Sri Lanka open against sparky minnows

Big Picture

Sri Lanka begin their World Cup campaign - the first in Asia since they stunned the world 16 years ago - against Group A minnows Canada. With a team forged around much of the same group of players that made it to the final in the Caribbean last time around, Sri Lanka start as one of the tournament's fancied sides. Canada - a team of immigrants, expats and five home-grown former Under-19 stars - have had a good run in the warm-up against Netherlands and England but will need a World Cup miracle to beat Kumar Sangakkara's side.

Sri Lanka's home record is imposing but the surroundings of Hambantota are almost as unfamiliar to them as they are to the visitors. A new pitch at a new stadium, the captains have been keen to praise the look of both. The state of pitches at this tournament is already shaping up into a bone of contention, and set against the fiasco at Eden Gardens, the Sri Lankan board should be credited for getting the stadium ready in time.

The last time these two met in the World Cup, Canada slumped to the lowest World Cup score in history. The entire cricketing infrastructure in Canada has improved since then, with players centrally contracted for the first time and big sponsors like Reebok jumping on board. Upsets have been hard-wired out of the format for this World Cup, and with the ICC taking it a step further next time by expelling Associate nations altogether, a competitive show from Canada would do wonders to the minnows' case for inclusion.

Form guide

(Most recent first)

Sri Lanka: WWLWW
Canada: LWWWL

Pitch and conditions

The Mahinda Rajapaksa International Stadium has not yet hosted a full international match so the pitch in Hambantota is something of an unknown quantity. There were concerns when the pitch produced a low-scoring 'A' match between Sri Lanka and Pakistan, but at the time the curator insisted his pitch was not to blame. After practicing at the ground Sangakkara was happy, saying "the wicket looked fantastic and the conditions were beautiful for cricket". The Sri Lankan weather has been anything but for recent series and there were a few clouds circling on the eve of the game, which could mean an early outing for Duckworth and Lewis, in their fourth World Cup.

Watch out for…

There is still something about the 50-over format that promotes unqualified utility players, who are unable to hold their place in either discipline. England have Luke Wright, while Australia have John Hastings. Sri Lanka's Angelo Mathews is the model the rest are chasing. In the last 12 months Mathews has averaged 54.50 with the bat, 32.90 with the ball, and has been a lynchpin behind the celebrated duo of Sangakkara and Mehela Jayawardene.

After his exploits against England, there is one Canadian that everyone will be looking out for: Gun batsman Rizwan Cheema. The Pakistan-born's ODI strike-rate of 119.4 beats even Shahid Afridi for crazed slugging. Faced with Lasith Malinga's slingers and Muttiah Muralitharan his task is less than straightforward, but alongside the youngsters in the side and captain Ashish Bagai, he could be the prime contributor of runs.

Team news

Sri Lanka's top-order is settled and the only contention is over the last bowling place. Ajantha Mendis' star has faded as his mystery unravelled with exposure so he competes with the Rangana Herath for the second spinner's role. If the damp conditions prompt another paceman, however, Thisara Perera might come up on the blindside to take the final bowling spot.

Sri Lanka (probable): 1 Tillakaratne Dilshan, 2 Upul Tharanga, 3 Kumar Sangakkara (capt & wk), 4 Mahela Jayawardene, 5 Chamara Kapugedera, 6 Thilan Samaraweera, 7 Angelo Mathews, 8 Dilhara Fernando, 9 Rangana Herath, 10 Muttiah Muralitharan, 11 Lasith Malinga

Canada have banked on their youngsters to support their array of more experience imports and will be hoping Hiral Patel and Nitish Kumar can come good.

Canada (probable): 1 John Davison, 2 Hiral Patel, 3 Nitish Kumar, 4 Ashish Bagai (capt & wk), 5 Jimmy Hansra, 6 Rizwan Cheema, 7 Zubin Surkari, 8 Khurram Chohan, 9 Balaji Rao, 10 Henry Osinde, 11 Harvir Baidwan

Try picking the XIs for tomorrow's game by playing Team Selector.

Stats and trivia

• The last time these teams met at the World Cup, Canada were bowled out for 36 and swept aside by nine wickets in a match that lasted a mere 23.2 overs - the quickest in World Cup history.
• Since making successive hundreds against Pakistan and Bangladesh in Karachi in June 2008, Kumar Sangakkara has played 59 matches, and made 1970 runs at 37.16, without ever passing three figures.
• Canada's opening batsman, and producer of one of World Cup cricket's most dazzling centuries - John Davison - is, at 40, the oldest player in the tournament.
  Quotes
  "Hard-hitting. I like to hit the ball... Out of the park"
  Rizwan Cheema gives a description, and warning, about the kind of player he is
  "You can't change what other people say about us whether they say that we are good enough to win the tournament or whatever."
  Kumar Sangakkara doesn't like the 'favourites' tag.

Source

A lot to prove for both teams

Big Picture

Both New Zealand and Kenya have been through difficult patches in the recent past and will open their World Cup campaigns with plenty to prove. Kenya come across as the whipping boys of the group, along with Canada, but a demoralised New Zealand are ripe for the picking. New Zealand have come off a humiliating loss to India in their warm-up game and three consecutive bilateral ODI series defeats at the hands of Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, so the need to show some intent is pressing.

New Zealand have gone from being one of the sides that was always there and thereabouts to the forgotten men of international competitions but given the format of this World Cup, they have almost no excuse to not make it to the quarter-finals.

The World Cup is Daniel Vettori's last international series as captain; he would like to leave a lasting impression and he has the personnel to help him do that. The middle order is New Zealand's marshmallow and if they can firm up that section, they should be able to pull off a decent all-round performance. They will be the team the minnows are targetting in this group and in order to restore self belief they could do with a solid win under their belts.

For Kenya, a win over any side will do and beating a full member will be punching above their weight. A close defeat to the Netherlands in their second warm-up illustrated what they are capable of with both bat and ball. The top five batsmen are all capable of getting big scores with Seren Waters leading the line-up. Their string of medium pacers have been economical and effective and if they can capitalise on the mentorship they've been receiving from people like the Kirsten brothers and Jonty Rhodes, they may have a rabbit or two to pull out of the hat.

Form guide

(Most recent first)

New Zealand: WLLLW Kenya: WLWLL

Pitch and conditions

The Chennai pitch worried South Africa captain Graeme Smith despite his team cantering to an eight-wicket win in a warm-up game against Zimbabwe last week. There doesn't appear to be too much life in it, for either the seamers or the spinners and the batsmen are the ones who could benefit the most. It is likely to be a hot day in Chennai, but the heat should be tempered somewhat by some cloud cover.

Watch out for…

One of the most exciting young batsmen to come out of Kenya in a while, Alex Obanda is a strokeplayer, who will probably open the innings. His shots are as flamboyant as his frosted hairstyle, and Kenya will look to him as the ideal foil for more circumspect opening partner, Waters, to attack the new ball and score boundaries with the field up.

Injuries and dwindling confidence have taken some of the spark out of Jacob Oram's gameplay in recent times, but there is no doubting his talent and if New Zealand are going to get out of their slump and be serious contenders in this tournament, they need a fit and firing Oram in the lower middle order. He didn't have much impact in New Zealand's warm-ups, scoring 17 runs in two innings and picking up two expensive wickets, and a return to form is well overdue.

Team news

Offspinner Nathan McCullum spent Thursday and Friday night in hospital after being admitted with high fever. He participated in a light training session on Saturday but remains a doubtful starter. Luke Woodcock may play in his place but that would keep a batsman out of the side. Should New Zealand opt for the extra batsmen, like Jamie How, they may find themselves a bowler short.

New Zealand (probable): 1 Martin Guptill, 2 Brendan McCullum, 3 Jessie Ryder, 4 Ross Taylor, 5 James Franklin, 6 Scott Stryis, 7 Jacob Oram, 8 Daniel Vettori, 9 Luke Woodcock, 10 Kyle Mills, 11 Tim Southee

Kenya have had a fairly settled unit in recent times, and without any injuries to worry them, the playing XI practically picks itself. With both the spinning Ngoche brothers likely to play on what should be a helpful surface, the one question may be who to pick between Tanmay Mishra and Rakep Patel, as both have impressed in the middle order.

1 Seren Waters, 2 Alex Obanda, 3 Collins Obuya, 4 Tanmay Mishra/Rakep Patel, 5 Steve Tikolo, 6 Maurice Ouma (wk), 7 Jimmy Kamande (capt), 8 Thomas Odoyo, 9 James Ngoche, 10 Shem Ngoche, 11 Nehemiah Odhiambo

Try picking the XIs for tomorrow's game by playing Team Selector.

Stats and trivia

• Kenya and New Zealand have met just once before in World Cups, with New Zealand handing out a 148-run thrashing at Gros Islet in 2007.
• The second-oldest man at the World Cup, after Canada's John Davison, Steve Tikolo is just a shade under 40. He's also his country's leading batsman, having scored more runs and more hundreds and fifties than any other player to represent Kenya.
• To say that New Zealand haven't had the greatest time on the subcontinent lately is to put it mildly, as they slumped to 11 straight losses in the region, before going down to Pakistan at home.
• Jesse Ryder had a quiet 2010 thanks to a couple of nagging injuries, but he's started 2011 with a bang, blazing to a hundred to set up a consolation win over Pakistan in the sixth ODI at Eden Park. Another New Zealand batsman in unexpectedly good nick is James Franklin, who's scored three half-centuries in his last six innings, narrowly missing out on a hundred in Bangalore in December.
  Quotes
  "Any team that takes us lightly will do so at their own peril. We practiced very hard for this after our training camp in India and the mood in the camp is as good as it can be."
  Jimmy Kamande is confident that his side will not be pushovers
  "We can't take them lightly because they are an unknown quantity, we do not know much about them"
  Daniel Vettori warns against complacency on the eve of his side's first game
  
  
   

Source

Tendulkar only current player in ESPNcricinfo all-time World XI

Sachin Tendulkar is the only current player in ESPNcricinfo's all-time Test World XI, which is dominated by Australians and West Indians, reflecting their pre-eminence in Test cricket over the years.

Shane Warne, Adam Gilchrist and Wasim Akram were the other players from the last two decades to make it to the XI, which featured seven players who made their debuts after 1970.

Four Australians, three West Indians, two Englishmen, an Indian and a Pakistani make up the XI.

Three players were unanimous choices, figuring in the first XIs of each of the 12 members of the jury (each juror was asked to pick a first XI and a second) - Don Bradman, Garry Sobers and Shane Warne, each of whom got the maximum points possible in the exercise, 60. Tendulkar followed with 51 points.

Perhaps the biggest surprise the XI threw up was the gap between Warne and Muttiah Muralitharan, the two leading wicket-takers in cricket history. Murali made it to ESPNcricinfo's World Second XI, tallying 34 points fewer than Warne.

The closest battles were for one of the opening spots and for No. 5. Sunil Gavaskar lost out to Jack Hobbs by one point and George Headley by two to Viv Richards.

Len Hutton (47 points) partners Hobbs at the top. They are followed by Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards and Sobers. While there was no competition to Sobers for the allrounder's spot, Imran Khan (19) narrowly edged out Keith Miller to make it to the Second XI.

Adam Gilchrist beat Alan Knott to the wicketkeeper's spot by eight points. The next closest contender was Kumar Sangakkara, who got nine points.

The bowling positions were all decided by handsome margins. Three of cricket's most highly rated fast bowlers - Dennis Lillee, leading with 48 points, Wasim Akram and Malcolm Marshall (in addition to Sobers, who could bowl left-arm fast, spin and chinamen) - accompany Warne.

Four players figured in either the first or second XIs of each of the 12 jury members - Bradman, Sobers, Warne and Viv Richards. Five players were in 11 - Tendulkar, Akram, Hutton, Gilchrist and Marshall.

The jury comprised one former captain from each of the top Test-playing teams - Ian Chappell, Clive Lloyd, Tony Greig, Duleep Mendis, Ali Bacher, Intikhab Alam, John Wright, Ajit Wadekar - and four cricket historians and writers.

The World XI is the final installment in ESPNcricinfo's all-time XI series, in which all-time sides have been picked for the leading Test teams. The shortlists that the members of the jury picked their World XIs from consisted of the players who made it to the country XIs.

ESPNcricinfo readers were invited to pick their XIs in parallel, and six of the jury's choices made it to the readers' XI: Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Warne and Akram. Virender Sehwag and Gavaskar were the overwhelming favourites for the opening slots, while Brian Lara edged out Richards for a place in the middle order. The readers went with a two-spin, two-quicks bowling combination - their XI has Warne and Murali bowling in tandem. And Glenn McGrath and Akram comfortably beat competition from all the West Indian bowlers in the shortlist.

"It was only natural that our all-time XI series for the top Test-playing countries should culminate in an all-time World XI," Sambit Bal, editor of ESPNcricinfo, said. "It's the apt finale to what has been hugely successful exercise. Not only have these features been widely read, our readers have participated in huge numbers in picking their own XIs."

"We have taken great care in choosing the jury for the world XI. All the cricketers on the panel have been captains, and are thus well-versed in the business of selecting teams. Also, they have either played alongside, or watched first-hand, a significant number of the nominees."

The World XI: Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Dennis Lillee

The Second XI: Sunil Gavaskar, Barry Richards, George Headley, Brian Lara, Wally Hammond, Imran Khan, Alan Knott, Bill O'Reilly, Fred Trueman, Muttiah Muralitharan, SF Barnes

Readers' XI: Sunil Gavaskar, Virender Sehwag, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Muttiah Muralitharan, Glenn McGrath 

Source

Who after Bradman and Sobers?

The presence of two names in any all-time world XI has traditionally brooked no argument, but one more joined them as an unanimous choice in ESPNcrincinfo's all-time XI. Shane Warne, who spun the ball a mile and made spin bowling glamorous again, was a presence in the first XI of each jury member, alongside Don Bradman and Garry Sobers. (Each juror was asked to pick two teams - a first XI and a second.)

The jury also seems to have settled the answer to the question "Who after Bradman?" The answer is Sachin Tendulkar, by a fair distance. Tendulkar, who stands a step away from 50 Test hundreds and whose lustre, in defiance of age, grows brighter with every passing day, was effectively voted, with 51 points, the fourth-greatest cricketer in the history of the game. In the batting stakes he was comfortably ahead of Viv Richards (42).

Brian Lara, Tendulkar's contemporary and great rival, didn't make it to the World XI, with 28 points, George Headley, the other West Indian in contention, and considered Bradman's equal for batting skill by many, lost out to Richards by a mere two points. In fact, the last juror's vote swung it for Richards. Walter Hammond, who had the misfortune of spending a career in Bradman's shadow, made it to the second XI.

Going by the votes, this is the order of merit in which the world's middle-order batsmen stack up: Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Headley, Lara, Hammond, Graeme Pollock and Greg Chappell.

There was an even closer contest for the opening positions. While Len Hutton, the master technician, who scored a colossal 364 at the age of 22, took one end comfortably with 47 votes, Jack Hobbs, who remains cricket's most prolific batsman with 61,237 first-class runs and 197 centuries, just about managed to snatch the other spot from Sunil Gavaskar, whose technique and temperament withstood the severest examinations, by one point.

Gavaskar is partnered in the Second XI by Barry Richards, whose Test career was limited to only four matches, but whose legend was established during World Series Cricket, where the contests were as fierce. The openers who came behind those two in the reckoning were Virender Sehwag and Victor Trumper, who played in vastly different eras but in the same buccaneering spirit.

The allrounder's position was, of course, a no-contest, but the jury settled an important argument by voting Imran Khan into the Second XI. Keith Miller, the free-spirited Australian allrounder, came next, followed by Imran's great rivals Richard Hadlee, Ian Botham and Kapil Dev, in that order.

Adam Gilchrist, who with his batting redefined how wicketkeepers were viewed - and selected - fought off a strong challenge from Alan Knott, the Englishman considered by many the most technically accomplished wicketkeeper ever. Gilchrist secured his position with 45 points to Knott's 37.

World XI: Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Dennis Lillee

Second XI: Sunil Gavaskar, Barry Richards, George Headley, Brian Lara, Wally Hammond, Imran Khan, Alan Knott, Bill O'Reilly, Fred Trueman, Muttiah Muralitharan, SF Barnes 

Source

Aleem Dar named Umpire of the Year

Aleem Dar, the Pakistan umpire, has been named Umpire of the Year at the ICC Awards ceremony in Bangalore. He has won this award - named the David Shepherd Trophy - for the second time in successive years. The other nominees in the category were Steve Davis, Tony Hill and five-time winner Simon Taufel.

Dar, 42, was voted by the captains of the ten full members of the ICC and the eight-man elite panel of ICC's match referees for the period August 24, 2009 to August 10, 2010. Their choice was based on his decision statistics and officiating skills over the past 12 months.

After collecting his trophy from match referee Chris Broad, Dar said: "I think the fact that I'm still playing cricket in Pakistan makes me a good umpire. In the last four times I've played cricket I've scored centuries so I definitely think that has helped." 

Source

Nitschke named Women's Cricketer of the Year

Shelley Nitschke, the Australia allrounder, has been named the Women's Cricketer of the Year at the ICC Awards in Bangalore. In the eight ODIs she played during the period under consideration - August 24, 2009 to August 10, 2010 - Nitschke scored 342 runs at an average of 57, and took 12 wickets. She also played in 10 Twenty20 Internationals, scoring 265 runs and taking ten wickets.

Nitschke won the award ahead of team-mate Ellyse Perry, West Indies' Stafanie Taylor and England's Katherine Brunt. She was also part of the victorious Australian women's side in the ICC World Twenty20 earlier this year.

Accepting the award from Australia batsman Michael Hussey, Nitschke said: "This year has been fantastic and to cap the year off with winning the ICC Women's Cricketer of the Year is brilliant. A huge part of increasing people's following of us has been our playing double-header matches with the men's sides, and to be playing Twenty20 cricket on a global stage has also helped us immensely."

There was another special honour for women's cricket, as former England batsman Rachael Heyhoe-Flint became the first woman to be inducted into the ICC Hall of Fame. 

Source

Ryan ten Doeschate is Associate Player of the Year

Ryan ten Doeschate, the Netherlands allrounder, has been named the Associate and Affiliate Player of the Year at the ICC Awards ceremony in Bangalore. He was chosen by the jury over Afghanistan's Mohammad Shahzad and the Ireland duo of Trent Johnston and Kevin O'Brien. He has won this award for the second time - his first came in 2008.

During the voting period - from August 24, 2009 to August 10, 2010 - ten Doeschate played for the Netherlands in five ODIs, making one century and three half-centuries. He averaged 121.33 at a strike rate of 79.30. He also played four Twenty20 Internationals for his country, scoring 94 runs at an average of 47. In the one ICC Intercontinental Cup fixture he played during this period, ten Doeschate scored an unbeaten 212 against Kenya, striking 22 fours and seven sixes in his first innings, and claiming 7 for 174 in the game with his medium pace.

ten Doeschate couldn't attend the award but was delighted to receive the prize. "I'm really upset that I am unable to attend tonight's ceremony to accept my second ICC award. I feel extremely privileged to be once again recognised by the ICC and the Voting Academy for my performances this year.

"I would like to take this opportunity to thank the KNCB (the Netherlands board) and my team-mates as well as the ICC for the continued support it shows to Associate and Affiliate cricket." 

Source

UDRS resistance returns to hurt India

India can feel hard done by Billy Bowden's lbw decision against Gautam Gambhir, but they have only themselves to blame. The batsman hits the leather off the ball, and is also hit outside the line of the off. The umpire thinks it is pad first, and misjudges the line. The batsman makes a T sign, the third umpire has a look at it, and tells the on-field umpire he has made a mistake. The umpire then crosses arms, reverses his decision, and the batsman goes ahead with his innings. When that happens at a critical juncture, as it could have on two occasions today, it is a huge relief for those participating in, officiating in, and watching the game.

India, though, refuse to use it. The Gambhir decision, and the one against Michael Hussey, where everyone in the crowd immediately knew it was not out, is exactly what the UDRS is in place for. Umpires are human too. They too make mistakes. Admittedly some are more human than others. In recent times their workload has grown manifold, but the Elite Panel remains just as big - or small.

India's argument against the UDRS is that they are not comfortable with it unless a technology at least as reliable as Hot Spot is used. Rahul Dravid illustrated India's concerns about the system yesterday. "My personal view is that if it can be proved that technology is foolproof, there is no harm in going for it," he said. "As long as we can be sure that it is available for every Test match, every condition all over the world and it's uniform." And while neither the BCCI nor the ICC is willing to bear costs for the technology that is to be used for the smoother running of the game, it is unfair to expect the broadcasters - who have paid through their noses to obtain the rights - to foot the bill.

Yet, looking at the way Gambhir and Hussey were given out, there is a case for even half the technology doing more good than bad. The Indian team is not united in its opposition of the system. At the P Sara Oval earlier this year, when Abhimanyu Mithun and Ishant Sharma were given out caught off their pads, Virender Sehwag had said: "It happens in cricket. Sometimes the umpire gives you a good decision and sometimes a bad decision. But yes, I would love to have that referral system in Test cricket, or even in one-day cricket. That is my personal opinion."

Ben Hilfenhaus shared the opinion after the day's play. "Obviously there is technology out there to be used," he said. "Umpires are doing a fantastic job, but obviously with the technology you take a bit of that human error out."

Chances are Gambhir's personal opinion might not be too different from Hilfenhaus' after today. Personal opinions, though, should not matter in the first place. As many players have demanded before, the ICC needs to put its foot down and make it mandatory for all Tests to be played under the same set of playing conditions. Test cricket shouldn't become a backyard game of cricket where kids decide beforehand if they can be given out lbw or not. 

Source

Trott-Riaz row 'closed matter' says ECB chief

LONDON: England batsman Jonathan Trott's pre-match altercation with Pakistan's Wahab Riaz ahead of the fourth one-day international here at Lord's on Monday was now a "closed matter" according to England and Wales Cricket Board ( ECB) chief executive David Collier.

South Africa-born Trott and Pakistan's Riaz, not in the team on Monday, squared up to one another in the nets at Lord's.

Their confrontation was the latest visible sign of the tension that has built up during a season where Pakistan's tour of Britain has been overshadowed by allegations of 'spot-fixing'.

Trott, later out for just four, and Riaz clashed just a day after Pakistan Cricket Board ( PCB) chairman Ijaz Butt stoked the row by suggesting England players had received "enormous sums of money" to lose deliberately last week's third ODI across London at The Oval.

"There was an altercation," Collier said. "It was fairly minor in nature. It was regrettable, but it happened."

Collier was glad match referee Jeff Crowe, the former New Zealand captain, was on hand to calm rising tempers.

"We are very fortunate that we have the experience of a neutral man in Jeff Crowe here, who dealt with it immediately," added Collier. "It is a closed matter.

"I think feelings have been high in the last 24 hours. We don't hide behind that, though. We admit feelings were strong, so that is bound to spill over."

Earlier, a statement issued by England captain Andrew Strauss spoke of his side's "surprise, dismay and outrage" at the comments made by Butt on Sunday, adding the team would be exploring "all legal options open to us".

Nevertheless, Strauss said England had decided to play Monday's match and Wednesday's fifth and final one-day international at Hampshire's Rose Bowl ground because "we do, however, recognise our responsibilities to the game of cricket, and in particular to the cricket-loving public in this country".

Pakistan have had to confront allegations of spot-fixing ever since Test captain Salman Butt and bowlers Mohammad Aamer and Mohammad Asif were named in a newspaper report and subsequently suspended by the International Cricket Council ( ICC) over claims they planned to bowl no-balls deliberately during last month's Test against England at Lord's.

Source

Pakistan betting scandal: Sri Lanka player under ICC spotlight

The International Cricket Council's anti-corruption unit has been monitoring the activities of a leading Sri Lanka player since the World Twenty20 in England last year after team-mates became increasingly unsettled by his late-night fraternising with a man they believed to be an illegal bookmaker. They passed on their concerns to the captain, Kumar Sangakkara, who followed ICC protocol by contacting the anti-corruption unit.

The player has since been investigated by Sri Lankan police, although no charges have been laid; officials from the ICC's anti-corruption unit are said to be dismayed at the lack of progress. Haroon Lorgat, the ICC's chief executive, has admitted to a general sense of frustration, saying: "The [anti-corruption unit's] working is not that of a policing agency or a newspaper. They have no power to arrest or seize, or carry out a sting operation."

Getting international players to question the honesty of one of their own team‑mates is a considerable challenge, but it is essential if the ICC is to root out corruption. England's one-day captain, Paul Collingwood, admitted ahead of today's Twenty20 international in Cardiff the difficulty faced by players in casting aside dressing‑room loyalties by reporting a team‑mate suspected of involvement with a betting scam.

As England and Pakistan prepared for the start of the one-day series, in a lingering atmosphere of despondency and mistrust, Collingwood said: "I love this game fondly. It's very hard to say whether you would blag on someone or whatever but I would like to think I would take every decision in the best interests of the game of cricket."

No England player, as far as Collingwood is aware, has ever felt the need to phone the ICC's anti-corruption hotline. "In my experience, I would probably say never, but I don't know for certain. You don't know whether players have done it individually and not told anybody else. This is probably stuff that will be done confidentially and kept kind of under the carpet."

England also seem to have stopped short of reporting suspicions about opponents. They are regularly implored, as are players from all countries, to pass on all suspicions and leave the anti-corruption unit to investigate, but pointing the finger of suspicion without evidence is not easily done. "From a players' point of view, we pretty much just want to focus on the game in hand and let the authorities deal with it and make strong decisions," Collingwood said. "It may be up to the players to tell the authorities if they think something is going on."

Pakistan's new captain, Shahid Afridi, who took over from the suspended Salman Butt, made a remarkable public apology before his side's net session in Cardiff yesterday on behalf of the three players – Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir – whose alleged involvement in betting scams is being investigated by the Metropolitan police and who have already been charged under the ICC's code of conduct. Afridi made no attempt to proclaim their innocence. "I think it is very bad news," he said. "On behalf of these players – I know they are not in this series – but on behalf of these boys, I want to say sorry to all cricket lovers and all the cricketing nations."

The News of the World, which published its exposé into cricket corruption a week ago after a sting operation against the Pakistan players' agent, Mazhar Majeed, provides further evidence over 19 pages today to support its allegations. The newspaper has been praised by the head of the anti-corruption unit, Ronnie Flanagan. The newspaper claims that the Pakistan players face 23 ICC charges between them and that the Metropolitan Police have recovered between £10-15,000 of bills marked by the News of the World from Butt's room.

It also states Butt was warned five times that he must report any irregular dealings. It also derides as "rantings" the suggestion by the Pakistan high commissioner in London, Wajid Shamsul Hasan, that the evidence had been faked.

Yasir Hameed, who was recalled for the final Test at The Oval – the Test that was the subject of the News of the World sting – is quoted as saying: "They were doing it [fixing] in almost every match. God knows what they were up to." Hameed last night denied he had made the allegations and said he was "deeply disturbed" by them.

Source

It could happen in India as well

At the heart of Mohammad Amir's stupidity, at the core of what is happening to a beautiful game, which is in the hands of ordinary people in Pakistan, lies one very basic question that every cricketer should have asked himself at some point: why do I play this game?

If the answer is that you want to excel at the one thing that you are good at, that you want to find the limits of your ability, that you relish the challenge of a competition, that you get goose pimples putting on your country's colours and walking out to the expectations of your countrymen, you will pursue those goals and take whatever reward you get. Invariably it will be handsome.

If the answer is that you want to earn a good living as quickly as you can, that you want to bask in the comforts of the material pleasures that your talent delivers to you, you will take whatever financial inducement comes your way. Inevitably it will be tainted, inevitably the dessert will be laced.

It is our choices that tell us who we are.

But these choices can be influenced; sometimes, and I hope never, young players can be coerced into walking down a specific path. And so it comes down to the air they breathe when their minds are still fragile. It could be the air of excellence that drives a young man to newer heights of achievement. Or it could be the putrid air of greed that could infect him and snuff a career out before it has had time to blossom.

In the Pakistan dressing room, and by extension in the society that it always reflects, I do not know if the air they breathe is fresh from the meadows of their land or their majestic mountains. It is easy, and dangerous, to pass judgement from a distance, but surely there must be a clue in the number of gifted individuals who wither away. But one thing is clear. Amir is not just a young cricketer but a young man symbolising tomorrow in Pakistan and that is why cricket lovers there should be disappointed. As they should have been with the antics of another astonishingly gifted young man, Umar Akmal, in Australia when his brother was left out.

If there is a brotherly hand on their shoulder, encouraging but firm, pointing out the rewards of a great career, would young cricketers think of performing petty crimes for petty rewards? Or is it that the hand on their shoulders isn't brotherly but villainous, goading them to fill their coffers with whatever comes their way? The second seems the more likely and if that is indeed the case, the Pakistan Cricket Board has picked the wrong people and in doing so let down the cricket lovers who seek their identity from the way their national team plays. Across the cricket world, the Pakistan board has little respect, and it is not difficult to imagine that the decay would begin there.

There is a danger for us in India too. It is easy to sound superior and sneer at our neighbours, to appear holier than thou and take the moral high ground. India faces a threat that is, if anything, greater than the one that seems to have engulfed young men in Pakistan.

India's new generation of cricketers is not just wealthy beyond imagination, they seem to have acquired it without a lot to show for it. I do not know if these young men are looking 10 years into the future, acquiring a work ethic that their solidly brought-up seniors possessed. They seem satiated, two years at the top seems to drain them; the BMW seems more alluring than the sustained effort of a 10-year career. For those that don't want a place in history, the low-hanging fruit can come from many sources. Make no mistake, Indian cricket is under threat and it cannot help that its guardians spend more time bickering over each other's excesses.

The News Of The World video suggests how easily a script can be written when the actors are weak and willing. This is the time to be strong and unforgiving and it must come from the ICC, for the PCB doesn't seem to have the stature to enforce anything. And the PCB can do better than suggest to the huge army of passionate Pakistan supporters that there is a conspiracy.

In India too we indulge in it from time to time, when a referee hands an adverse report or someone bowls a no-ball in a moment of poor judgement. Teams that win don't need to be martyrs and that is a lesson for all of us on the subcontinent. And to my friends in Pakistan I will say "show these theories the door", for the world neither has the time, nor does it benefit from, conspiring against them. 

Source

Mohammad Amir earns sympathy amid scandal

Former Pakistan captain, Ramiz Raja, and the former coach, Geoff Lawson, have both spoken out in defence of Mohammad Amir, Pakistan's 18-year-old fast bowler whose alleged involvement in the Lord's spot-fixing scandal is threatening to destroy his burgeoning career.

Amir was a revelation during the recent four-Test series against England, in which he collected 19 wickets at 18.36 and proved unplayable at times in helpful swinging conditions. He picked up consecutive five-wicket hauls in the final two Tests, including a career-best 6 for 84 in England's only innings at Lord's.

However, on the eve of the final day of the series, he was one of four players - along with his captain Salman Butt and fellow new-ball bowler Mohammad Asif - to be named by The News of the World in an alleged scam involving bowling no-balls to order, a situation that has led many commentators, including England's former captain, Michael Vaughan, to call for a life ban.

However, Ramiz and Lawson both expressed sympathy for Amir, and believed the greater blame lay with the men who had led him astray so early in his career. "To see an 18-year old boy being dragged into the controversy is the worse part," Ramiz told Cricinfo. "He had the world, everyone was raving about the talent and praising him. It is such a sad moment in cricket.

"Amir comes from a humble background," Ramiz said. "He is 18, with an impressionable mind, and if he has been keeping bad company, it's possible he could have been drawn [into wrongdoing]. But if that's the case, then the guys who got him in should be put behind bars because they've spoilt a grand career. They've infiltrated and spoilt a young mind, and it's such a shocking state of affairs."

Lawson, who coached Pakistan for 15 months between July 2007 and October 2008, said: "For me, it would be a great tragedy if a young man such as Amir, a shining light of hope, has been led astray." But he also added that Pakistan's socio-economic situation needed to be taken into account before rushing in to judge the alleged actions of its cricketers.

"We must remember that we are judging these guys by the standards of our own country, when their situations are vastly different," Lawson told The Age in Melbourne. "The first time I met Mohammad Amir was when he was 16, coming to an Under-19s camp. He comes from a small village near the Swat valley and was delayed by three hours because the Taliban had closed the highway. That doesn't happen in this country."

"One thing that struck me about Amir was his constant smile, his zest for the game," he said. "That has not changed. I will never condone any form of fixing, but we should consider that a cricketer might not be thinking of personal gain but of getting money to buy a generator for his village because they don't have electricity.

"I don't think Pakistan should be banished, we have seen it survive some incredible on and off-field turmoil," Lawson said. "But I will say that the present Pakistan administration cannot escape some of the blame for this. What they need right now is positive leadership and they don't have it.

"When I was there the board did not have people with vested interests, they were business people who treated people fairly, remunerated the players well. The first-class players were looked after and paid well and it made a difference.The [current] Pakistan Cricket Board chairman Ijaz Butt is not a leader, he should not have the job, he is incapable." 

Source

Credibility concern over Eng-Pak ODIs: Vaughan

London: Cricket authorities were under pressure on Monday to cancel the rest of Pakistan's tour to England after lurid match-fixing allegations swirled around a string of recent matches.

Scotland Yard detectives were questioning top Pakistani players as the cricket world reacted with shock and dismay at reports that hundreds of thousands of dollars had changed hands in match-fixing schemes at Test level dating back months.

Ex-England captain Michael Vaughan said any further matches against the tourists would have "no credibility" in the light of the damaging allegations. The latest scandal broke when Britain's News of the World claimed on Sunday that it had paid fixer Mazhar Majeed 150,000 pounds (230,000 dollars) for advance details of three no-balls in the fourth and final Test between Pakistan and England as part of a betting sting.

England won the game at Lord's in London - the prestigious ground known as the home of cricket - on Sunday, meaning they took the series 3-1.

Majeed, a 35-year-old who is an agent for several Pakistan players, was arrested by police on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud bookmakers in the wake of the report but was released on bail late on Sunday. Scotland Yard have also questioned Pakistan captain Salman Butt, plus star strike bowlers Mohammad Amir and Mohammad Asif.

Butt, Asif and 18-year-old Amir - who was named Pakistan's man of the series - all had their mobile phones seized. The news has sent shockwaves around the world of cricket, which prides itself on its reputation for fair play, raising questions about the fairness of previous games and leading to calls for Pakistan's looming one-day series against England to be scrapped.

Former International Cricket Council chief executive Malcolm Speed even said there was a "fairly compelling case" for suspending Pakistan from world cricket. "It looks as though it is endemic that several of the team members are involved and have been for some time," Speed told national radio.

"So perhaps they need a rest. It looks a fairly compelling case."

Former England batsman Allan Lamb called for the upcoming one-day series between Pakistan and England to be scrapped. "I believe that the one-day series shouldn't go on," he told BBC television. Ex-England captain Vaughan wrote in the Daily Telegraph that England "would not want to play against" Pakistan in the games, which would have "no credibility".

The news has also hit hard in Pakistan, with Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said the claims "have bowed our heads in shame", as he launched an investigation. President Asif Ali Zardari has expressed his disappointment at the allegations and is being informed of developments, while federal sports minister Ijaz Jakhrani promised any players found guilty would not play for Pakistan again.

Source

Selectors, sins and bins

"I'm going to help pick a few names out of the hat." So quipped David Gower, that master of gentle sardonicism, shortly after being reappointed England captain in 1989. By the end of that summer's Aldermanning by Allan Border's revitalised Australians, the newly-formed England Cricket Committee had plucked 29 names from their topper, 13 of whom played just once. What is generally forgotten is that three debutants, Mike Atherton, Angus Fraser and Devon Malcolm, all went on to carve their names in the nation's heart.

Even during their most blush-worthy periods, selectors are seldom utterly wrong. And nor, even when all is going swimmingly, do they necessarily get things wholly right. Thus it was with the unprecedentedly early announcement of the England XI for the Oval Test. The timing, three days before the toss and plainly designed to reassure Alastair Cook, exemplified the sensitivity and fairness we have come to expect, even demand, in the age of the central contract. File it alongside dads attending births as a sign of progress. The retention of Stuart Broad, conversely, smacked of warped priorities and mangled morals.

Team selection is only straightforward when options are limited or the occupants are uniformly in form. When you've won six Tests on the trot, regardless of the poverty of the opposition, it is too easy to leave well alone. Yet victory can mask deficiencies, as Alec Bedser and pals acknowledged after the 1981 Headingley Test, responding to a magical, if somewhat fortunate, triumph by dropping one of the conjurors, Graham Dilley, a fast bowler who'd reserved his sorcery for the striker's crease, in favour of John Emburey, a spinner. Sentiment be damned.

Another improbable win followed, at Edgbaston, with Emburey to the fore, whereupon two more heroes were shelved for the next chapter at Old Trafford: keeper Bob Taylor (skipper Mike Brearley insisted on recalling an all-round mini-genius, Alan Knott) and allrounder Peter Willey (Chris Tavare stiffened the top order). Not even hindsight could find fault.

As a show of humanity and faith, sticking with Cook - who at 25 has already racked up 12 Test centuries, more than Ted Dexter, Mike Gatting or Tom Graveney managed in their entire careers - was admirable. Brave, too. Over England's last 15 Tests he has averaged 36.57, , least among the regular specialists; subtract 401 runs at 66.83 against Bangladesh and the fruits, such as they are, have been 550 at 27.50 in 20 knocks, with one hundred and three fifties. Twenty-four innings for Essex this summer have yielded one hundred and five fifties, three of the latter, instructively, in Twenty20, a format wherein he has flown the flag just four times. Form is a distant memory, class barely detectable. Yet just as the Australian selectors stuck with another opener, Mark Taylor, while he, their captain, was enduring 21 innings without reaching 50, so another factor has spiced up the usual calculations - Cook is, after all, Andrew Strauss's heir apparent. Besides, what better for waning confidence than back-to-back games on those flat mattresses at The Oval and Lord's?

On another level, retaining Cook is unpragmatic if not downright foolish. Pakistan might be demoralised in the field and bereft with the bat, but the quality of their pace attack, even in the absence of Umar Gul, would be an ideal examination for an alternative opener such as Jonathan Trott, Michael Carberry, or even a young thruster such as Yorkshire's prolific Adam Lyth.

Albeit batting down the order, Carberry was a key figure for Hampshire on Saturday, when Twenty20 Finals Day at the Rose Bowl brought an undeservedly rousing conclusion to the competition's un-businesslike excesses (if more fixtures than an entire County Championship campaign doesn't qualify as overkill and misplaced priorities, I am at a loss to know what does). On an occasion marred only by Kieron Pollard's horrific injury, and decided somewhat surreally by Somerset's ignorance of the law governing runners, the main joybringers were a terrific trio of 19-year-olds: Hampshire's flighty left-arm slowie Danny Briggs and nifty stumper Michael Bates plus, most thrillingly of all, Taunton's inventive swashbuckler Jos Buttler. To see Cook free his arms and slap a few "have-at-thee-o-vile-critics" boundaries was a tonic too, not least because he put his foot in it, or rather, his feet.

Distracted as he is by all those obsessive-compulsive trigger movements, can we wonder that Cook has scant time for footwork? Even when those soles do shift, it is all too often too little, let alone too late. And there lies the rub. Gower, Virender Sehwag and Marcus Trescothick are rare exceptions to the golden rule: light feet = big feats. Nor is it any coincidence that all three are/were attacking batsmen with fast hands, enabling them to make light of such a flaw.

Significantly, bar a stoical and crucial 118 in Durban, Cook's best two innings during his personal recession have come when he's let his hair down - 95 in a dash over three hours to give his side a flying start in that drought-breaking Ashes victory at Lord's, and a match-winning century in Dhaka against the clock. Brett Lee, Shaun Tait, Jason Gillespie, Michael Kasprowicz and Stuart MacGill might also recall his rollicking 214 off 238 balls for Essex in 2005. Here, one cannot help but conclude, is where salvation lies.

FOR BROAD, SALVATION almost certainly lies in the opposite direction. Until this summer, I had only twice been ashamed of an England bowler. The first time was at Lord's in 1971, when big, bad John Snow shoulder-barged little Sunil Gavaskar as if disputing possession in a schoolyard soccer scrap. The second offender, more improbably, was Steve Harmison, a courteous and generous soul, who in Faisalabad in 2005 somehow saw fit to hurl the ball at Inzamam-ul-Haq and hence, with the complicity of the umpires, run out Pakistan's captain as he took evasive action. When Broad fired the ball at Zulqarnain Haider at Trent Bridge, he committed a more grievous sin than Snow or Harmison. And not just because, in doing so, he may have aggravated the finger injury that truncated Haider's tour.

Unlike Snow, Broad didn't have the alibi that he was trying to field the ball while contending with a scampering batsman. Unlike Harmison, he couldn't even claim, however tendentiously and self-servingly, that he was aiming at the stumps. No, this was purely a fit of pique, an eruption from the bubbling well of frustration. Snow was suspended for the next Test, five priceless paydays lost; to Broad, who shops at Dolce & Gabbana, confesses to having a "thing" for expensive watches, and has his suits handmade, a £3000 ICC fine amounted to a mild tut.

Trouble is, while Chris Broad also played at the highest level, and was even reborn as an estimable ICC referee, he hardly set his son the finest of examples. For too long now, in fact, son has appeared hell-bent on outdoing father, diluting and diminishing his own considerable achievements with even more egocentricity and petulance. Stepping over the line is becoming a nasty habit. Compassion is due - his stepmother died last month - but forgiveness would be simpler were it not for the lengthy charge list. Shahid Afridi bites balls and gouges pitches, but when it comes to sullying the game's largely good name, Broad Jr's look-at-me surliness is fast making him Public Enemy No.1.

It needn't be this way. Such is his ability with new ball and old, Broad has it in him to lead his country's attack for the next decade, and even become England's most complete seamer since Ian Botham's pomp. He could also be a vibrant No. 8 once he learns that singles are as important as sixes. First, though, he must master a nobler art - humility.

Unlike the likes of Dennis Lillee and Javed Miandad, Broad is playing in an era of goldfish-bowl scrutiny, one in which cricket's hourly reach can be measured not in thousands but billions. Misdeeds, thanks to satellite TV and the internet, are far more visible, rectifying them vastly more necessary. Which is why Broad should have been suspended for this week's Test, if not longer. In resisting an option that would have sent appreciative waves rippling across the oceans, the selectors failed to send the requisite message: no player, no matter how valuable, can behave with impunity. The choice, though, should not have been theirs (even though, apropos the Snow incident, it was Bedser and his co-selectors who claimed responsibility for dropping the Sussex man on disciplinary grounds). In ducking any official sanction, the England and Wales Cricket Board did not so much pass as chuck the buck.

The obvious antidote, if we are to make Broad and his ill-tempered ilk think twice, is to take one leaf from rugby's book and another, however reluctantly, from soccer's. Umpires who are privately unhappy about the way technology is eroding their responsibilities would surely not be alone in welcoming both the sin bin (a session or day in the pavilion, depending on the length of contest) and a punitive card system (bacon and egg instead of red and yellow). And yes, those who attempt to pervert justice via the UDRS - umpire misses blatant edge, decision overturned on appeal - should be eligible.

It's a pity, however inevitable, that it should come to this, but the prospect of having misdemeanours so openly exposed and instantly punished, in the team sport that values decorum and propriety like no other, ought to prove a worthwhile deterrent. Throw in an annual "It's Not Cricket" award for serial offenders (The Grace Trophy?) and we may really get somewhere. 

Source

Men behaving badly in the Lord's pavilion

The Centenary Test at Lord's in 1980 was intended to be a celebration of a hundred years of Test cricket in England. Off the field it lived up to all expectations, as a mass of former internationals assembled in London from around the world to enjoy a week of reminiscing and parties. Sadly, on the field the Test was marred by the weather and best remembered for an altercation on the Saturday, when an MCC member assaulted one of the umpires.

The original Centenary Test - in Melbourne in March 1977 - was a tremendous success, with the match itself going down to the wire and even producing an identical result to the first encounter, a win for Australia by 45 runs. The huge crowds had barely left the MCG before plans were being drawn up by the MCC for a similar event in England.

The first Test in England had been played at The Oval, but staging the Centenary Test there was ruled out on commercial grounds. Lord's held around 24,000, The Oval 16,000. It was also argued that Lord's was the spiritual home of the game. Even on such a sentimental occasion, the money men had the final say.

The assembly of Ashes greats at Lord's for the first day of the match, September 2, 1980 was remarkable. The oldest Englishman was Percy Fender (90), while Australia's senior was Stork Hendry from the 1921 tourists. I remember walking round the ground an hour or before the start of play and being left open-mouthed at the mass of legendary players casually chatting behind the Q Stand (now the Allen Stand), which was reserved throughout just for them.

Sadly, unlike in Melbourne, the game itself was poor - "inconclusive and dull" to quote David Frith in Wisden Cricket Monthly. Time lost to the weather (10 hours in all) did not help, but neither captain appeared prepared to take any risks, and on the fifth and final day England chose to ignore a stiff target set them by Greg Chappell. In warm late-summer sunshine, what should have been a great match petered out into a forgettable draw.

But it was the events of the third day that dominated the headlines and were remembered long after the game itself faded from the memory.

After delays on the Friday, a dry night meant there was every hope play would start on time on the Saturday. But a two-hour downpour in the morning left old creases towards the Tavern-side of the square sodden. To make matters worse, as the sell-out crowd milled around, the sun came out. All spectators had to entertain them under a clear blue sky was a regular procession of umpires and captains to and from the pavilion.

As the delay continued, the crowd's frustration grew and, fuelled by alcohol, they became more vocal. In his book Lord's, Geoffrey Moorhouse, who had access to many of those involved, said the ground staff thought play could start after lunch. Chappell told the umpires he was prepared to play ("If it helps you two lads to get the game started then I'll go along with that") but not so Ian Botham, England's captain since the start of the summer. Jack Bailey, the MCC secretary, told reporters that night that "MCC wanted play to start earlier".

With tedious regularity the four men inspected the pitch alongside groundsman Jim Fairbrother and then returned to the pavilion. That there was disagreement between them, made clear to all by often vigorous head-shaking and gesticulating, only served to stoke up the crowd.

"Had Botham been of the same mind as Chappell, they could have taken the matter into their own hands," John Woodcock wrote in the Times. "They were not obliged to, though, and in their maddeningly pedantic way, the umpires, with Botham's approval, worked to rule."

As umpires and captains headed out at 3.30pm for their fifth inspection, Botham was struck on the head from behind. Despite that, no additional security was called for. Dickie Bird said in his autobiography that out in the middle, against a backdrop of booing and jeering, he said to the captains: "Come on, lads, we can't keep going like this. Let's give it a go in 15 minutes."

As they returned Moorhouse said "it was apparent from all parts of the ground that MCC members had gathered more thickly than usual around the [pavilion] steps". As umpire David Constant started to walk up the steps he was subjected to a barrage of questions and comments, some abusive. So densely packed were the members that they were inadvertently blocking the umpires' path, and Constant pushed one to try to force his way through. The man responded by grabbing Constant's tie and almost pulled him to the ground. What followed was a brief melee as Chappell and Botham leapt to Constant's aid.

Bird was still out in the middle, supervising the spreading of sawdust, although he was shocked when he got back to his dressing room and saw a deeply shaken Constant. "We both sat there with tears in our eyes."

What was especially unfortunate was that it was claimed Bird and Constant had asked the MCC for extra covers on the old wickets as they had identified a potential problem in their pre-match inspection. The request was ignored.

"While it lasted only a minute or so, it was quite a to-do," Moorhouse noted. "It was a disgrace not only to English cricket but to the game in general," Frith added. "Such behaviour is of course deplorable," wrote Denis Compton in the Sunday Express, "but I can understand the members' sense of frustration."

Chappell said that some of the language used by the members "embarrassed me" (a surprising claim from a man who had played alongside his brother, Rod Marsh and Dennis Lillee), adding that the one who grabbed Constant "should be put in a cage". Botham said it was "more like a football terrace". When play finally got underway at 3.45pm there was a police guard inside the Long Room and on the stairs in front of the pavilion.

Amid the flurry of media comment, almost all of it apportioning blame to the MCC, it was expected the member who assaulted Constant would be thrown out. But after 19 members were questioned in the fortnight following the incident, it took another two months for any announcement to be made.

When it came, it was a classic establishment fudge. Peter May, the club's president, said while some members "had behaved in a way wholly unbecoming to the club", action had been taken, but he refused to reveal what that was. It only subsequently emerged the punishment was a stiff letter of warning from the secretary about future conduct.

The argument put forward by the club was that the individual who had assaulted Constant was only one of around 50 members who had behaved badly; he was also supposedly a non-drinker and claimed to have grabbed the tie "to stop himself falling over".

"It was a classic example of what MCC committees do when considering many things on their agendas," Moorhouse concluded. "Dwelling on every question from every conceivable angle until everyone is so confused by the alternatives that no clear decision seems possible or even desirable."

The final word, as is often the case, goes to Bird. "It was a very sad day all round. A marvellous occasion ruined by that one day." 

Source

Grand fightback ruins Amir's party

Nadir of the day
"I've got to look at the positives and drag my confidence up, which has been hammered in the last 18 months. I'm nowhere near the person I used to be but I've got to keep trying to work at it." Those were Kevin Pietersen's words on the eve of the Lord's Test, as he poured his heart out to Mike Atherton in an interview for Sky Sports. Unfortunately for Pietersen, his quest for redemption is far from over yet, after a horrible dismissal that raised a whole new host of doubts about his mindset. After arriving at the crease a mere three balls into the day, KP watched from the non-striker's end as Mohammad Asif sent down a maiden, but rather than afford himself a sighter in prodigious swinging conditions, he flung a wild drive at an outswinger from Mohammad Amir, and snicked his first ball to the keeper. The atmosphere as he returned to the pavilion was reminiscent of Ian Botham's infamous pair in 1981 - with none of the members quite knowing where to look.

Bowler of the day
Amir's astounding onslaught ripped the guts out of England's innings, as he claimed 4 for 0 with his first ten balls of the day, and in the process inflicted ducks on England's No. 4, 5 and 6 - for the first time in the team's Test history. But his most notable dismissal, for a number of reasons, came in the second over of his post-lunch spell, as Matt Prior's plucky resistance was ended by another well-directed outswinger. Amir sunk to his knees to perform a celebratory sajda, as well he might. He had completed his second five-wicket haul in the space of six days - to become, at 18 years and 136 days - the youngest man to etch his name on the Lord's honours board. In the same breath, he overtook Daniel Vettori to become the youngest bowler to reach 50 Test wickets, and celebrated the achievement two balls later by inflicting England's fourth duck of the innings on Graeme Swann.

Anchor of the day
England's batting coach, Graham Gooch, yesterday suggested that England's batsmen had forgotten the art of building Test innings, but one man in the top six was totally exempt of that charge today. Jonathan Trott's ponderous batting style has had its detractors of late, not least in the last Lord's Test against Bangladesh when he ground along to a career-best 226. But today the value of a man who puts a price on his wicket was plain for all to see. With impeccable judgment and a calm assurance on the front foot, Trott arrested the rot in England's middle order, notched up his third Test century and in the process went past 1000 runs in Test cricket. This is his 23rd innings, putting him equal with Mike Atherton and Kevin Pietersen, among other notable England batsmen.

Impetus of the day
Stuart Broad's backfoot cover-drive was once likened by Geoffrey Boycott to that of Garry Sobers, but his batting had been in the doldrums of late, with just 106 runs in 11 innings since the Ashes, until he rediscovered his rhythm with a combative 48 at The Oval last week. Suitably emboldened, he put his recent troubles behind him with a brilliantly belligerent maiden first-class hundred, one that was greeted with a raucous standing ovation from an absorbed Lord's crowd. On 88, he had gone past his father, Chris, to become the highest-scoring Broad in a Test at Lord's, having already, on 73, emulated Trott in passing the 1000-run mark. It's not inconceivable that he could complete the double in this Test as well. He is currently on 94 Test wickets, and so needs six in the match to become the 11th Englishman to reach the mark, and the first since Ashley Giles and Andrew Flintoff, who brought up their 1000 and 100 in the same Cape Town Test in January 2005.

Partnership of the day
In a series marked by stunning batting capitulations, Broad and Trott's eighth-wicket alliance has the look of a match-seizing moment. So far in the series there have been just seven century stands - compared to 60 in single figures - and by the close the pair had eclipsed Eoin Morgan and Paul Collingwood's 219 at Trent Bridge. It was the second time in consecutive Tests that Broad had been involved in a 100-run stand for the eighth wicket, having added 119 with Matt Prior at The Oval, and by the close, their stand was sandwiched at No. 2 in England's all-time standings for the eighth wicket, between those involving Gubby Allen and John Murray, the only other England No.9s to make a Test match century.

Reprieves of the day
It was rather a case of horses and stable doors, but when the part-time legspinner Imran Farhat found Broad's edge twice in consecutive deliveries in the 101st over of the innings, the reaction of Yasir Hameed at slip summed up the extent to which Pakistan's morale had been battered. The first snick flew at a catchable height straight past his left hand and away for four, the second looped up off a leading edge and was fumbled as Hameed dived across to gather. Broad had been on 121 at the time, and he had added just one run to that total when Saeed Ajmal successfully appealed for lbw. Broad, however, correctly decided to use his review, and Ajmal was distinctly dischuffed to discover that the ball would have been sliding down the leg side. 

Source

Call back Dravid to Team India: Akram

New Delhi: Senior batsman Rahul Dravid should be called back to India's ODI team as he still has lot to offer to the country in the 50-over format, feels former Pakistan skipper Wasim Akram.

"Dravid still has a lot to offer in ODIs. I believe that Dravid should be brought back into the (one-day) team. In the sub-continent, the current batsmen can do well, but on the overseas tours, India need a solid and experienced batsman like Dravid," Akram said.

Akram also was not happy with the current bowling line-up of the Indian team.

When asked about his reported comments that some of the India players were "softies and lazy", the former left-arm pacer said, "I was not talking about the whole team. I was only talking about the bowlers.""Look at Munaf Patel, (S) Sreesanth, Irfan Pathan and RP Singh. They all were very promising in the beginning. They had everything a bowler needs. Now you look at them. They have waned, for reasons beyond me," Akram said.

The cricketer-turned-commentator also feels that a packed international schedule is taking toll on the players of the Indian team.

"There is a series between these two teams every two months. It is very natural that the Indian players have lost interest in the contests. I am sure the same is the case with the Sri Lankan cricketers," he said.

"Indian players are in the habit of playing in front of more or less 60,000 people and now they are playing amidst almost empty stands.

"Obviously, their performance will get affected. They are a top team in both Tests and ODIs and only too much cricket is their undoing at the moment," he added.

Source

 

Foxes, lizards and other bowlers

I no longer support teams, only bowling. This is an ecologically conscious decision, of course, a petition for preserving the balance of cricket. But it is also driven by greed for the comedy that is a batting collapse (Pakistan and England are somehow the funniest). Much of it, however, has to do with the rare pleasure of brilliant bowling. And last month was a beaut. Test cricket was back again, even though it lost yet another of its ace bowlers. Murali, Warne, Kumble, McGrath, Pollock, Vaas, Lee, Flintoff, Bond - by a rough count that's 4000 Test wickets gone in the last three years.

England and South Africa are the best venues to watch bowling nowadays. Australian pitches lately bounce as sorrowfully as dead kangaroos. Broken Indian pitches used to have their moments of glory (Mumbai 2004, Kanpur 2008), but match referees and the media have terrorised them into terminal blandness. South Africa's have pace, bounce, seam. But England has rain; rain enough to put juice into pitches and wobble in the air, but not enough to wash out matches altogether. Rain is critical to the ecology. Rain made uncovered pitches the exquisite roulettes we read about. And rain, drawing sweat from the surface underneath covers, still makes excellent bowling legendary.

On two wet first days at Lord's and Headingley, Pakistan's two Ms - may their success be as great as the two Ws - along with Umar Gul, hooped and frisbeed all around the Australians in collusive joy.

Mohammad Amir is a bee. He buzzes in his run-up, the ball buzzes in the air, either way, and off the pitch, either way. He buzzes in appeal. Honeybees die after a single sting, but not Amir. He chews gum with teenage vigour. He takes the hair out of his eyes. He buzzes in again.

Mohammad Asif is a snake (Wasim was both snake, King Cobra, and bee, Queen Bee. Waqar was a bull. Imran was a stallion. Shoaib is an unnamed genetically modified species comprising Shoaib Akhtar and occasionally Salman Khan).

Asif is no ordinary snake. He is both venomous and a constrictor. This is a very wise and languid snake indeed. He cannot be provoked into reckless bites or over-exerting constrictions. Doesn't have those ways. He may plot his prey days in advance, observing the victims. He fattens them if need be. Then he begins to paralyse them. One limb, then another, and another, then the entire nervous system. At last he slithers in, cool, wraps himself around, gentle, and swallows whole. Pups are tormented by him. Did you watch Michael Clarke?

How he laughs at desperate flingers. Osman Samiuddin tells the story of Asif narrating a tale from a domestic match. Asif is watching a whippet-like, floppy-haired, largely futile fast bowler, in and out of the national team for a decade, going at it as usual. "Pace pe pace. [Pace on pace]" Asif jogs in calmly, wrists it this way and that, picks up a couple of wickets. It is hot. He heads for the pavilion. The fast bowler is still at it, still wicketless. "Pace pe pace." Asif drinks tea, smokes a ciggy. Outside in the heat, "Pace pe pace." Asif returns. Takes two more.

Closer home, before the horror of Colombo, there was some eye-catching bowling in Galle. Ishant Sharma is a giraffe, though arguably more an ostrich. Neither animal has our very tall and thin fast bowler's Adam's apple, which leads his gangly loping run like a spear, his hair (unlike Pakistani hair, which is invariably cool) racing behind him like something forgotten. Ishant needed rain. Once he had it, he stood the ball on the seam, jagged it both ways, fast and sharp. He was coming in like the breeze, floating like a long ghost in follow-through. Preserving Ishant, however, might be a challenge too big for the Indian conservationist.

At any rate, Ishant was easily outbowled by Lasith Malinga, who is a frill-necked lizard. As that creature throws opens the startling umbrella around its neck to frighten predators, so Malinga - who otherwise smiles like a little girl with ribbons in her plaits, who kisses the ball softly every time he bowls it - so Malinga unveils at the very last moment the shock of his delivery action. And each time it is indeed a shock.

Bowlers have all kinds of philosophies. An uber-genius like Garry Sobers (who was the whole Ark) could say it depended on - not on the pitch, the day, or the match situation, no, it depended on the ball, its "character". "Some swing or spin, some don't." Ah! For others, like Jeff Thomson, "I just roll up and go whang." Malinga slings it like Thommo, and that's his approach. If the bouncer don't get ya, the yorker must.

Finally, there was a long and anxious bowl, one final time, from the great Muttiah Muralitharan. "Hello, superstars," he told MS Dhoni and Yuvraj Singh in the first innings, "this is Test cricket. Remember it well." In the second he grinned, he bore, and got to 800.

Murali is described often as a fox. This seems right. Unlike hedgehog bowlers who pursue one big idea, Murali, like a fox, had many ways of pursuit. Like a fox he did not hunt in a pack. Like a fox he was himself cruelly hunted for sport in some parts of the world. Fox-hunting was banned a few years ago in England, but is still legal in Australia. 

Source

Which is the world's best bowling attack at the moment?

Harsha Bhogle: On Time Out with Harsha today we are going to discuss the state of bowling around the world. We have Ian Chappell and Sanjay Manjrekar in the studio going country by country, and we've got an expert comment from Allan Donald. Then we will go across to S Rajesh to find out exactly what the numbers show and which country is doing better.

Ian, let me start with you. Are you happy with the standards of bowling in international cricket? Do you think they are dropping a little bit? You think the pitches are affecting the bowlers a little bit these days?

Ian Chappell: I think we have seen pretty competitive cricket in last 12 months or so, and a couple of things have contributed to it. The main thing is the more even spread of good bowlers. I think we have got four what I could class as outstanding attacks and two quite good attacks. Then throw in the fact that Champions Trophy last year in South Africa had some pitches with a bit of life in them, the administrators in Australia before last summer asked for a bit more grass on the pitches, which helped the bowlers quite a bit, and in England for the last two seasons we have seen a lot of swing around. So in general, in those conditions, the bowlers have prospered quite well. In the subcontinent it is perhaps a different matter. The pitches there tend to favour batsmen and bowlers have a bit of a hard time there.

HB: Sanjay, are you generally happy with the health of bowling?

Sanjay Manjrekar: Actually the reason why the bowling is the way it is is because the cricketing conditions have changed a lot since 50-overs cricket flourished. To prepare a good pitch was to prepare a flat pitch, and that started happening due to limited-overs cricket because people wanted to see fours and sixes. So the curators were under pressure to prepare a pitch which is good for run-scoring, and just to make sure that it made for good viewing, runs being scored quickly.

The curators also started making the same sorts of pitches for Test matches. That's when the bowlers started talking about right areas, when they realised that most pitches around the world were flat. What it meant was to bowl outside the off stump, be patient and wait for the batsmen to make a mistake. For a good 10-15 years, they realised that there was nothing in it for them and they have to bowl in the right areas. That is starting to change, as Ian mentioned. Also, the curators have realised that for Test cricket to become more attractive, the crowd also wants some more life in the pitch. So basically everyone is adjusting to the way cricket is changing through various periods and decades.

I would like to believe that the administrators will now react to the market. We live in a world where the market dictates where your product is heading. The administrators will start responding and you will see more life coming into the pitches when they realise that we need balance between the bat and the ball to get the crowds in, to get the viewership back in Test cricket. I liked the pitch at The Oval; it's got something for the bowlers.

HB: Right, I am going to ask both of you to analyse each country. We are not going to look at all 10 countries, but we will look at the top six. We are looking at the bowling side of each country, and we will start with Australia. They have always had a fair tradition of wrist-spin bowling, but Chappelli how to do you rate the fast and fast-medium bowlers in Australia? They have been injury-struck. I mean, Peter Siddle looked a decent bowler, then he got injured; injury has taken Brett Lee out of the game. So are you happy with the state of Australian bowling these days?

IC: I think the pace bowling is pretty good. Doug Bollinger made a big difference to the Australian side when he came in last season; he bowled extremely well in Australia. Ben Hilfenhaus coming back also gives them a bit more variety. Mitchell Johnson is a wicket-taker, and the fact that he has struggled the last two times he has bowled in England, once against England and once against Pakistan, suggests that he needs a little bit more bounce to be at his devastating best.

Nathan Hauritz is steady, and I think he has improved. It is hard work in Australia to be a finger spinner. You need to be an exceptional finger spinner to be successful in Australia. Steve Smith, you are probably looking at another two-three years before he develops, and hopefully he will develop as a bowling allrounder. That's what Australia really needs. They need Smith to be able to bat in the top six, but also be able to get into the side for his bowling. And I think it is probably about two or three seasons away before he gets to that stage. I think Australia, at the moment, are a pretty decent attack - probably more so for Australian conditions than English conditions.

HB: In fact, I was about to ask Sanjay: are they an all-weather, all-conditions bowling side?

SM: That is the key point here, when you are talking about bowling attacks: which conditions are these bowlers operating in? Then you visualise those bowlers or assess their performance from the past results. When you look at bowling attacks from around the world, Australia will still perhaps be number one, because you can imagine that attack being pretty good on Indian conditions and in Sri Lanka as well.

One of the key aspects of bowling, I think, which slowly seamers are discovering, is the length. We were talking about the channel outside the off stump. I think length is the key. When you don't have anything coming from the surface, we have seen Lasith Malinga use the length beautifully to get wickets. We have a history of Pakistan bowlers not worrying about the surface and using the length of their bowling. Getting everything in the air, trying to beat batsmen in pace and not using the surface at all by bowling the ball full. That's where Australia is good. They have got Mitchell Johnson, who uses the length well. Bollinger is also quite happy pitching the ball up. So attacks, especially the Indian seam attack, which depends too much on the pitch, where they look to bowl around good length or short of good length, are the ones that will struggle on flat pitches. Australia and South Africa, to me, are the attacks that can perhaps make an impression in all sorts of conditions.

HB: We will come to those in a minute, one point answer from you - out of 10, how many points for Australia? I don't want you to go into the past.

SM: As they stand today, I would give them 7-8 points on a scale of 10.

HB:Chappelli, 7 points for Australia?

IC: I would give Australia 6.8 points.

HB: Trust you to have that little difference. Let's move on to England, who for the first time are showing a fair amount of consistency in team selection. It's not that you see a different bowler coming in every Test match, as you saw about a decade ago. They have got a swing bowler in James Anderson, they have got a very steady bowler who gets good bounce in Steven Finn, and a hit-the-deck bowler in Stuart Broad. And they have suddenly found this wonderful finger spinner in Graeme Swann, who has just hit 100 Test wickets. How do you rate England?

IC: Well, I think England have got a very good attack and I would be interested in seeing how they go in Australia. I am just not sure how good they would be in Australian conditions. I think Swann is that exceptional finger spinner that you need, and I think Swann should bowl pretty well in Australia. Anderson hasn't proved himself to me yet, and the Australian tour will give him the opportunity to show that he can be a really top-class bowler when the ball is not swinging. That's the other thing that he needs to do to take a step towards being a real top-notch bowler. Stuart Broad and Finn, they should bowl all right in Australia with their height and bounce, but that can also be a bit of trap. If you continually bowl a bit too short in Australia, against batsmen who can play horizontal bat shots, then you can take a bit of caning. So England, I would rate them the best attack at the moment, but that's in their own conditions. In Australia I am just not quite so sure about that.

HB: So in England, 6.9 and in Australia 6?

IC: England in England, 6.95 to be exact, Harsha.

HB: Sanjay, you like what you see with England?

SM: Yes, but as Ian said it's a good attack in English conditions. Also, when you talk about attacks you have to talk about the captain. It is important to know the captain's attitude towards the game, and just watching Andrew Strauss it seems that he likes to play the waiting game. So on flat pitches this England bowling attack might be waiting for just too long, and that could be a problem. So perhaps it's a good attack in English conditions, because they are used to those conditions and there is more help for their seamers. There the captain will succeed in the waiting game if he just keeps bowling outside the off stump. In flat conditions - I am imagining this England attack on a typical Indian pitch like Ahmedabad - it's not a threatening attack.

HB: So how much out of 10?

SM: I will go with about 6 points, just because I think the best spinner in the world is with England right now.

HB: Sorry Chappelli, I did not ask you for England in conditions outside of England? You rated them 6.95 in English conditions. And outside of England?

IC: Probably 6.5 at this stage.

HB: Those are the numbers to beat as we head towards South Africa, which probably has the best new-ball bowler in the world at the moment, in Dale Steyn. There is Morne Morkel, who in those conditions can get good bounce, steepling bounce; he's a tall man. Makhaya Ntini's replacement is not yet visible. Paul Harris and Johan Botha, they have not really set the world alight. Sanjay, your thoughts on South Africa's bowling attack?

SM: When you compare the South African attack with the Australian bowling attack, you see clear difference in their bowling ability. Australians historically have had more ability per bowler in their team. But a South African attack in South Africa is a tough one. If you look at the records of Indian batsmen, all the great Indian batsmen, they have a good record in Australia, but in South Africa all of them have records that are not great.

HB: Why do you think that is the case?

SM: Just tough cricket, I guess. South Africa just play really well at home. Not very attacking - as I said they are quite happy playing the waiting game, bowling outside the off stump. Maybe, just temperamentally they come out differently on their own pitches. They understand them. Just enough help, pace and bounce as well, and that helps them apply the theory of waiting, which works.

I also liked the way they bowled in India in the last series. Steyn was outstanding - he got seven wickets on a flat pitch. Harris, he bowls a negative line and the tactics are debatable, but he keeps pressure on from the other end. So on flat pitches he can complement fast bowlers well. So I like the South African attack in all conditions.

HB: Chappelli, fast bowling looks all right, but maybe not much depth outside of Steyn and Morkel, and in spin bowling. Are you happy with the overall look?

IC: I have got a query against Steyn as well. He is a very fine bowler when he is on, but he strikes me as someone who might be moody. I have seen a couple of times when you think, "What the hell is going on here? He is not doing much." Then suddenly you get a bee in his bonnet and he is a different bowler.

There was a classic example when Phil Hughes got his hundred in Durban. Steyn did not go after Hughes at all until he got the hundred. I was starting to wonder: since when do you have a handicap in Test cricket, where they let you get hundred before they get after you? So that's my query with Steyn. When he is good, he is very good, but he is a little bit moody.

Morkel, I think, has got room for a lot of improvement. If he gets it all together then he could be one of the really top-class quickies around. I think he is improving. He seemed to lose line and length every now and again, but he is cutting down on those occasions.

Their third seamer at the moment would be Wayne Parnell, but he has been injured a bit. They have tried Lonwabo Tsotsobe and Friedel de Wet, but they really haven't got a third seamer. And Harris, to me, is just a good honest, negative bowler, who will try and tie you down. It's a typical South African ploy: try and keep things quiet until your frontline quickies are ready to come back again. Harris has had more success than I think he should have, but that's a credit to him.

I have got Australia, England and Pakistan better than South Africa at the moment. I have South Africa at 6.2 points.

HB: So it's 6.2 for South Africa. This is becoming like gymnastics judges - numbers flashing on the big screen. Sanjay, what's your number for South Africa?

SM: Just a little below Australia. I gave Australia 7-8, so I will give South Africa 7 points.

HB: Now, your favourite side in the world. I know you get excited watching Pakistan. Favourite in that they tingle your senses a little bit. When Pakistan are playing, you don't know what to do. Suddenly Mohammad Amir appears out of nowhere. Mohammad Asif, when you think his career is over, he comes back, maybe five or six kph slower, but he is bowling well. Then a Wahab Riaz comes out of nowhere and picks up five wickets. There is still a Sohail Tanvir somewhere, Shoaib Akhtar, maybe Mohammad Sami, there is Rana Naved… all of them are around. Two years ago the attack was completely different.

SM: That's why you want Pakistan around. I am so glad that we are seeing Pakistan in action. Their top-order batsmen are struggling a bit because they are playing in conditions they don't like.

HB: The conditions are good for their fast bowlers though.

SM: Exactly, but that's been their problem. Pakistan's problem has been the top-order batting, which is getting even more exposed in helpful conditions, but it's the bowling that we have to talk about, and that's where I really get excited with the talent.

And this has got to do with the culture that they have in Pakistan. It's nothing to do with the academies that they have, or some bowling coach who gets them to do their biomechanics well. It's just the kind of culture that they have. If you have an Under-19 selection, and if you ask the kids to line up as batsmen and fast bowlers, then you will perhaps have a longer queue to bowl fast at the nets rather than batsmen wanting to bat.

HB: Everyone is raving about Mohammad Amir?

SM: For a young bowler, he is almost a complete seam bowler, and that very rarely happens. You see fast bowlers develop and become complete after four or five seasons. This guy is really gifted, and when I talk about lengths, these are the guys who bowl the attacking lengths. Again, it's the culture. They have seen the likes of Waqar Younis and Wasim Akram bowl the full-length deliveries, the bouncers, the slower deliveries and everything, and that's why they like to do it as well. Also they have no choice but to do something in the air, because pitches back in Pakistan are like concrete pitches, bowlers' graveyards. But in spite of that, they want to bowl fast and they have so many fast bowlers coming through the ranks. And that is purely because they know that length and they try and get quick in the air.

HB: It's an interesting one, though. They are hardly going to play any international cricket in Pakistan, sadly, by the looks of it. So as all-weather bowlers, 6 points, 7 points?

SM: I am not going to give Pakistan too many points because their problem has been the back-up, which is catching. For good seam bowlers, good fast bowlers, you need a good slip cordon as well. One of the reasons why the 80s attack of the West Indies was great was because they had a great slip cordon. It was like a fishing net behind the stumps. So because the back-up isn't great, I am going to give them about, just 7 points.

HB: Sanjay is the polite one for the bowlers. Chappelli, you are one who is in the sixes; he is in the sevens. What do you think of Pakistan?

IC: I think Pakistan have got a very good attack, and because they are going to play a lot of their cricket in England, I think that suits them greatly. The difference, I would say, between Mohammad Asif, and other bowlers like Steyn and Anderson... Anderson, I think is becoming more consistent, but you still are just not sure what you are going to get. But with Asif, even if he doesn't take wickets, he is going to bowl well, he will beat the bat, and he is a real artist. I think he is a tremendous bowler.

Mohammad Amir is also a terrific young bowler, but the only worry I have about him is that they are going to use him so much that they will wear him out fairly quickly. And Sanjay did point to the fact that they have got a horrible catching cordon. Although it looks like that they might have got a good one with the opening batsman they got in for the Oval Test match, Yasir Hameed. He took a really good catch, and I have seen him take one or two good catches as a substitute. But you never know what you are going to get from Kamran Akmal - some days he's got bricks in his gloves. So that makes it very hard for the bowlers, when sometimes you have to get the guy out three times. Umar Gul is a good bowler; he is a bit inconsistent, but when he is good, he is really good.

They have got quite a bit of talent in spin bowling. Saeed Ajmal is a good bowler and Danish Kameria has got all the ability in the world, but he cannot work out his field placings. I cannot believe that the guy has got about 260 Test wickets and he hasn't got a clue about placing his field. If he ever got his field right and got some sort of plan into his bowling, then he could be terrific.

HB: Maybe he needs a better captain?

IC: Mate, if you are a bowler and your livelihood is depending on you getting wickets then why the hell wouldn't you know what field placing you want? I think he has got a good young captain now. I think Salman Butt is the right guy, he has got stability and is an intelligent young bloke. But I have got a query, as to why the hell the bowler doesn't know what field he wants? I wouldn't put too much blame on the captain.

HB: How much would you rate them Chappelli?

IC: I have given them 6.75 points, and if they had a decent fielding side then they might be about 7.5 points.

HB: [laughs] Now for the last two teams. We are going to club them together largely because they are always playing against each other. So it's almost like they are always together - India and Sri Lanka.

India, I think, has a really desperate problem because their one world-class bowler, Zaheer Khan, is out and I think slowly India have to get used to the fact that Zaheer Khan is not going to be available all the time, because he seems to be carrying a lot of injuries. But the rest of the seam bowling or swing bowling is really about who is not playing, who is injured, who is in the garage rather than driving on the road. And is Harbhajan plateau-ing, I wonder?

SM: Yes, I think that has happened for a while, and I think we have to accept that this is what Harbhajan Singh is all about. In the last five or six years we have expected Harbhajan to bowl differently. When he arrived on the scene he was brilliant. I think it was one of the very rare performances from an Indian bowler, in the series against Australia in 2001, which India won at home. On good pitches he ran through the opposition, a very good batting unit, and won the series for India. That hasn't quite happened with too many Indian bowlers, so obviously that was a rare performance. But after that, with age and playing a lot of cricket, the opposition knows what you are all about, and he hasn't evolved too much, and I think he has stagnated as a bowler. Still, a wonderful bowler whom the captain finds dependable. He is not really going to let you down badly but he is also not going to surprise you with anything different.

HB: But apart from Harbhajan, in what is traditionally considered the home for spin bowling, are the Indian stocks looking bare to you? Do you like Pragyan Ojha? Do you like Amit Mishra? Do you like Piyush Chawla? And there is no one beyond them.

SM: I am not terribly impressed with the two legspinners. I was excited to see Amit Mishra for the first time, but that was in a limited-overs game. After watching him bowl on some decent batting pitches, he looks pretty limited. Of the three you mentioned, Pragyan Ojha could be the pick, but India have some problems with the spin department. And again, it's got to do with the culture that India has - nobody really wants to be a bowler.

HB: And the fast bowlers are just coming and going. Irfan Pathan has come and gone. Ishant Sharma has gone, come, gone, come and now you really don't know where he is. RP Singh has fallen off the radar completely…

SM: I had some hopes from RP Singh, because he looked like a guy who could produce two wicket-taking deliveries on flat pitches. Of the lot, Praveen Kumar to me, if Zaheer Khan is not fit, looks the only bowler who is quite capable of taking wickets right up the order.

HB: Points for India…

SM: From the teams we have discussed, India looks pretty ordinary as a bowling attack. So I would go with 6 points.

HB:Chappelli, can you club the two together and give points for India and Sri Lanka?

IC: Well, they both have got similar sorts of problems - not much depth in pace bowling. Zaheer is very good when he is playing but he seems to be injured quite a lot. Ishant Sharma, I am hopeful, will come back, and it does appear that his performances, certainly statistically - I haven't seen him bowling lately - seem to be improving. Which is good news, because I thought he was a terrific young bowler. Harbhajan, to me, has been a very defensive bowler for quite some time now.

With Sri Lanka, you've got Lasith Malinga, who is terrific. The rest of their pace attack is pretty ordinary. Ajantha Mendis, I think the world's batsmen have worked him out a bit, and I don't think he is anywhere near as dangerous as he was. I haven't seen enough of Suraj Randiv to know much about him.

So I have got India at 6.1 points and Sri Lanka at 5.9 points.

SM: The Sri Lankan attack looks slightly better than India's. If Zaheer Khan is fit then maybe they're on par. But Malinga has come on really well as the strike bowler. He comes in looking to get wickets and he produces some really good deliveries to get some really good batsmen out. Ajantha Mendis, people have worked him out but I love this guy's temperament; he has got accuracy, and he has got a couple of deliveries that will always trouble at least two batsmen from the opposition. Impressed with Randiv. I think he has got good temperament. Maybe skills-wise, he is nowhere in the league of Murali, but there is something there with Randiv that you can work on. So that attack, at this stage, looks better than India's.

HB: So you are going with...?

SM: I think 6 points, close to England.

HB: Okay, we have given points. But if we hadn't given points, we just woke you up at night and asked you the best bowling attack in the world today. It would be…

SM: Australia.

HB: Chappelli?

IC: Well, the first question I would ask is, where they are playing?

HB: All weather.

IC: If it's in Australia, then I would probably go with Australia. But if it's in England then I would definitely go with England.

HB: And the subcontinent?

IC: I might go for England ahead of Australia, because of Swann's ability. Pakistan on the subcontinent would be very difficult, but there again you've still got the same problem. If you can give Pakistan bowlers another fielding side, then they would probably be pretty tough.

SM: I think the challenge in the subcontinent is not as much about the bowling talent you have as how you play as a unit. If you ask the Indian batsmen which is the attack they wouldn't want to face in India, then I think Australia and South Africa would be right up there.

HB: While on the topic of bowling, no one better than Allan Donald to have on the show, and our programme today is all about the state of bowling in the world. Are you happy with the kind of bowlers you are seeing or do you think it's just sort of being phased out a little bit?

Allan Donald: I'm very happily retired right now. The amount of cricket that players play these days… everyone talks about quick bowlers around the world, the likes of Brett Lee who have retired from Test cricket, the likes of Dirk Nannes, who doesn't want to play even domestic four-day stuff, is quite worrying. I think it has taken its toll. The pitches prepared around the world have become an absolute joke. I suppose I speak for the whole fast-bowling fraternity. The flat wickets - you look at the scores these days, it's becoming quite worrying. The volume of cricket has taken its toll on some of the greatest bowlers in the world right now.

HB: Do you think that it is reason why we are not getting a great new crop coming? I know Pakistan keeps throwing up people from time to time. England have just thrown up a Steven Finn, who is not really a fast bowler but a sort of McGrath kind of a bowler. Do you think it's the pitches that are a problem? Didn't you have flat pitches when you and Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and Glenn McGrath and all the others were bowling?

AD: You look at Wasim and Waqar. Those two were the most skilful bowlers on any pitch around the world. Especially in their own backyard, they reversed the ball beautifully. They had real pace through the air. These days you've got Shaun Tait, Dale Steyn and Brett Lee who are capable of doing that, but those two were the most unbelievable. Wasim was the most skilful of all bowlers. He was outstanding whether he was reversing over or round the wicket. You just never knew what was coming.

I don't think we played as much cricket as the modern-day cricketer plays today. The schedules are ridiculous, bowlers are subject to a lot of hard wickets, very flat pitches. It's boring Test cricket to watch at the moment. The recent Test match between Sri Lanka and India in Colombo - I just cringed watching that. That doesn't make for any viewing whatsoever. The wickets were far too flat. So we will see bowlers diminishing as the years go on. Something's got to be done about the pitches.

HB: Interesting you say that because the averages that bowlers are generating are starting to move up as well. Good fast bowlers averaged 22, 23, went up to about 26, 27. They are now going into the high thirties. But there are still a couple of people who are bucking the trend. Dale Steyn would probably have been a good bowler in any generation. Jimmy Anderson, when the ball in swinging around, is all right. So there are still a few good bowlers around. Pakistan seem to have one every Test match.

AD: You have Mohammad Amir from Pakistan. Dale Steyn keeps churning it out. He is a fantastic performer right now. James Anderson as well, swinging the ball through the air. Your skill level has got to be of such a standard in the modern-day game that you've got to move the ball through the air. You've got to have the capability of moving the ball through the air with the new and the old ball on certain surfaces. Steyn keeps doing it. At the moment he's got the best strike rate of any bowler. Pitches are one thing, what really concerns me is the amount of cricket the players play these days. It's the survival of the fittest, really, in all conditions, but we'll just have to monitor the volume of cricket these guys are subjected to these days.

HB: Okay Allan, I am going to put you on the line, almost like someone is facing up to you in your prime. I am going to give you three fast bowling pairs, and you tell me who you rate as best among those. From Pakistan you have Mohammad Asif, who has come back, dropped in pace, but is bowling well with Mohammad Amir. England have got Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad, and in South Africa we have got Steyn and your boy, Morne Morkel.

AD: I'll try not to be biased. At the moment, at Test-match level, Dale Steyn is the best bowler in the world. I would give Morne Morkel just a year or so from now and I think you've got the best partnership in world cricket.

HB: Let's run through all the sides. Your favourite cricket team in the world, Australia - are they struggling with their fast bowling? You are happy with what you see with their overall bowling? There is not much of a spin bowler there; Hauritz is averaging very high.

AD: Mitchell Johnson's very good. They've got a settled attack. They've got one of the better attacks in the world at the moment.

HB: Dougie Bollinger looks all right as well?

AD: I met Doug Bollinger in 2006, during the High Performance Camp. He's become a consistent member of the Australian side. He keeps doing it on all surfaces. A very skilful bowler.

HB: On a scale of 1 to 10, Allan, how many points would you give Australia today?

AD: Around 6 or 7

HB: Let's talk about England - Anderson, Broad, Finn. In English conditions they are very good. How many points would you give them?

AD: 6 or touching 7

HB: You think they will be just as effective in other conditions, or do you think they are a very English-oriented attack?

AD: They're good in English conditions. It'll be very interesting for them to go to Australia during the Ashes and bowl on those flat pitches.

HB: With the Kookaburra ball?

AD: With the Duke ball, they're pretty good. Anderson is the bowler, for me, who really stands out in that regard. Broad is pretty much a line bowler, though he's quite aggressive. But in Australian conditions, with that ball, they're going to need something off the deck as well. So they're going to be tested during the Ashes.

HB: Pakisan, how many points out of 10? As they stand now, because you don't know if three months later they will be the same bowling side.

AD: Five

HB: Okay, that's Pakistan. Though you have already said that you rate Amir high. Now the two teams you've seen a lot of sitting in a television studio - Sri Lanka and India?

AD: Those two sides are battling at the moment. Malinga for me is outstanding, on any surface. India have big problems, especially with regards to how they're going to take 20 wickets. You look at Harbhajan Singh, he's actually leading that attack at the moment, which is worrying.

HB: How many points for Sri Lanka and India?

AD: These are the sides that will struggle bowling people out. 4.

HB: Not bad. I think India would not mind having same points as Sri Lanka. Last one for you: South Africa now have a couple of spin bowlers - in Johan Botha and Roelof Van der Merwe, and Paul Harris is still around. Steyn and Morkel look good. Maybe you still need a replacement for Makhaya Ntini. But I am going to leave that as a last ranking for you.

AD: I don't really see South Africa bowling people out with their spinners. They never have and I don't think they ever will, unless Johan Botha starts playing in the Test side. I don't think Harris is an outstanding bowler. He does a good holding job. But South Africa's seamers Morkel and Steyn, with no more Ntini - I would say they are the same as Australia. 6 or 7.

HB: Okay, Allan Donald wonderful talking to you, and getting your views on fast bowling. Maybe somebody will listen to you and realise that good wickets are not only good for fast bowlers but good for cricket as well. 

Source