowl a slider to trap him in front of the stumps. One little weapon that defended the great Indian fortress for decades, against the best, time and again. At the moment, the spin duo, far from leading the spinners' pack in the world, is struggling to contain run rates on turning wickets.
Perhaps some credit should be given to the Australians for the aggressive and positive manner in which they have played spinners in different parts of the world in the last few years, most prominent performances against quality spin bowling being the Test series wins on their last tours to India and Sri Lanka. If Hayden does not pick Mendis' first delivery, if the tempting contest takes place, I am willing to bet my writing hand that he sweeps every ball after that. The sweep, or slog-sweep in most Australian batsmen's case, is their way of putting off a spinner off his line and length, and it was a great surprise that Indian batting line-up did not use the sweep shot often enough against Murali and Mendes on their recent tour.
Coming back to the use of variations, there are, however, exceptions such as Daniel Vettori, who have made exemplary use of variations, and has in fact styled his variations to suit his own bowling style and bowling action. He experiments with his pace well, his exceedingly slower off-breaks ensuring the batsman plants his front foot forward much before the ball pitches, and often failing to adjust to exceptional turn thereafter. He has never really been heralded as a leading spinner in the world, but if your life depends on getting a wicket and not concede many runs in the process, he would definitely make a favorable choice.
The exponential increase in one-day cricket, and now 20-20, can be attributed much of the blame for robbing a lot of spinners of their confidence to throw the ball up, and the somewhat deliberate shortening of ground diameter on most grounds in IPL sets a dangerous precedent. Spinners are in fact being paid hefty sums for bowling 24 flat and quick deliveries in the 20-20 format. The purist's worst nightmare. As an average ever-optimistic Indian cricket fan, I can only hope that the Australian tour this October is not a seal on this fact, and a stain on the yet untarnished memories of match-winning spells by Kumble and Harbhajan, which seems like an eternity ago. Let there be flight.
Comments (4)
The beginning of the end
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/11/2008 in Indian cricket
From Anil K, United States
So, the squad for the Irani Trophy has been announced; and it excludes the name Sourav Ganguly. The Irani Trophy is certainly not the same as a Test series, but in this case it appears just that. One of the selectors is reported to have stated that Ganguly's future is not necessarily over; and that he may find favour from the new selection panel. That means that he is already out of favour from the existing panel.
Ganguly has found himself out of the selectors' favour before also; but then he had the backing of his age. His contribution to Indian cricket is immense, both in terms of his personal achievements and for his aggressive, deterministic leadership, and no one disputes that. However, everything has an end and so does Ganguly. On one hand, such a decision by the selectors is in the right direction for Indian cricket: someone younger and agile can take his place, and perhaps will contribute more than Ganguly would have. However, on the other hand, there are two troubling aspects of such a decision.
First, should not the BCCI think seriously and sincerely on how to engineer a respectful exit for Ganguly, who, statistically so far, is the most successful Test captain of the country? Public pronouncements of his failing to bat and field are factually correct but tactically deplorable. And, this should be not just for Ganguly but also for Dravid and Tendulkar. They are all legends. Every legend begins unceremoniously but deserves a fitting end. Second, the Trinity of Ganguly, Dravid and Tendulkar knows that each one of them has been a genuinely great cricketer, and that a big innings may come anytime. However, they seem not to realize that they are currently not performing well, that they do not have many years to keep playing, and that many young aspirants are already aspiring to get the selectors' nod.
This tendency to keep themselves pushing ahead will earn them a bagful of money and a few hundred runs, which will not be statistically great addition to what they already have gathered. However, this tendency will also tell their own fans that all that the Trinity is displaying is a sheer greed. Sooner than later they will fall in the eye of their fans. But, it is still not too late: they can quit now and remain adored for ever.
Comments (4)
September 8, 2008
There is only one Don
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/08/2008 in Australian Cricket
From Brendan Layton, Australia
Following the man's centenary last week, I saw a plethora of Bradman articles thrown around talking about his legendary status and iconic role within cricket. I've decided to throw my two cents in and look at both man and player.
It is extraordinarily hard to dismiss a man who has averaged 99.94 in a 52 test career span, with 29 centuries and 13 half centuries and a high score of 334, which was at its time a world record. He was leagues ahead of his nearest rivals of batting, which were at the time Wally Hammond and Herbert Sutcliffe of England, and George Headley of the West Indies. Headley and Sutcliffe average 60 and Hammond averaged 58, although that averaged suffered after World War II.
He also played in an era of uncovered pitches in which batting could be made difficult when weather permitted, such as the creation of a 'sticky dog' which led to balls shooting erratically off the surface. It has been a wide source of debate as whether Bradman often batted on these styles of wickets (In the home series of 1936-37, he famously reversed the order on a drying pitch at Melbourne, and his 270 changed the series). The majority of his tests were against England, he played against South Africa, the West Indies and India once in his career and none of those tours were overseas, which is vastly different to the current crop of players that play in a variety of conditions and countries. No bowling strategy as provocative as 'Bodyline' has been devised for any other batsman, and even then Bradman averaged 56.57.
Bradman the man was vastly different from the cricketer idolised as an Australian hero during the Depression era. He was regarded knowledgeable but aloof, a shrewd businessman but ham-fisted with money. He was a practising mason and had a long history of grievances with Catholics Bill O' Reilly, Jack Fingleton, 'Chuck' Fleetwood-Smith, and Stan McCabe. O' Reilly and Fingleton were probably his biggest foes. The trio never got on. Although they had immense respect for each other on the field, that was the end of it. The pair laughed the Don back to the pavilion on the occasion of his final test innings, when he was bowled second ball by Eric Hollies for a duck, and they constantly criticised each other over their roles in the team.
He has also been singled out by influential Australia skipper Ian Chappell as one of the prime reasons for World Series Cricket, claiming in a documentary that Bradman 'treated board money as if it was his own money' during a boom time for cricket in the 70's. As an administrator, Bradman was wise but refused to budge on money. He was also regarded as somewhat old-fashioned. Still, Bradman was regarded as the all-knowing doyen of Australian cricket and was often sought after for advice, made all the more harder in his later years when he became a recluse in his home in Adelaide. He always responded to letters with fond affection though, and was polite and helpful for young cricketers seeking advice, whether life or cricket related.
In terms of the greatest batsmen ever, what makes Bradman stand out is not just the fact that he was far ahead of his contemporaries, but he overwhelms all that follow him. It was a common trait to call an exciting young batsman in Australia 'the new Bradman' (Norm O' Neill and Doug Walters suffered this comparison) and it was often a kiss of death. He is justifiably, in terms of figures, ability and influence, at the top of the batting tree in cricket, with his nearest rivals being Sachin Tendulkar (A man Bradman once considered similar to himself), Viv Richards, Brian Lara, and Wally Hammond. There can be no other player quite like Sir Donald George Bradman.
Comments (3)
September 4, 2008
Make 'Bradmanesque' a word
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/04/2008 in Extras
From Sandeep Deepak, United Kingdom
Being a cricket fan for almost all of my life, there is one thing most desired while playing, and that is to be as good as the Don. So it makes me think, I've heard the word 'Bradmanesque' used so often in the cricket world, but what exactly does it mean.
There seems to be no definition for what 'Bradmanesque' means; In fact it is not recognised as a word. So that leaves me to think, why not! I have found many different words with the same meaning: Achieving the highest level in your area of expertise or to be almost perfect at what you do. My plan is to unite cricket fans, players and commentators on this, the Don's Centenary; a number that is highly linked with his legend.
So to get the ball rolling, I have started a Facebook Group to get numbers: Make Bradmanesque a Word. I know a lot of people on this website use the term often, why not make it official. Suggestions for an appropriate definition would be appreciated.
Comments (13)
September 3, 2008
A rare sextet
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/03/2008 in Indian cricket
From Keyur Shah, India
It seems strange that nobody else has observed this before me.
Six of India's current Test side are on the verge of achieving a record which has previously been achieved by very few cricketers in their career. Should Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Ganguly, Sehwag and Kumble play in New Zealand when India visits and manage to win a Test there, they shall have personally won a test in all 9 current Test playing countries.
To put emphasis on how significant an achievement this will be, let me disclose that only two players (to the best of my knowledge) have won in all 9 Test playing countries: Inzamam-ul-haq and Waqar Younis. Ricky Ponting hasn't won in Pakistan, but won against them in Sharjah and may be considered, but most other players of the current Australian world-conquering side have missed out in two out of Pakistan, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
Now even if we consider those past players who have won in all Test playing nations in their time (with a minimum of 6 test playing nations ie after India and New Zealand were granted Test status), only those players of the great West Indies of 70's and 80's who won in Australia, SA, England, India and New Zealand, and retired before Sri Lanka was granted Test status make the cut (because Sri Lanka was granted Test status in 1981 and West Indies is yet to win in Sri Lanka).
Hence, this will be a great achievement indeed and i will be hoping that these 6 players manage to win a test in NZ and leave a legacy of winning tests in all countries and conditions for the coming generations of cricket fans to follow.
Comments (23)
Why Kumar doesn't worship the Don
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/03/2008 in Extras
From Suresh Kumar, India
Today we have been finding lot of write ups and comments on the greatness of Sir Don Bradman's batsmanship, but with all due respects to the great Sir Don Bradman, I would like to know how a batsman who has not played in any places other than Australia and England can become all time great batsman?
Can a batsman become all time great without facing a quality spin attack in the sub-continent and without playing on those bouncy tracks in West Indies. If you look at in the modern day's cricket you find one batsman who has done all that which Sir Don Bradman could not been able to do is Sachin Tendulkar, but for dubious finger works by umpires like Darrel Hair and Steve Bucknor, Sachin's average would have been much more better.
Today you have television replays which enable the opposition to do a SWOT analysis of the batsman and more than once the opposition teams have used these replays to get Sachin out. Yes I do agree Sir Don Bradman was the best batsman of his era but not the greatest of all time.
Comments (47)
Remember, it's only a game
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/03/2008 in Extras
From Luke, UAE
Once again it all comes down to cultural sensitivity. Bit tired of hearing about sub-continent victims of everything though. No, the world doesn't hate you, you just seem to think so!
As far as teams not touring the CT (amongst other past tours cancelled in Pakistan), bear in mind the following: Political coup, bomb blasts, Taliban, assassinations, political unrest, scores sadly losing their lives as a result ... these are all very sad and unfortunate events in Pakistan. In comparison, countries like AUS, NZ, WI, ENG are fortunate enough not to have such events within it's border anywhere near to the degree of Pakistan and therefore when is asked to tour a place like Pakistan, you have to understand their concern. It's a case of relative thinking. The biggest dangers around areas of political unrest is terrorism making a point or trying to get noticed. What better way than where there is media attention or large gatherings ... not to mention the misfortune of happenening to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.
As an Australian I have to say I have nothing against any team from the sub-continent and I never have. Neither do the players and officials at the top level. We are all just concerned about one of the basic human needs ... safety. Please respect the concerns of others when it comes to safety as you would in your own workplace or home. I understand the disapointment of not being able to see the games as a result of cancellations, but remember, it's only a game after all.
Comments (3)
September 2, 2008
Change format of ODIs
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/02/2008 in Extras
From Veer Dhandapani, USA
Watching the recent ODI series between India and SL, the importance of the toss on the outcome of the matches was significant. Especially in grounds like Dambulla, Premadasa, Cape Town, Durban etc. The ongoing clamor for revamping the ODI format to make it more exciting throws up an opportunity to balance the input of the toss into the results equation.
What about dividing the ODI innings into two parts: Each team going for a certain number of overs and then in the 2nd half the team that lost the toss gets to choose what they want to do - bat or field first. There are several exciting possibilities here - the cutoff for the first half can be 25 or 35 overs - halfway point or the point where the ball is changed - the rules can be set up for one choice here. The value of winning the toss is diluted to a first mover advantage only - the last move can still be decided by the team losing the toss.
Or the team winning the toss can choose to give the choice of picking batting or bowling first up to the team losing the toss. Either way, it throws up a game within a game - what will happen at the toss itself gets to be exciting while diluting its potential impact on the result. Both teams get a somewhat level playing field, especially under lights when the playing conditions are different than during the day.
Another suggestion is to allow the captains to name their teams after the toss and decision at the toss - this would also even the field a bit as the losing team at the toss can atleast field the team for the circumstances. At worst, these ideas are worth a try - I think they are certainly better than some of the ones that have been tried - the substitute at the innings break being one that was summarily dumped after it got a go around.
Comments (1)
No joy for 'Roy'
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/02/2008 in Australian Cricket
From David Anderson, Australia
I was a late convert to the Andrew Symonds fan club and still only hold a junior member's ticket. For a long time I didn't think he was up to the job, especially in Test cricket but in the last few years he has proven me and a lot of other people wrong.
It's true that he made a major stuff up in 2005 when he turned up for an international match still half cut from the night before and since then there have been a couple of other misdemeanors of less consequence but he appears to be copping a fairly rare deal out of this Darwin fishing trip (mis)adventure. The report of the incident in Cricinfo states, "Symonds' passion for fishing is well documented and he took to the water early on Friday, the day before the first Bangladesh match. When a compulsory team meeting was called later that morning, Symonds did not know about it as he was already wetting a line. An optional training session was later held at the Marrara Cricket Ground, which he had already decided not to attend".
So lets see, he's out on the water on what is essentially a day off and some bright spark decides to call a team meeting after he has left and when he doesn't turn up he's hung out to dry by Cricket Australia and his buddies and made to look a complete tool by the Australian media. Come on, there's either a fair bit of detail missing from available reports or he has been treated rather poorly on this occasion.
If there's more to this story I'd like to read it.
Comments (5)
Exposing Dhoni
Posted by Cricinfo - on 09/02/2008 in Indian cricket
From Nandun Senanayake, Australia
Mahendra Singh Dhoni, the new Indian legend, is praised by cricket fans all over the world, but I do not believe he is as good as fans believe him to be. Dhoni who usually bats at 3 down or 4 down takes absolute advantage of the spinners and medium pacers. Is it just me that has realised he cannot play fast bowling?
In the recent test tour of Australia (2007) it was evident to me that he could not play consistent pace bowling properly. From what I recall his highest score was about 36 runs, I might be wrong on this fact but I don't recall him getting a half century. In the ODI series however he played brilliantly, mainly against Sri Lanka who was filled with spinners and medium pacers, and he Dhoni did not manage to get Lasith Malinga away for many.
The ODI series in Sri Lanka (2008), the !dea cup I believe it was called, Dhoni was obviously the best batsman in the series, take no respect away from that, but once again the two times he convincingly got out, he was taken by Dilhara Fernando the inconsistent Sri Lankan speedster. With a Sri Lankan line up lacking in pace Dhoni was almost lucky to not to have face Malinga, Amerasinghe and Fernando more. But this was due to Sri Lanka's stupidity not to realise this rather than Dhoni's weakness. Right?
Comments (24)
|
RSS Feed
