Another dose of perspective for me, this time a whole host more pleasant. Our beautiful baby daughter made her grand entrance into this world this weekend which meant that for the first time in living memory, I elected not to play cricket for a reason other than serious injury. And what's more, I discovered that life does indeed still go on.
Of course, my pain was eased by the fact that United did not have a game this weekend, thanks to the Cup semis, which meant I just traded one great love for another, rather than being stuck with a 2-for-1 deal. Not that I would have hesitated for a second.
I'm working feverishly on ensuring that she is a devoted Red -- she's only a few days old, but is already showing a strong affinity for the Park and Rooney (white Pele) songs. That, and good old "Hungry, Hungry" which I discovered just now is actually a Dr. Seuss special!
In any case, to explain the title - a couple of emailers asked why I'd stopped posting, so now you know. I get the feeling I'll be back to it pretty soon, what with being the paranoid dad who sits awake at 3am watching his sleeping daughter!
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Perspective
Sometimes in life, things happen that put it all in perspective. A few days ago, a young cricketer in Northern California was taken from us, the victim of a needless car crash. Fardin Qayyumi was 15, and had just begun to make a mark in local cricketing circles. He was a wonderful young man, and as determined a cricketer as they come. A youngster who had not just the desire to play for his adopted homeland, but the singular intent. He could have achieved his dream, but now we'll never know. His young immigrant family is shattered, in a way that few of us can probably imagine.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Australia on track
Looks like I was close to spot-on. Australia wrapped up the Bangladesh tail, and chasing 307, it's Ponting and Gilchrist at the crease with 95 runs required on the last day. I suppose there's a chance they might finish it before lunch, especially if they don't lose any more wickets, but other than that, I couldn't have called it better. Perhaps I should seek out Pinky and John and place a few wagers.
Bangladesh certainly have an outside chance to pull it off from here - but I think they'll have to get rid of both Ponting and Gilchrist early on for that to become real.
Bangladesh certainly have an outside chance to pull it off from here - but I think they'll have to get rid of both Ponting and Gilchrist early on for that to become real.
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Wisden struggling for original content?
A few times now I've noticed that I'll raise a point in my blog, and in the next couple of days, an article appears on Wisden CricInfo making the precise same point. For some reason, they only seem to get there after I do. I've used that to make myself feel good about former colleagues stealing my ideas (which may or may not be true of course, but keeps me happy nevertheless!).
Now it's gone a step further! The great almanack has gone and put one of my thoughts in print! A few weeks ago, I commented on the way captains are vilified for fielding first and not taking wickets, but not for batting first and not scoring runs. I now read that inside the yellow dust-jacket this year, lies an article by Rahul Bhattacharya, making the same point. What are the odds that he came up with that all by himself?
I will leave it as an exercise for the reader (both of you) to determine just how facetious I am being!
Now it's gone a step further! The great almanack has gone and put one of my thoughts in print! A few weeks ago, I commented on the way captains are vilified for fielding first and not taking wickets, but not for batting first and not scoring runs. I now read that inside the yellow dust-jacket this year, lies an article by Rahul Bhattacharya, making the same point. What are the odds that he came up with that all by himself?
I will leave it as an exercise for the reader (both of you) to determine just how facetious I am being!
What price Australia?
It was supposed to be a waste of time. Bangladesh barely deserved to be in the inner circle of Test cricket. Australia were going to wipe the floor with them, make a point, and head on home. Sure, Ricky Ponting went back on his derisory comments - but what else was he to do in a press conference in the heart of Dhaka?
Now Bangladesh lead by a little under 300, with 5 second innings wickets in hand. The cricket world ostensibly has something to cheer about, with the underdog about to walk off with the most prized scalp of all.
But are they? The last time I remember things getting to this point, Bangladesh had taken a 100 run first-innings lead against Pakistan, set them 260 to win, and reduced them to 99-5, and 200-8. Inzamam-ul-Haq then resurrected his own career, and the near-win has been long forgotten.
After two days, many pundits had written off Australia's chances, quite foolishly. Adam Gilchrist has brought them right back in the game, and I wouldn't bet a lot of money against Ponting, Gilchrist and co. pulling off the win. They'll be thinking they can keep the lead down to 325, and chase it before tea on the 5th day. The romantic in me doesn't want to see that happen, but you've got to consider the harsh realities.
Now Bangladesh lead by a little under 300, with 5 second innings wickets in hand. The cricket world ostensibly has something to cheer about, with the underdog about to walk off with the most prized scalp of all.
But are they? The last time I remember things getting to this point, Bangladesh had taken a 100 run first-innings lead against Pakistan, set them 260 to win, and reduced them to 99-5, and 200-8. Inzamam-ul-Haq then resurrected his own career, and the near-win has been long forgotten.
After two days, many pundits had written off Australia's chances, quite foolishly. Adam Gilchrist has brought them right back in the game, and I wouldn't bet a lot of money against Ponting, Gilchrist and co. pulling off the win. They'll be thinking they can keep the lead down to 325, and chase it before tea on the 5th day. The romantic in me doesn't want to see that happen, but you've got to consider the harsh realities.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Schoolyard football
Super performance on Sunday - we played some top class football, and put Arsenal firmly in their place. It's a shocker that they've gone so far in Europe, but perhaps Villareal and Barcelona will know better than to sit back and give them space to play.
The highlight of the day was of course Kolo Toure's incredible two-palmed save to deny Wayne Rooney when Jens Lehmann had been left for dead. It puts Arsene Wenger's pathetic comments about "playing a fair game" in perspective when his centre-back pulls off a manoeuvre out of a schoolyard rulebook, where the player closest to the goal gets to function as the keeper. Still, even playing the 2-3-5-1 formation with two goalies didn't help.
The new German #1 (boy did I laugh at that) was no better either. His hilarious attempt to get Rio Ferdinand booked when he tripped over his own leg (watch the replay if you don't believe me, it's outstanding stuff) was something to behold. Par for the course for Lehmann, of course.
I'm hoping against hope at this point - it's hard to see Chelsea winning only two of their remaining five games, but all we can do is fight to the end. What is very clear is that we're building up a young team of real quality - once again with the right blend of youth and experience throughout. Bring on next season, I say!
The highlight of the day was of course Kolo Toure's incredible two-palmed save to deny Wayne Rooney when Jens Lehmann had been left for dead. It puts Arsene Wenger's pathetic comments about "playing a fair game" in perspective when his centre-back pulls off a manoeuvre out of a schoolyard rulebook, where the player closest to the goal gets to function as the keeper. Still, even playing the 2-3-5-1 formation with two goalies didn't help.
The new German #1 (boy did I laugh at that) was no better either. His hilarious attempt to get Rio Ferdinand booked when he tripped over his own leg (watch the replay if you don't believe me, it's outstanding stuff) was something to behold. Par for the course for Lehmann, of course.
I'm hoping against hope at this point - it's hard to see Chelsea winning only two of their remaining five games, but all we can do is fight to the end. What is very clear is that we're building up a young team of real quality - once again with the right blend of youth and experience throughout. Bring on next season, I say!
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Judging Sachin
Even Brian Lara himself, no stranger to troughs of woeful form, has now weighed in on the issue. Three pyjama victories on the trot has dulled the focus somewhat, but the questions around Sachin Tendulkar's future remain. Cricket aficionados far and wide are ruminating over his apparent fall from grace, but while I've asked a lot of questions, there can really never be any doubt as to the impact he has had on India and Indian cricket.
Things came to a head in Mumbai, when the members pavilion at his home ground booed him off the field following yet another low score. Not a pleasant sight at all. As Richard Hobson wrote in the Times, it was as if "Zeus was being heckled from the foot of Mount Olympus, except Tendulkar did not have the bolts of lightning to fire back. And if the god Tendulkar is fallible, ... what hope can there be for mere mortals ... ?" Hobson contends that after two operations in a year, and 17 years on the circuit, Tendulkar's body is "telling him to stop." Lara, undoubtedly speaking from experience, assures us that Tendulkar will be back. We'll ignore for now the fact that he said this while in India doing publicity work on behalf of MRF.
There's little I can say about Tendulkar and his cricket that someone else hasn't already said, and I'm certainly nobody to pass judgement. What's more interesting to me is the shift in attitudes towards cricketers that is going on in India. Hobson alludes to Tendulkars god-like status with his Zeus analogy; Nirmal Shekar and others have suggested that the unprecedented booing is no more than reflective of a continued dumbing-down of the Indian cricket spectator. Whether Mandira Bedi and others bear responsibility for that is again a separate question.
The conjunction of the two comments makes for some interesting thinking. It's hard to disagree with Shekar. Today's cricket watcher has been weaned on slap-bang batsmanship, and is less interested in a pure cricketing contest than in a thrill-a-minute instant gratification spectacle. That is the cultural whim of the dot com era. Mahendra Singh Dhoni is the icon for cricketing quality, and that about sums it up. Cricket certainly needs it characters, but there is no substitute for class, alas.
Yet while we purists bemoan this change in attitudes, I think we must concede that there is a bit of a silver lining in all of this. As cricket culture evolves (or perhaps devolves), it may leave in it's wake the demi-god worship that has troubled at least this writer for many years. With a burgeoning middle-class, the needs of the masses in India have changed. Cricket is less and less an inspirational escape from the drudgery of everyday life, and more and more an entertainment channel.
The hope is that this shift leads to less pronounced elevations of human beings to exalted status, and therefore fewer eruptions of mass depression when things don't quite go to plan. Cricket may well be on the path to reclaiming it's status as a game, no more and no less. On the flip side, ignorance could lead to the exact opposite, but I prefer to retain an optimistic outlook in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Back to Tendulkar himself, and the bottom line is that the boos of a small minority will not in anyway tarnish the man's achievements. Many years ago, The Don was a unifying figure in Australian culture. he transcended the then contemporary socio-political climate, and brought together a nation struggling to assert it's own identity. He lives on today as not just the greatest cricketer in Australia's history, but the most revered Australian ever.
The Caribbean had it's Sobers and Richards, and in a similar vein, India has had it's Gavaskar, Kapil Dev, and now Tendulkar. Whatever cricketing heights others may scale, these men have meant something a whole lot greater to their nation, and there is nothing that will ever detract from that.
Things came to a head in Mumbai, when the members pavilion at his home ground booed him off the field following yet another low score. Not a pleasant sight at all. As Richard Hobson wrote in the Times, it was as if "Zeus was being heckled from the foot of Mount Olympus, except Tendulkar did not have the bolts of lightning to fire back. And if the god Tendulkar is fallible, ... what hope can there be for mere mortals ... ?" Hobson contends that after two operations in a year, and 17 years on the circuit, Tendulkar's body is "telling him to stop." Lara, undoubtedly speaking from experience, assures us that Tendulkar will be back. We'll ignore for now the fact that he said this while in India doing publicity work on behalf of MRF.
There's little I can say about Tendulkar and his cricket that someone else hasn't already said, and I'm certainly nobody to pass judgement. What's more interesting to me is the shift in attitudes towards cricketers that is going on in India. Hobson alludes to Tendulkars god-like status with his Zeus analogy; Nirmal Shekar and others have suggested that the unprecedented booing is no more than reflective of a continued dumbing-down of the Indian cricket spectator. Whether Mandira Bedi and others bear responsibility for that is again a separate question.
The conjunction of the two comments makes for some interesting thinking. It's hard to disagree with Shekar. Today's cricket watcher has been weaned on slap-bang batsmanship, and is less interested in a pure cricketing contest than in a thrill-a-minute instant gratification spectacle. That is the cultural whim of the dot com era. Mahendra Singh Dhoni is the icon for cricketing quality, and that about sums it up. Cricket certainly needs it characters, but there is no substitute for class, alas.
Yet while we purists bemoan this change in attitudes, I think we must concede that there is a bit of a silver lining in all of this. As cricket culture evolves (or perhaps devolves), it may leave in it's wake the demi-god worship that has troubled at least this writer for many years. With a burgeoning middle-class, the needs of the masses in India have changed. Cricket is less and less an inspirational escape from the drudgery of everyday life, and more and more an entertainment channel.
The hope is that this shift leads to less pronounced elevations of human beings to exalted status, and therefore fewer eruptions of mass depression when things don't quite go to plan. Cricket may well be on the path to reclaiming it's status as a game, no more and no less. On the flip side, ignorance could lead to the exact opposite, but I prefer to retain an optimistic outlook in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Back to Tendulkar himself, and the bottom line is that the boos of a small minority will not in anyway tarnish the man's achievements. Many years ago, The Don was a unifying figure in Australian culture. he transcended the then contemporary socio-political climate, and brought together a nation struggling to assert it's own identity. He lives on today as not just the greatest cricketer in Australia's history, but the most revered Australian ever.
The Caribbean had it's Sobers and Richards, and in a similar vein, India has had it's Gavaskar, Kapil Dev, and now Tendulkar. Whatever cricketing heights others may scale, these men have meant something a whole lot greater to their nation, and there is nothing that will ever detract from that.
Monday, March 27, 2006
The unbearable greatness of Ponting
Ricky Ponting scored yet another century yesterday. In the first innings, he was reprieved by Boucher on 5, and by Smith and Kallis on 36, he tooks his tally to 29. Now he's reached the big Three-Oh. It is surely only a matter of time before he surges past Tendulkar's 35 centuries and Lara's runs total. The plaudits are ringing from far and wide already - with one writer suggesting that Ponting is now one of the greatest players of all time, and others calling him the greatest Australian batsman since Bradman.
I know I've harped on about this before, but quite simply, these comments smack of either ignorance or prejudice, and I am in no position to say which. A truly great player must demonstrate his prowess in all conditions that he is pitted against. In 14 innings in India, Ponting has scored 172 runs at an average of 12.28. Quite simply, that's not good enough.
Inzamam ul Haq averages 30 in Australia and South Africa, and that is rightly held against him when we come to evaluate greatness. They don't rate in the same bracket, but I draw the parallel only to illustrate that Ponting must be measured by the same yardstick. In a world in which Sachin Tendulkar's greatness is under question, Ponting must conquer his own final frontier before being admitted to that pantheon.
He is a superb batsman, and currently in a patch that is a very deep purple indeed. Nobody can argue with that. He is also a destructive batsman, in the mould of several of the genuine greats, and he has as good a pull shot as I have ever been fortunate to see. It is in fact almost unfair that he has that Indian blot on his record, perhaps desperately so. But it is real, and if he is half the cricketer I suspect he is, then he himself will be all too aware of it.
The real difficulty is that he will have at most one opportunity remaining to set the record straight. Australia's next tour to India will be in October 2010 per the current schedule. Ponting will be just shy of his 36th birthday at that point, and presumably at the tail end of his career. He will have close to 50 Test centuries to his name, and will have rewritten every record in the book, but his place in history will come down to those 4 weeks he spends in the sub-continent. If he doesn't succeed there, or if he doesn't play for that long, then he will forever remain just one notch below the top rung.
Reality Bites, as the movie espoused.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
England Report Card
Andrew Flintoff: A+. And that's just for his outstanding leadership, most notably the way he got his bowlers to execute on specific plans for individual batsmen. There can be no doubt that he has just concluded his second wonderful tour of India, and he led by example with bat, ball, in the slips and everything else. This man can do little wrong at the moment, and will hopefully go on to be one of the genial legends of the modern game.
Matthew Hoggard: A+. Hoggard was absolutely outstanding, and what really stuck out for me was the way he adapted so smoothly to the different pitches. He used the slower ball and other variations to good effect at Nagpur, and when he found some bounce in Mumbai, he was right in at the throat, unsettling batsmen despite his relative lack of pace. He seems to improve with every outing, and while he may not yet be England's strike bowler, he certainly is their leading man.
James Anderson: A. Three years ago, Jimmy Anderson was the pin-up boy of the England side, and was going to go on to great things. Three weeks ago he was a forgotten man enjoying a sunny A-tour in the Caribbean. Today, he's firmly a part of England's quintet of world class seamers. Quite a ride he's been on. His bowling in Mumbai was a revelation to the England camp - control and movement, at a brisk pace, never allowing the batsmen to settle. Harmison and Jones will vault straight past him when they return, but he now knows that he really can belong, and that should bode well for his future.
Alistair Cook: A-. He fell away somewhat after a stunning debut performance, and that's what keeps him from getting a perfect grade. However there can be little doubt that England have unearthed a potential gem - a young batsman with the mental fortitude and technical competence to go a long way in this game. It'll be interesting to see if Marcus Trescothick winds up in the middle order this summer.
Owais Shah: A-. I'm probably being a little generous here, if only because I've followed Owais Shah for many years even if I've never really been a fan, per se. As I've already said elsewhere, he showed remarkable poise and panache on debut, and made it very clear that he was going to assert himself on the game, and not be dictated to. He played both the spinners and paceman with aplomb, and really only misses out on the perfect grade because he failed to turn the 88 into a century, and ran himself out stupidly in the second innings. 120 and 60 rather than 88 and 38, and Kevin Pietersen would have been looking over his shoulder come the summer.
Paul Collingwood: A-. You can't really downgrade a guy who saved his country's blushes with a terrific knock to open up the series, but as one other critic noted, he appeared to bat himself completely out of form over the three weeks. He remains England's best fielder, even if his bowling is clearly not going to cut it in a Test match. With Flintoff and Strauss certain picks, England have to choose 4 from Vaughan, Trescothick, Cook, Bell, Shah, Pietersen and Collingwood. The utility man can't afford a sustained drop in form.
Andrew Strauss: B+. Strauss has not been at his best all winter, with the pitches not suiting his preferred cuts and dabs. However, despite looking unsure as to how to put an innings together, he came to the party with a series-defining century in Mumbai, which probably helped cement his place at the top of the order for some time to come. His fielding and catching were a little up and down, but the same could be said of most in this series.
Shaun Udal: B+. Quite an amazing story, as England's 4th choice spinner came to the fore in a handful of overs after lunch on the final day of the series. You can only be happy for him, as there's every liklihood that he has played his last Test match, and what could be better than to go out like that? He fought hard with the bat as well, even if Darrell Hair did help him out, and showed that a little bit of experience and nous can be a match for the most talented of cricketers. He didn't do much, but he didn't need to, as the hara-kiri attitudes of the Indian tail (beginning at #6) played right into his hands.
Monty Panesar: B-. I debated giving Panesar a C, but at the end of the day didn't have the heart. He flew in as the third-best spinner in team management's eyes, and flew out as the understudy to Ashley Giles. He bowls with a nice loop, and can extract turn and bounce when it's on offer. He was not fazed by anything, until the nerves betrayed him in the final innings at Mumbai with so much on the line. His captain used him intelligently, coaxing the confidence into him throughout the series, and he showed a hitherto unseen stickability with the bat as well. His fielding of course is a throwback to the old days - there could not have been a dry eye in the house when he held out his hands to trap that Dhoni skier and missed by about two yards.
Kevin Pietersen: C+. I realy struggled with this one, because KP was neither here nor there in this series. He had some astounding luck with the third umpire, and he had a bum decision go against him as well. His contributions with the bat were as positive as ever, but he never got away to the extent England may have wished him to. Test cricket is not an easy game, however absurdly talented and confident you might be. He gets the + modifier for his livewire ground fielding which was one of the highlights of the tour. Part of him will be hoping that both Vaughan and Trescothick don't make a comeback this summer - if they do, then his place will be under serious threat.
Stephen Harmison: C. He didn't quite get it right in Nagpur, but he made up for that with a terrific display at Mohali, even if the stats show just 2 wickets taken. The extra yard of pace, and the well-targeted steepling bounce are always going to be a handful, and it's not just Indian batsmen who will be troubled by it. The trouble is, since the Lord's Test against Australia, he hasn't really put in a commanding performance, and it will be his place that Anderson is targeting.
Geraint Jones: C-. I'm always a contrarian when it comes to keepers for some reason, and this case is no different. For my money, Chris Read should be back behind the stumps for England, as there's no doubt that he's a better keeper, and Jones has done little with the bat to justify his continued selection. He certainly salvaged some pride with an improved display in Mumbai, and Duncan Fletcher is known to favour his presence in the side, but he can't have much rope left to play with.
Ian Bell: D. For a batsman who seems to have all the raw ingredients, Ian Bell is rapidly starting to disappoint. He doesn't seem to be able to knuckle down and convert the starts, and it's very hard to see him retaining his place in the side this summer. To give credit where it's due though, he pulled off a couple of good catches at bat-pad, and in general taught the Indians a thing or two about how to field in that position.
Liam Plunkett: F. One of the disappointments of the tour for my money, and instinct tells me that he was rushed in a little too quickly. He doesn't quite seem to have the maturity in his bowling that you need at this level, and he doesn't have the raw pace or magical control that could compensate for that. His batting was also a let-down after his heroics in the ODI series in Pakistan, proving for the umpteenth time that the two forms of the game are completely different.
Ian Blackwell: F. The only reason Ian Blackwell wasn't a disappointment was that I never expected much from him in the first place. A true utility cricketer in the Ronnie Irani mould, he may continue to have a place on the one day squad, but he didn't show anything to suggest that he should be picked once Ashley Giles returns to fitness.
Matthew Hoggard: A+. Hoggard was absolutely outstanding, and what really stuck out for me was the way he adapted so smoothly to the different pitches. He used the slower ball and other variations to good effect at Nagpur, and when he found some bounce in Mumbai, he was right in at the throat, unsettling batsmen despite his relative lack of pace. He seems to improve with every outing, and while he may not yet be England's strike bowler, he certainly is their leading man.
James Anderson: A. Three years ago, Jimmy Anderson was the pin-up boy of the England side, and was going to go on to great things. Three weeks ago he was a forgotten man enjoying a sunny A-tour in the Caribbean. Today, he's firmly a part of England's quintet of world class seamers. Quite a ride he's been on. His bowling in Mumbai was a revelation to the England camp - control and movement, at a brisk pace, never allowing the batsmen to settle. Harmison and Jones will vault straight past him when they return, but he now knows that he really can belong, and that should bode well for his future.
Alistair Cook: A-. He fell away somewhat after a stunning debut performance, and that's what keeps him from getting a perfect grade. However there can be little doubt that England have unearthed a potential gem - a young batsman with the mental fortitude and technical competence to go a long way in this game. It'll be interesting to see if Marcus Trescothick winds up in the middle order this summer.
Owais Shah: A-. I'm probably being a little generous here, if only because I've followed Owais Shah for many years even if I've never really been a fan, per se. As I've already said elsewhere, he showed remarkable poise and panache on debut, and made it very clear that he was going to assert himself on the game, and not be dictated to. He played both the spinners and paceman with aplomb, and really only misses out on the perfect grade because he failed to turn the 88 into a century, and ran himself out stupidly in the second innings. 120 and 60 rather than 88 and 38, and Kevin Pietersen would have been looking over his shoulder come the summer.
Paul Collingwood: A-. You can't really downgrade a guy who saved his country's blushes with a terrific knock to open up the series, but as one other critic noted, he appeared to bat himself completely out of form over the three weeks. He remains England's best fielder, even if his bowling is clearly not going to cut it in a Test match. With Flintoff and Strauss certain picks, England have to choose 4 from Vaughan, Trescothick, Cook, Bell, Shah, Pietersen and Collingwood. The utility man can't afford a sustained drop in form.
Andrew Strauss: B+. Strauss has not been at his best all winter, with the pitches not suiting his preferred cuts and dabs. However, despite looking unsure as to how to put an innings together, he came to the party with a series-defining century in Mumbai, which probably helped cement his place at the top of the order for some time to come. His fielding and catching were a little up and down, but the same could be said of most in this series.
Shaun Udal: B+. Quite an amazing story, as England's 4th choice spinner came to the fore in a handful of overs after lunch on the final day of the series. You can only be happy for him, as there's every liklihood that he has played his last Test match, and what could be better than to go out like that? He fought hard with the bat as well, even if Darrell Hair did help him out, and showed that a little bit of experience and nous can be a match for the most talented of cricketers. He didn't do much, but he didn't need to, as the hara-kiri attitudes of the Indian tail (beginning at #6) played right into his hands.
Monty Panesar: B-. I debated giving Panesar a C, but at the end of the day didn't have the heart. He flew in as the third-best spinner in team management's eyes, and flew out as the understudy to Ashley Giles. He bowls with a nice loop, and can extract turn and bounce when it's on offer. He was not fazed by anything, until the nerves betrayed him in the final innings at Mumbai with so much on the line. His captain used him intelligently, coaxing the confidence into him throughout the series, and he showed a hitherto unseen stickability with the bat as well. His fielding of course is a throwback to the old days - there could not have been a dry eye in the house when he held out his hands to trap that Dhoni skier and missed by about two yards.
Kevin Pietersen: C+. I realy struggled with this one, because KP was neither here nor there in this series. He had some astounding luck with the third umpire, and he had a bum decision go against him as well. His contributions with the bat were as positive as ever, but he never got away to the extent England may have wished him to. Test cricket is not an easy game, however absurdly talented and confident you might be. He gets the + modifier for his livewire ground fielding which was one of the highlights of the tour. Part of him will be hoping that both Vaughan and Trescothick don't make a comeback this summer - if they do, then his place will be under serious threat.
Stephen Harmison: C. He didn't quite get it right in Nagpur, but he made up for that with a terrific display at Mohali, even if the stats show just 2 wickets taken. The extra yard of pace, and the well-targeted steepling bounce are always going to be a handful, and it's not just Indian batsmen who will be troubled by it. The trouble is, since the Lord's Test against Australia, he hasn't really put in a commanding performance, and it will be his place that Anderson is targeting.
Geraint Jones: C-. I'm always a contrarian when it comes to keepers for some reason, and this case is no different. For my money, Chris Read should be back behind the stumps for England, as there's no doubt that he's a better keeper, and Jones has done little with the bat to justify his continued selection. He certainly salvaged some pride with an improved display in Mumbai, and Duncan Fletcher is known to favour his presence in the side, but he can't have much rope left to play with.
Ian Bell: D. For a batsman who seems to have all the raw ingredients, Ian Bell is rapidly starting to disappoint. He doesn't seem to be able to knuckle down and convert the starts, and it's very hard to see him retaining his place in the side this summer. To give credit where it's due though, he pulled off a couple of good catches at bat-pad, and in general taught the Indians a thing or two about how to field in that position.
Liam Plunkett: F. One of the disappointments of the tour for my money, and instinct tells me that he was rushed in a little too quickly. He doesn't quite seem to have the maturity in his bowling that you need at this level, and he doesn't have the raw pace or magical control that could compensate for that. His batting was also a let-down after his heroics in the ODI series in Pakistan, proving for the umpteenth time that the two forms of the game are completely different.
Ian Blackwell: F. The only reason Ian Blackwell wasn't a disappointment was that I never expected much from him in the first place. A true utility cricketer in the Ronnie Irani mould, he may continue to have a place on the one day squad, but he didn't show anything to suggest that he should be picked once Ashley Giles returns to fitness.
Indian Report Card
Scale Used: A = excellent, B = good, C = average, D = below average, E = bad, F = failure
Anil Kumble: A. He has been a star with both ball and bat for India in this series. If anyone rivalled Flintoff for all-round contribution, it was probably Kumble. What is abundantly clear is just how much India needs this man at his best - an India without Kumble is a frightening prospect for Indian fans.
Munaf Patel: A-. Talk about seizing your opportunity with both hands. There has been talk about Munaf and his sheer pace for a couple of years now. We found out that he doesn't really have the pace that was implied, but what he does have is heart, control, and a potentially devastating inswinging yorker. Shades of Waqar, dare I say it, and as long as he keeps working hard at his game, he can be an ever-present in this Indian attack for years to come. What's more, he's pure entertainment with a bat in hand.
Shantakumaran Sreesanth: A-. Much like Munaf, Sreesanth grabbed his chance and bowled with discipline. He's a little more prone to losing his line and length, but he has a nice little outswinger on him, and obviously has the mental fortitude to fight when the going is tough, as his 29* illustrated. I suspect he'll inherit a lot of the Balaji fans looking for their next happy hero.
Mohammad Kaif: B+. Performed with the bat when under pressure, but was not up to his usual standards in the field, and his technique in the close cordon and under the nose was exposed as somewhat comical. He will no doubt feel hard done by, after doing nothing wrong, but his chance will come, probably at the expense of VVS Laxman, and possibly even at the expense of Yuvraj Singh.
Rahul Dravid: B. As ever, Dravid was a rock with the bat, but he never went on to make the big series defining score, and faltered when his team needed him most in the final effort. Furthermore, he has to take the heat for two decisions which, even though I understand the rationale behind them, I believe were poor. Risking the series by playing a batsman short was one, and then compounding that error by bowling first was the second. The theory behind putting England in at Mohali might have been sound, but when your senior paceman is a 21 year old who bowls at 75mph, and his cohorts are in their debut series, that's asking an awful lot. Of course, it's easy to say this with hindsight.
Wasim Jaffer: B-. England regrouped after his superb return to the side, and came to Mohali and Mumbai with a plan, and his sequence of 81, 100, 31, 17, 11, 10 reflect that pretty clearly. However, an average of 40-odd is not a bad return for a man making a comeback and trying to stake a claim. As I've said before, he will hold onto his spot through the South Africa tour in December, but I'm not putting money on anything beyond that. His strokeplay is classy, and his technique far more solid than it was a few years back, but Pollock and Ntini are sure to put Jaffer to the test.
Irfan Pathan: C-. Yes, he may have done a valuable job with the bat, but he's in the side to bowl, and the lack of quality from Pathan in this series was telling. The only medium pacer on either side who performed worse was Liam Plunkett, and he was worse than Geoffrey Boycott's grandmother. I raised the point before that, apart from the hat-trick in Pakistan, Pathan has only performed with the ball in 4 Test matches, two against Zimbabwe, and two against Bangladesh. Hopefully this series will alert him and his coaches to the fact that there is a lot of work to be done. The talent is there, both technically and mentally, but it needs to be shaped. He's only 21, and I'm optimistic, but a bad series is a bad series, and that's what this one was.
Harbhajan Singh: D. The one positive Harbhajan can take out of this series is his final spell in Mumbai, and that wonderful caught and bowled. There was just a hint there that he might yet rediscover the rhythm of his best days. Other than that, he looked about as penatrative as we all thought Shaun Udal would be. Wrong on both counts, I suppose.
Piyush Chawla: D. His performance was mediocre, but young Chawla also showed glimpses of talent, most notably in his temperament, which is absolutely crucial to long term success as a spin bowler. He's had a taste, and that will hopefully have whetted his appetite - he probably has a couple of years in which to establish himself as the successor to Anil Kumble. God knows India need him to come good.
Yuvraj Singh: E. He reverted to type, after flattering to deceive in Pakistan. He certainly played some exquisite shots, including a stellar straight drive off Jimmy Anderson on the final day of the series, but I'm still not certain if he's got Test match quality stamped on him. He will rightfully start in the Carribbean, but another poor series could see the likes of Kaif and Raina leapfrog him in the pecking order. What he needs to do is figure out how to bring some consistency to his Test match game.
Virender Sehwag: E. England had him completely sorted out as far as his batting was concerned, and he was even slower than usual in the field. Sehwag needs to go back to the drawing board before the Indians go to South Africa at the end of the year - in fact, even on the slow West Indian pitches of late, it looks like Edwards and co. will be challenge enough. Another poor series, and his automatic place will be under serious threat. He escapes the F only because of his 76* at Mohali.
Mahendra Singh Dhoni: E. He was lucky to get the one half-century that he did, and he illustrated at Mumbai why many question his ability to serve India well in the longer form of the game. His keeping standards also fluctuated through the series, and he missed a couple of sitters. Parthiv Patel will probably tour the West Indies as Dhoni's understudy, and I wouldn't be surprised if the roles are reversed by the time the team goes to South Africa in the winter.
Sachin Tendulkar: F. It's intriguing to see Sachin struggle now that he is no longer the sole focus of the team, and is not under immense pressure every time he walks out to the middle. Paradoxical as it sounds, he almost appears to be under even more pressure now that he's not. My speculation is really neither here nor there, but perhaps what we're learning these last couple of years is that the man is in fact human. It's pretty much mandatory for genius to be flawed - just look at Brian Lara. Whether Indian cricket can live with that is another question. I expect that he'll be back, and we'll find out whether it's one last hurrah that culminates in a great tour of South Africa and a big World Cup, or whether it goes on as this Indian side rebuilds for the future.
VVS Laxman: F. A little harsh perhaps, given that he faced but one delivery in the series, but then again, it's only his own fault that he didn't face more. One wonders where his career will go from here - he's not a player who has responded well to being in and out of the side, although his skills in the slips alone may ensure that he's on the plane to the Caribbean. If he doesn't perform there however, it is almost certainly the end of the road.
Anil Kumble: A. He has been a star with both ball and bat for India in this series. If anyone rivalled Flintoff for all-round contribution, it was probably Kumble. What is abundantly clear is just how much India needs this man at his best - an India without Kumble is a frightening prospect for Indian fans.
Munaf Patel: A-. Talk about seizing your opportunity with both hands. There has been talk about Munaf and his sheer pace for a couple of years now. We found out that he doesn't really have the pace that was implied, but what he does have is heart, control, and a potentially devastating inswinging yorker. Shades of Waqar, dare I say it, and as long as he keeps working hard at his game, he can be an ever-present in this Indian attack for years to come. What's more, he's pure entertainment with a bat in hand.
Shantakumaran Sreesanth: A-. Much like Munaf, Sreesanth grabbed his chance and bowled with discipline. He's a little more prone to losing his line and length, but he has a nice little outswinger on him, and obviously has the mental fortitude to fight when the going is tough, as his 29* illustrated. I suspect he'll inherit a lot of the Balaji fans looking for their next happy hero.
Mohammad Kaif: B+. Performed with the bat when under pressure, but was not up to his usual standards in the field, and his technique in the close cordon and under the nose was exposed as somewhat comical. He will no doubt feel hard done by, after doing nothing wrong, but his chance will come, probably at the expense of VVS Laxman, and possibly even at the expense of Yuvraj Singh.
Rahul Dravid: B. As ever, Dravid was a rock with the bat, but he never went on to make the big series defining score, and faltered when his team needed him most in the final effort. Furthermore, he has to take the heat for two decisions which, even though I understand the rationale behind them, I believe were poor. Risking the series by playing a batsman short was one, and then compounding that error by bowling first was the second. The theory behind putting England in at Mohali might have been sound, but when your senior paceman is a 21 year old who bowls at 75mph, and his cohorts are in their debut series, that's asking an awful lot. Of course, it's easy to say this with hindsight.
Wasim Jaffer: B-. England regrouped after his superb return to the side, and came to Mohali and Mumbai with a plan, and his sequence of 81, 100, 31, 17, 11, 10 reflect that pretty clearly. However, an average of 40-odd is not a bad return for a man making a comeback and trying to stake a claim. As I've said before, he will hold onto his spot through the South Africa tour in December, but I'm not putting money on anything beyond that. His strokeplay is classy, and his technique far more solid than it was a few years back, but Pollock and Ntini are sure to put Jaffer to the test.
Irfan Pathan: C-. Yes, he may have done a valuable job with the bat, but he's in the side to bowl, and the lack of quality from Pathan in this series was telling. The only medium pacer on either side who performed worse was Liam Plunkett, and he was worse than Geoffrey Boycott's grandmother. I raised the point before that, apart from the hat-trick in Pakistan, Pathan has only performed with the ball in 4 Test matches, two against Zimbabwe, and two against Bangladesh. Hopefully this series will alert him and his coaches to the fact that there is a lot of work to be done. The talent is there, both technically and mentally, but it needs to be shaped. He's only 21, and I'm optimistic, but a bad series is a bad series, and that's what this one was.
Harbhajan Singh: D. The one positive Harbhajan can take out of this series is his final spell in Mumbai, and that wonderful caught and bowled. There was just a hint there that he might yet rediscover the rhythm of his best days. Other than that, he looked about as penatrative as we all thought Shaun Udal would be. Wrong on both counts, I suppose.
Piyush Chawla: D. His performance was mediocre, but young Chawla also showed glimpses of talent, most notably in his temperament, which is absolutely crucial to long term success as a spin bowler. He's had a taste, and that will hopefully have whetted his appetite - he probably has a couple of years in which to establish himself as the successor to Anil Kumble. God knows India need him to come good.
Yuvraj Singh: E. He reverted to type, after flattering to deceive in Pakistan. He certainly played some exquisite shots, including a stellar straight drive off Jimmy Anderson on the final day of the series, but I'm still not certain if he's got Test match quality stamped on him. He will rightfully start in the Carribbean, but another poor series could see the likes of Kaif and Raina leapfrog him in the pecking order. What he needs to do is figure out how to bring some consistency to his Test match game.
Virender Sehwag: E. England had him completely sorted out as far as his batting was concerned, and he was even slower than usual in the field. Sehwag needs to go back to the drawing board before the Indians go to South Africa at the end of the year - in fact, even on the slow West Indian pitches of late, it looks like Edwards and co. will be challenge enough. Another poor series, and his automatic place will be under serious threat. He escapes the F only because of his 76* at Mohali.
Mahendra Singh Dhoni: E. He was lucky to get the one half-century that he did, and he illustrated at Mumbai why many question his ability to serve India well in the longer form of the game. His keeping standards also fluctuated through the series, and he missed a couple of sitters. Parthiv Patel will probably tour the West Indies as Dhoni's understudy, and I wouldn't be surprised if the roles are reversed by the time the team goes to South Africa in the winter.
Sachin Tendulkar: F. It's intriguing to see Sachin struggle now that he is no longer the sole focus of the team, and is not under immense pressure every time he walks out to the middle. Paradoxical as it sounds, he almost appears to be under even more pressure now that he's not. My speculation is really neither here nor there, but perhaps what we're learning these last couple of years is that the man is in fact human. It's pretty much mandatory for genius to be flawed - just look at Brian Lara. Whether Indian cricket can live with that is another question. I expect that he'll be back, and we'll find out whether it's one last hurrah that culminates in a great tour of South Africa and a big World Cup, or whether it goes on as this Indian side rebuilds for the future.
VVS Laxman: F. A little harsh perhaps, given that he faced but one delivery in the series, but then again, it's only his own fault that he didn't face more. One wonders where his career will go from here - he's not a player who has responded well to being in and out of the side, although his skills in the slips alone may ensure that he's on the plane to the Caribbean. If he doesn't perform there however, it is almost certainly the end of the road.
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
India vs England: T3D5
There's not a lot I can add to what is I'm sure already being said about the final 3 hours of this Test series. Still, a few things that caught my eye:
As far as looking forward is concerned - I'll leave that for the report cards that I'll post in the next day or so. Should make for some interesting reading!
- BCCI - the commercial operation goes from strength to strength. I noticed today that the covers of all the team laptops have massive Microsoft and Intel Centrino logos affixed to them, so that when the TV cameras focus in on the pavilion, the advertising is what takes centre stage. It certainly is quite ridiculous, but you simply have to hand it to Lalit Modi and his team for not missing a trick. First the $10 million non-leading arm shirt deal with Nike, and now this.
- Shaun Udal - what a way to come good, in what is probably the last Test match of his career. His experience shone through, and it was clear that once he realised there was turn and bounce for him, he concentrated on simply dropping the ball on a spot, and letting the pitch do the rest.
- Dhoni - I don't want to waste much time here, other than to say that he illustrated clearly why India needs a Parthiv Patel, someone who is an equal or better keeper now, and a vastly more mature batsman.
- Sachin Tendulkar - he top-scored, and didn't look terrible for the most part, but sadly he also appeared to lend credence to my hypothesis. He put away a few rank deliveries, and then got out just when he might have been set. I'm not knocking him in the context of this particular Indian innings, but re-iterating the belief that for some reason, he doesn't seem able to turn a start into a score these days.
As far as looking forward is concerned - I'll leave that for the report cards that I'll post in the next day or so. Should make for some interesting reading!
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
India vs England: T3D4
Highlights from Day Four
This has been a superb Test match for the first 4 days, and with any luck, day 5 will be an absolute corker. Kudos to the curator for an outstanding strip. All four results are not just possible, but plausible, although the Indian victory is probably about as likely as a tie. If England can get 2 or 3 wickets in the morning session, then it's game over, but if India hold on, they will start to believe that they can maintain their grasp on the series trophy. They don't deserve it though - in my book, Andrew Flintoff is well worth a share of the spoils.
- Nasser Hussain - in a great throwback to his tour of India as captain, Nasser Hussain interviewed Paul Collingwood at the start of the day's play and quite shockingly, asked him "Are England looking to win this game?" Times have changed Nasser - fear of defeat does not consume Andrew Flintoff.
- Sachin Tendulkar - hurrah! He hit the stumps! Unfortunately, there was really nothing happening at the time, and both batsmen were well in their ground when it happened. I suppose you have to start somewhere though. I did notice, as I had on Day One, that after releasing the ball, he visibly winced and gingerly massaged his right shoulder. No surprises then when it was announced this morning that he was out of the one day series, and likely the West Indies tour to follow. For once in my life, I can say I know exactly how the great cricketer feels - I'm carrying a very similar injury right now!
- Indian Bowling - the fact that the day opened with Munaf and Sreesanth speaks volumes for the miserable time that Irfan Pathan is going through at the moment. The Indian bowling today was discplined and honest, which it hasn't always been in this series. No co-incidence then that England struggled for runs. The poor fielding continued though - missed catches in the bat-pad areas, and yet another clumsy missed stumping from Dhoni. Kumble and Harbhajan each took a great caught and bowled chance, but one fears it was far too little, and far too late.
This has been a superb Test match for the first 4 days, and with any luck, day 5 will be an absolute corker. Kudos to the curator for an outstanding strip. All four results are not just possible, but plausible, although the Indian victory is probably about as likely as a tie. If England can get 2 or 3 wickets in the morning session, then it's game over, but if India hold on, they will start to believe that they can maintain their grasp on the series trophy. They don't deserve it though - in my book, Andrew Flintoff is well worth a share of the spoils.
Monday, March 20, 2006
India vs England: T3D3
Highlights from Day Three
So what does day 4 hold in store? It's all gone to plan for England thus far. 150 in front, Owais Shah at the crease, and Flintoff and Pietersen yet to come. They'll be looking to bat 60-70 overs, and set India a target of around 375-400, which will be unattainable. India's only hope is to bowl England out by lunch or shortly thereafter. A 4th innings chase of 200-250 could give them a hint of a chance. The draw has got to be the outside bet, given that Sehwag is no Atherton (think South Africa a few years back).
- Mahendra Singh Dhoni -- you know, I'm still not sure about his batting skills, as opposed to his assault skills. However, I have to hand it to him for showing remarkable character and restraint after getting smacked on the back of the skull. His technique is questionable at best, and his attempted duck into the Flintoff bouncer was a joke, but he came out after lunch no doubt fortified by some sage advice in the Chappell Way, and battled it out for his country. Full marks for that.
- Sreesanth -- speaking of spunk, this guy has it in large quantities. He bowled a beautiful probing spell in the evening, despite seeing Yuvraj drop an absolute sitter, and he was desperately unlucky not to have Shaun Udal caught behind. His batting was a revelation - probably to himself as much as to anyone else.
- Hoggard, Flintoff and Anderson -- all were thoroughly impressive, particularly Anderson on his return to the side, given that he pretty much had one shot at staking a claim. They used the pitch intelligently, allowing it to help them, bowling in the right areas and mixing it up, never afraid to have a real go at the batsmen. Of course, in contrast to the Indian attack, they can all get up there in pace, and that makes a big difference. Duncan Fletcher must be thrilled to bits to realise that he has 5 seamers of top quality to work with.
- Srinath and Gower -- their attempted conversations at each break in play are an utter joke. You can't help but wonder if they actually dislike one another. Srinath insists on rambling on and on without letting Gower get a word in edgewise, and Gower is constantly trying to shut Srinath up. Six of one, maybe, but my vote is with Gower, and not just because he was a classy batsman and fielder. That said, Srinath criticising Monty Panesar's fielding was a right hoot!
So what does day 4 hold in store? It's all gone to plan for England thus far. 150 in front, Owais Shah at the crease, and Flintoff and Pietersen yet to come. They'll be looking to bat 60-70 overs, and set India a target of around 375-400, which will be unattainable. India's only hope is to bowl England out by lunch or shortly thereafter. A 4th innings chase of 200-250 could give them a hint of a chance. The draw has got to be the outside bet, given that Sehwag is no Atherton (think South Africa a few years back).
Sunday, March 19, 2006
India vs England: T3D2
Highlights from Day Two:
- Indian Fielding - utterly atrocious. The dropped catches by Sehwag and Kumble stood out, and the overall ground fielding was abysmal. However, the incident that was truly pathetic was Irfan Pathan's catch for six off Flintoff. For an international cricketer to so casually take a catch while stepping over a boundary rope is inexcusable. For one who is used to being on boundary patrol at long leg, it's even worse. I've watched the replay countless times, and there is no reason he couldn't have taken the catch inside the field of play. Greg Chappell must have been livid.
- Munaf Patel - my respect for this young lad continues to increase. He bowled with purpose and intent, and didn't let the lack of support with the ball or in the field get to him at all. Nor was he thrown off by two warnings for running down the pitch. I only wish he had the genuine pace I had heard about for the last two years. If he can push into the high 80s, then he can be something close to a Waqar Younis in his pomp, as early as it is to make such a judgement. He's already got the Queen's English down pat - we saw that pretty clearly!
- Indian Batting - as I've said, with the 5 batsmen selected, you're effectively playing with one batsman, Rahul Dravid. That could not have been more evident last night, especially with the continued feeble efforts of Virender Sehwag and Sachin Tendulkar.It feels as if Sehwag has been dismissed the same way every time I've seen him bat recently, and similarly, this was far from the first time that Tendulkar has poked hesitantly and edged through to the keeper. A great batsman has to respond to being worked out - we'll soon see what Sehwag in particular is made of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)