Cricket Country Articles

Wally Hammond: A life of grace, grandeur and grief

Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:15:08 +0530

The legendary Len Hutton once said he would rather watch one hour of Wally Hammond (above) than 10 hours of Don Bradman. Hammond is one of the game greatest giants who, in all First-Class cricket, amassed 50551 runs with 165 hundreds, captured 732 wickets and pouched 820 catches © Getty Images

Wally Hammond, born June 19, 1903, was a peerless stroke-maker through the off-side, a fascinating combination of grace and grandeur, one of the greatest batsmen of all time, perhaps the best slip fielder ever produced in the game, and a more than handy bowler. Arunabha Sengupta looks back at the life and career of a charismatic cricketer and a complex character.

Runs and roving eyes

Playwright Ben Tavers was at the height of his fame with several of his popular farces already successful at the Aldwych Theatre. He could afford to relax in the winter, travel with the English cricket team and watch the game he loved with the very core of his soul. And he could also afford a pair of high quality binoculars when he went down to Australia to follow the Ashes series of 1928-29.

In the second Test at Sydney, Wally Hammond finally branded the game with the seal of his enormous talent, scoring his first hundred on his 10th appearance. He made it a huge one. According to The Sydney Morning Herald, ‘the charm and variety of his strokes could not be conveyed by figures’, but nevertheless it amounted to 251. Seldom had the ball been glimpsed travelling at a faster clip than it did off his redoubtable willow, especially when he executed some of his spectacular drives. And according to Tavers, the innings left no marks on his bat apart from a perfectly circular indentation, plumb in the middle of the blade.

Tavers also recalled how Hammond made his way towards him every time the players left the field, even in the breaks during his own 461 minute marathon. The Gloucestershire great would borrow the field-glasses, and his enhanced eyesight would sweep across ladies’ enclosure of the stadium,in which sat some of the most beautiful women in the world.

An appetite for runs and an eye for beauty.Handsome of face, immaculate in his whites, debonair with the bat, languid in the covers, sublime in the slips, classical action with the ball. And the most dapper of men off the field, with infinite charm reserved for the coquettish lass, a superb dancer eagerly sought as partner by the most desirable of women… Hammond did look the very image of the Boy’s Own Hero. And the events that came to pass after the Sydney Test seemed to add gloss to the shining armour of thisgallant knight.

At Melbourne he scored 200 and earned a three-wicket win for England. He upstaged a wide-eyed youth playing his second Test for Australia — who answered to the name Don Bradman and fought hard with 79 and 112. In the fourth Test at Adelaide, he became the fourth batsman to score a hundred in each innings. He scored119 and 177 to guide England to a 12-run win. He ended the five Tests with 905 runs at 113.12, easily the highest tally in a series, overtaking Herbert Sutcliffe’s 734 set in 1924-25.

Back in England, he was received with the adulation befitting an all-conquering hero. When he married Dorothy Lister in Bingley Parish Church that spring, extra police had to be put into operation to hold back the swarming crowd. The Bishop of Bradford did the services, and one of the men who sent a telegram apologising about his absence was Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin.

Could there be a more ideal sporting hero?

The obsession with Don Bradman (right) would grow in Hammond s (left) soul. It would make him bitter, prone to outbursts in his Gloucestershire dressing room.In the above picture, the two legends are going out to toss before the 1938 Nottingham Test © Getty Images

The many layers

Unfortunately, things were not as delightful as they seemed.

Within a year and a half, Hammond’s record aggregate for a series would be smashed by that Australian youth who had made his debut in the 1928-29 series. Bradman would score 973 in England in 1930, and would remove Hammond from the throne of the best batsman of the world on which he had perched for a brief wondrous while.

For the rest of his career, at least till the Second World War, Hammond would bat with his customary grandeur, but he would forever be among the leaders of the rest of the rank and file as Bradman led the batting world, separated by a colossal chasm. The obsession with this little Australian man would grow in Hammond’s soul. It would make him bitter, prone to outbursts in his Gloucestershire dressing room.

There were many who would acknowledge his greatness in absolute terms. Len Hutton would rather watch one hour of Hammond than 10 of Bradman. RC Robertson Glasgow would combine his batting, bowling and fielding to call him “quite simply the greatest cricketer”. However, Hammond himself showed little evidence of coming to terms with the shadow of Bradman’s pile of runs.

Indeed, the normally taciturn Hammond, involved in the game through a haze of aloofness, seemed most animated and bristling with excitement during one significant match. It was not for England, but when Gloucestershire held Australia — including Bradman — to a tie in 1930. It was a personal battle he dearly wanted to win. In spite of numerous admirers who swore by the supreme elegance of his craft rather than the cross batted utilitarian run-gathering of Bradman, the gulf in the numbers would forever play on his mind.

Wally Hammond walks out to bat against Australia at Nottingham in 1930 © Getty Images

Besides, there were other problems. Hammond did have a period of tepid courtship with Dorothy before their marriage, but she was far from his type of belle. Decent as a person, a good cook and able house-keeper, Dorothy lacked the attractiveness and flirtatious allure that drew Hammond to women. She was plain and dull. It is often said that Hammond married for money, and was eyeing the fortune of her father, an affluent Bradford merchant. A more temperate way of looking at the great batsman is that he liked her family, especially her father.

But, whatever be the reason for taking the plunge, Hammond did send proposals of marriage to at least a dozengirls — often simultaneously — before tying the knot with Dorothy. And he remained the philanderer, staying away from her, roving eyes settling on the many other women that cricket and fate flung in his way. With the economic downturn of the 1930s, the textile business of her father went through a slump, and the financial cushion was cruelly whisked off from under their relationship. Hammond battled with money problems, Dorothy took to drink. And the way he neglected his wife made him unpopular with his teammates. When he finally divorced Dorothy and married again, it was to a South African beauty queen much younger than him. Eddie Paynter did not cloak the weakness of his great colleague in gracious words when he said: “Wally, well yes, he liked a shag.”

Mercury rising

Marriage and Bradman were not his only problems. In spite of the brilliance of his bat, the lofty feats achieved by his stroke-play, the innumerable voices of cheer that rose from the delighted throngs who revelled at his catching in the slips or the greyhound-swift chases and the tearing returns from the cover boundary, Hammond remained one of the unhappiest and troubled of cricketers throughout his career.

According to Wally Hammond — the reasons why, a fascinating study of this legendary batsman by David Foot, the seeds of sadness were planted on his first tour as a part of a representative England side. Hammond was a reasonably happy 22-year-old at that point, putting on fancy headgear and also playing untutored drums to captain Hon. Lionel Tennyson’s impromptu jazz band. Percy Holmes played the comb and paper, Fred Root fastened some wire onto a wooden framework and called it a harp, George Collins made a dummy saxophone out of a cardboard which he would go red in the face ‘playing’. Hammond was fully into the merriment with a flexatone. In his first representative match, he scored 238 not out. And amidst these highs he was struck by a mystery illness.

It has been described in euphemistic forms as a blood disorder, an infection caused by multiple mosquito bites in the groin area. However, Foot has no doubt that it was one of the sexually transmitted diseases. By the time he was on the ship back home, Hammond was battling with his life.

He was treated with mercury, and perhaps as a result succumbed to the effects of mercury poisoning —and later displayed all the effects of that particular disorder. This included personality change, moods of withdrawal, sudden outbursts of anger, impatience and exaggerated emotional response to circumstances. Forever after that, every teammate, close or distant, admiring or restrained, described him as moody.

It was mainly through the determination of his domineering mother that doctors were desisted from the horrifying act of amputating Hammond’s leg. Gloucestershire County Club diligently paid the medical bills and arranged a trip to South Africa to allow the young star to recuperate. And Hammond repaid their faith.

He came back against Yorkshire in the 1927 season, scoring 135 in the second innings, breaking the umpire’s leg with a booming straight drive. And in the next match against Surrey, he made a century in each innings, hitting one full toss into the front garden of one of the neighbouring houses. Finally, against Hampshire, he struck 192 in two hours and 28 minutes, with six sixes and 27 fours, to complete a thousand before May. The Manchester Guardian wrote, “In scoring his aggregate, it is certain that Hammond has caused not a single yawn to come over any spectator’s face; his thousand runs must have given more than thousand thrills of delight to lovers of brave, skilful, imaginative cricket.”

From there to Test selection was but a short step.

The complete sportsman

Hammond was born of an unplanned pregnancy in Dover. His father was a corporal in the Royal Garrison of Artillery, later a Major. Aged five, Hammond travelled to Hong Kong, where his father had been posted. And at eleven the family travelled again, this time to Malta. Here he played cricket with the sons of other soldiers, with a discarded bat that had a smashed end. Hammond and his friends sawed off the broken part and found the extra-long handle more effective than the shorter blade. It taught him what he considered to be an essential lesson of the game — that a batsman should strike the ball, not pat it.

When he returned to England during the outbreak of the First World War, Hammond was admitted in the Portsmouth Grammar School. His father passed away while he was at school, perhaps kick-starting the aloofness that would increase with years. However, Hammond continued to excel in every sport.

Unusually strong from his outdoor life full of swimming and diving in Malta, he dominated the track, field and pitch. He played in the football team with exceptional speed and wonderful ball-control, made almost all the runs and took most of the wickets for the cricket side, won the school mile in five seconds under six minutes, ran the 100 yards in 11.4 seconds, won the 440 yards, 220 yards handicap, cross-country and hurdles, and created school records in long jump and throwing the cricket ball. It was his headmaster who wrote a letter of introduction to Gloucestershire County Cricket Club, and Hammond made his First-Class debut a month after leaving school. Kent had made some enquiries about the prodigy, and Gloucestershire officials movedquickly, and two committeemen met Hammond’s mother explaining the life of a professional cricketer. After long deliberation — ‘longest hour of my life’ — she relented.

The ban

After a few games however, Hammond was banned. Starting slowly with a string of low scores, he played with a lot of application against Middlesex at Lord’s to score 32. This knock impressed cricket journalist Sir Home Gordon enough to earn some rave reviews. And this in turn led Kent’s omnipresent patriarch Lord Harris to make enquiries about Hammond’s background. It was discovered that he was born in Kent. Harris, with a fanatical fetish for adhering to birth-places in county sides, ensured that MCC banned Hammond for the rest of the season. Although Gloucestershire argued that Hammond had served a two-year residential qualification, MCC was adamant. Harris, incidentally, was born in Trinidad.

Hammond was withdrawn just before the match against Somerset. One of the Somerset players, Peter Randall Johnson, was playing in the side by virtue of being born in Wellington. The administrators had little idea that it was not Wellington, Somerset but the city by the same name in New Zealand.

Hammond did not play for a year, but joined Bristol Rovers and played third division Football. He was a talented winger of great pace, but courted criticism by not going into hard tackles. He obviously feared injury that could waylay his cricket career. He played for three winters, but did not continue once his cricket career was established.

The all-round cricketer

The first few years of Hammond’s career drove cricket loving crowds to paroxysms of delight. When he scored 250 not out against Lancashire in 1925, Neville Cardus wrote, “Yesterday was the gladdest I have spent on a cricket field for years. Young Walter Hammond of Gloucestershire played one of the finest innings that can ever have been accomplished by a boy of his age. To be present at the rise of a star in the sky and to know it is going to be glorious — here is a moment thrilling indeed to men who live their lives imaginatively.” In this innings he drove and hooked five consecutive fours of the fearsome pace of Ted MacDonald. “No other living Englishman could have given us cricket so full of mingled style and power, an innings of strength, bravery, sweetness and light. Not an ounce of power seemed to go to waste,” Cardus gushed.

And as a cover fielder, he had no peer in the world. Often, when the going was slow, the captain was urged to send Hammond into the covers to delight them with fleet-footed chase, and dead on accurate throws.

With time, Hammond would tighten up his game. He would reject the hook shot as too risky. But, the grace and grandeur remained undiminished. And to Cardus he would remain the most majestic of stroke players. Even when he scored 32 on an Australian sticky during the 1936-37 tour Down Under, with more grit than strokeplay on display, Cardus wrote, “The way Hammond continued in the gyrating circumstances to maintain something of his own poise and reasonableness, he was like a cool, cultivated surveyor applying a spirit level in a volcanic region.”Hammond had scored a little matter of 231 in the previous Test.

Through the 1930s, Hammond continued to amass runs with gifted stroke-play. Fielding at mid-off and cover point was a positive ordeal when he unleashed his off-side strokes. There were bouts of run making that were almost scary, although the aesthetics of the methods remained undiminished. True, the 1930s were loaded in favour of the batsman, the pitches true and the bowlers moved to desperation. Yet, some of the achievements of Hammond hint at supreme talent and endless drive.

In New Zealand in 1933, perhaps in the sheer relief of having closed the chapter on the Bodyline tactics, he piled up 227 in the first Test at Christchurch and an unbeaten 336 in the next at Auckland. It was a world record, breaking Bradman’s 334 which he had watched from close quarters at Leeds a couple of years earlier. And in all these deeds, the figure of the little man remained conspicuously at the back of his mind. After going past the record, Hammond had looked skyward, letting out an uncharacteristic scream: “Yes.”

Be it the 167 and 217 versus India in 1936 or the 240 against Australia at Lord’s 1938 or the 138 against West Indies at The Oval before the Second World War brought cricket to a screeching halt, Hammond’s glorious drives thundered through the covers with the might of sporting talent. Robertson-Glasgow summed it up: “The effect on a match of his presence alone … the influence on a bowler’s feelings of the sight of Hammond taking guard at about 11:50 am, when lunch seemed far and the boundary near.”

With seniority, Hammond moved into the slips, and he has seldom been equalled in that position. Len Hutton wrote that he would have “difficulty in naming a greater slip catcher than Hammond.” EM Wellings, writing as late as in 1983, believed: “there has never been a slip fielder to equal him. There have been very good ones, including Neil Harvey and Bob Simpson, but none to equal Hammond’s judgement and mobility.” He would seldom dive, but with his uncanny anticipation would make a catch with ease which the best of slip fielders would not only miss but would also never rate as a miss.

Hutton was effusive about his bowling too. “His bowling was just as graceful as his cricket, and the perfect sideways-on action which any aspiring bowler could copy.”

However, Hammond the bowler never really fulfilled his promise in Test matches. He bowled fewer overs down the years. He could be more than effective, the ideal third seamer, sometimes genuinely quick and could even send down off-spin when necessary. He started with heavy workload in his debut series, a tour of South Africa. It was a necessity given the curious team loaded with slow bowlers unsuited to the wickets. But, down the years, he was often unwilling to bowl too much. This is often related to his saving himself for his batting. But, Roderick Easdale, one of his biographers, links it to yet another facet of his complex character.

The professional and the amateur

The lack of money as a professional cricketer plagued Hammond right through his career till the late 1930s. He developed expensive tastes and moved in circles not suited to his purse. There was a longing for the life of the privileged, and Hammond was acutely aware of the social divisions that created a chasm in cricket teams of the era. He was a professional, but yearned to be an amateur. He almost aped his county captain Bev Lyon, wearing a trilby, having a blue handkerchief protruding from his right pocket, and driving expensive cars. Lyon was frequently invited to dine with the Hammonds. He became friends with Plum Warner — who later turned a strong ally. Professionals often used to be invited by amateurs to stay with them to save on hotel costs. But, it was Hammond invited amateur cricketer Bob Wyatt to stay with him.

The England cricket team that played India in 1936 (standing from left)Harold Gimblett, Arthur E Fagg, Joe Hardstaff, Alf Gover, Stan Worthington, Laurence B Fishlock. Sitting (from left): Hedley Verity, Walter Robins, Gubby Allen, Wally Hammond and George Duckworth © Getty Images

In 1937, Hammond joined Marsham Tyres as director, at a much larger salary that he got at Gloucestershire as a professional cricketer. It allowed him to turn amateur, and paved the way for his appointment as captain of England in 1938. Although Walter Robins had already voiced that ‘no cricketer would object to being led by such a great player as Wally Hammond’, the chances of a professional leading England were low. It took another decade and a half and a World War in between to achieve that.

According to Easdale, Hammond’s lack of inclination to bowl might have stemmed from his preference for the more gentlemanly pursuit of batting. Historically, professionals have been burdened with bowling and amateurs have lorded it at the crease. Hammond might have been subconsciously motivated to bat more and bowl less. However, according to Bradman, if he had not been that good a batsman, he would have been a bowler of a type and quality equalled only by Maurice Tate and Alec Bedser. He did have two five wicket hauls in Test cricket to vouch for his quality.

Wally Hammond batting against India in 1936 © Getty Images

The Leader

Captaincy started well enough for him. The Ashes series was drawn, with England famously and mercilessly putting up 903 for seven at The Oval, Hammond closing the innings only after making sure Bradman had indeed suffered a fracture and would not be able to bat. The following tour to South Africa witnessed three centuries and two fifties from his willow and a narrow 1-0 series win. The West Indies were beaten by the same margin just before the war broke out. Till then in 77 Tests, Hammond had scored 6883 runs at 61.45 with 22 hundreds.

During the war, Hammond joined RAF but did not see active service. He worked as an instructor, a very stern one, and was posted in Cairo. His duties included providing sporting facilities for the men serving there. He travelled around Africa and played a lot of cricket, always drawing huge crowds. All the war time matches were played seriously, but with the onus on entertainment. This was the ideal format for a cricketer of Hammond’s character. His aggressive and stylish strokes provided a spark of brightness to the many living under the constant threat of death. His positive and attacking captaincy during these games set up exciting finishes.

Hammond led England in four of the five victory ‘Tests’ —matchesplayed with much the same atmosphere and spirit of wartime games. He missed one due to fibrosis, but when cricket restarted he was there at Gloucestershire, leading his men with gusto. The county team trained hard, and Hammond the hardest. At 43, he knew he had to keep himself in the best possible shape to continue at the highest level.

The 1938 England team that beat Australia in the fifth Test at The Oval (standing from left): Bill Edrich, Arthur Fagg, Bill Bowes, Len Hutton, Joe Hardstaff, Denis Compton, Arthur Wood. Sitting (from left): Hedley Verity, Ken Farnes, Wally Hammond, Leyland andEddie Paynter © Getty Images

The last Ashes tour

The tour to Australia that followed was a disaster. It is often considered one tour too many embarked on by the great batsman. However, a look at the record books suggests that Hammond was very much the top batsman of England when the team was selected. He had played 19 matches and scored nine hundreds and averaged 84.90 in the series.

Yet, the Englishmen were routed by Australia. And Hammond’s leadership attracted vitriolic criticism from the press and players. According to Denis Compton, the only time the team saw the captain was during the matches. He remained aloof and distant.

However, it is likely that Hammond had been disillusioned. He had approached the tour with an expectation of the type of cricket played during the war and in the victory ‘Tests’, and a relaxed time for the war ravaged players. It was a return for many to the long lost luxury of good and plentiful food. The team was promised “the happiest six months of your life” by their captain. Perhaps that is what they enjoyed in the greater view of things. Everyone put on weight and sent parcels of food back home to England still sticking to war time rationing.

But, the Australians under Bradman played to win. When Bradman resumed his innings in the first Test after an edge off his bat seemed to fly to Jack Ikin at slip, Hammond made his disgust clear. “A fine f*#%ing way to start a Test series,” he remarked. After that Hammond looked distant, letting the game roll on from over to over. Relations remained strained between Bradman and Hammond. The two seldom talked to each other on the tour except at the toss.

The captain of England himself looked a pale shadow of the great player he had been and failed miserably. Suffering from injuries and after effects of fibrosis, he was also not too amused by the press intruding into his private life and splashing the news of his divorce with Dorothy.

After an innings of 79 against New Zealand in his final Test, he announced his retirement and returned to England. On arrival he married Sybil Ness-Harvey, a Durban beauty queen he had met on the 1938-39 tour. Again, she had not been his only mistress in the intervening years, but he did keep the promise of marrying her.

The last days

After his cricketing days were over, Hammond supplemented his income at Marsham Tyres by working as a journalist, covering cricket tours and having ghosted autobiographies written for him.

In 1951, he moved to Durban and earned a sketchy living through a number of jobs that required longer and more arduous hours than in England. His life was made more complicated by a major car accident that he suffered in 1960.

A glimpse of brightness visited him in the last days of 1964. When the English team visited South Africa that season, Hammond made an unexpected visit to the dressing room. The players of the team were both surprised and awed at the great man’s sudden appearance. And Hammond himself was struck by the reverence with which he was received and the popularity he enjoyed. It was perhaps a far cry from his playing days.

A few months after this happy occasion, Hammond died after a heart attack in July 1965.

Conjectures and Refutations

Hammond’s final figures read 7249 runs in 85 Tests at 58.45. The post-War Tests had dimmed his lustre but only just. His medium-paced bowling, and occasional spinners, collected 83 wickets. With 110 catches he is still widely considered to be the best ever all-round fielder produced by England.

In all First-Class cricket he amassed 50551 runs with 165 hundreds, captured 732 wickets and pouched 820 catches.

According to Bradman, his greatest rival, Hammond was “Of lovely athletic build, light as a ballet dancer on his feet, always beautifully balanced, the outstanding batsman between (the Wars). His game was based on driving and nobody was his peer when it came to the cover drive.” But, the rivalry hit Bradman as well, and surprisingly, in his greatest eleven, he included Hammond — as the 12th man.

There were some who felt he was not really comfortable against the fastest of bowling. But, on occasions, he did master some of the most formidable pace bowlers. Charlie Barnett, never a Hammond adherent, admitted: “He did not relish fast bowling, so if he had his way, which he normally did while batting, he took one run off the fast bowler and left his partner to get on with it and do the best he could. The last time I really saw him take on fast bowling was at Trent Bridge in 1932. Harold Larwood was one of several in that match striving for a place on the boat for the winter tour of Australia. Wally played one of the most brilliant innings I ever saw. He stood up and cut the fast, rising ball for runs time and again and it was a wonderful hundred he made.”

There had been occasions when Clarrie Grimmett and Bill O’Reilley tied him down by bowling at the leg stump. But, there had also been many leg break bowlers who barely escaped injuries when drives boomed back towards them.Some even ended up maimed.

Bradman did agree that he did not have an all-out attacking stroke between mid-on and square leg, but he did score through the region with relentless regularity. Sometimes, as a diversion from threading the offside with bullet-like drives off the front and back foot, Hammond did open his shoulders and lift balls over mid-on.

A complex character

As mentioned often, Hammond was taciturn, aloof and moody. During a 700-mile car journey across Australia, his only words to co-passenger Hutton had been, "Look out for a garage. We need some petrol.”

Yet, there was a generous side to him as well. In the benefit match of England and Gloucestershire off-spinner Tom Goddard, Nottinghamshire were all out for 200, and at close Gloucestershire stood at 107 for three, with Hammond on 52. Goddard feared that the game would last only two days, thus depriving him of gate money. Hammond promised his teammate that he would ensure that the match went the full distance. He brought up his century in 195 minutes, double hundred in 305 minutes, and then, having kept his promise, delighting one and all with the last 113 in 80 minutes. Having scored 317, he gave his bat to Goddard to auction.

He was a complex, curious character, but one of the greatest and most graceful batsmen of all time, certainly the finest player through the off-side in the history of the game and one of the most delightful to watch.

(Arunabha Sengupta is a cricket historian and Chief Cricket Writer at CricketCountry. He writes about the history and the romance of the game, punctuated often by opinions about modern day cricket, while his post-graduate degree in statistics peeps through in occasional analytical pieces. The author of three novels, he can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/senantix)

I would not count Zaheer Khan out yet: Dirk Nannes

Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:29:55 +0530

Dirk Nannes, who plays for Chennai Super Kings, has taken 28 wickets in 17 T20 Internationals for Australia © Getty Images

By Saj Sadiq

Dirk Nannes made his debut for Australia in 2009 at the age of 33, just three years after making his first appearance in First-Class cricket. A left-arm seam bowler capable of generating genuine pace, Nannes didn't appear to be destined to play cricket after he devoted a significant amount of time to skiing, going on to compete at World Cup events in the sport.

Nannes retired from First-Class cricket in 2010 after injuries prevented him from participating in the longer format of the game, choosing to concentrate on limited overs cricket. He has experienced success in T20Is, playing 17 matches and taking 28 wickets at 16.39. Nannes was the top wicket-taker in the 2010 World T20, claiming 14 wickets as he helped Australia reach the final of that tournament.

A familiar voice and face in media circles, Nannes regularly plies his trade in Twenty tournaments around the world, representing Chennai Super Kings, Delhi Daredevils, Melbourne Renegades amongst others.

In an exclusive interview with PakPassion.net, Nannes spoke on a number of topics including the standard of fast bowlers in the ICC Champions Trophy 2013, Australia's performance at the tournament, the two new-ball rule and the contentious topic of ball tampering.

Excerpts from an interview:

PakPassion.net (PP): Your thoughts on the Pakistani fast-bowling giant Mohammad Irfan?

Dirk Nannes (DN): I like him. I am surprised it’s taken this long for him to show up in international cricket and why he hasn't been around a bit more. He delivers an awkward bounce and he's generally pretty accurate. He bowls good yorkers, which is surprising because I thought it would have been quite hard to do for him. He's a bit slow around the field, but you're going to get that when you're over seven foot. I like him because he hits the wicket pretty hard. He doesn't give the batsman too much width to play with. I think all the Pakistan bowlers, particularly the left-handers are all very similar in the way they go about their business. They hit a 'first-class' length pretty hard and don't try and float the ball too much to get a lot of swing. They don't try and do too much with it, which a lot of the time can be pretty successful. I think that's the right way to go about it. The little I have seen, I've been impressed with.

PP: Wahab Riaz came into this tournament on the fringes of the starting line-up. However he's impressed and bowled with good pace throughout the tournament. Your thoughts on Wahab and any areas he could develop?

DN: I saw him in the game against South Africa and he bowled pretty well. He bowled fast and accurate. In the past he's been guilty of being a bit inconsistent where he would bowl an absolute genius spell and the next spell he would get belted everywhere. As a fast bowler, sometimes you have a good day and a bad day, but his good and bad days were wildly different; there were probably issues of consistency with him. However, like I said before for Irfan, he has a good intent in terms of hitting the wicket hard. Any bowler that does that is pretty good in my book.

PP: India haven't been blessed with too many fast bowlers in the past. They now have Umesh Yadav, who is capable of cranking it up to 140-145kph. He looks like a pretty good prospect?

DN: If he can stay on the park, for sure! His trouble historically has been is that he gets injured all the time. But he's fast, he's learned to move the ball and he's got a slower ball now. He can also move the ball both ways. He is also strongly built and athletic. He's one of the few shining lights in the fast bowling department for India and there's not that many around to speak of. At the moment they're going fine because they have their full pace barrage up and running. Probably the only exception to that is Zaheer Khan who, when they picked the final squad, wouldn't have been fit and they would have questioned whether he would be fit enough for this tournament. The last couple of games he played in the IPL [Indian Premier League] he bowled exceptionally well, so I wouldn't count him out in future. But for the time being they [Indians] are going well. They've got a couple of good young kids — although, they haven't got an out-and-out paceman, but the youngsters that are coming through. Hopefully, they can keep them in the park, and I'm sure that's what they're aiming to do.

PP: Many observers around the world thought the two white-ball rule was something that would help new-ball bowlers, but it hasn't worked that way in the ICC Champions Trophy.

DN: It might help if the ball was swinging! When it's not swinging the two new balls go the distance — they're good hard balls! Sometimes the advantage for a fast bowler is having a ball 35-50 overs old and it just gets soft and hard to hit. For example, you set a straight field to try and bowl full to get people to hit down the ground to mid-on or mid-off. When the ball is hard, it's very difficult to get a batsman to do that because they can hit the ball 360 degrees around the ground. The two new balls can also make it difficult for the spinners too because it's a newer ball and you can just get whacked everywhere. They thought they'd bring it in to help the bowlers, but don't believe everything you hear! It's a batsman's game after all.

PP: Why hasn't the ball swung at all in the Champions Trophy, barring one or two matches?

DN: I have no idea! Normally, here in England, it swings around corners, or at least in the first few overs. But, the wickets have been very dry. I really have no idea why it hasn't swung but these are unusual conditions for England.

PP: Would you agree that there has been very little seam movement too?

DN: The wickets are too dry — unusually dry and dusty. You don't often see one-day tracks that are so dusty in England. You see that whenever that hovercraft rain cover comes over the wicket and the dust goes everywhere. That's why you're not seeing any seam movement — the wickets are so old and flat. This should not have too much impact on the swing, apart from scuffing the ball up. The first ball of the game you normally get the white ball to 'hoop', but at the moment you're not really seeing that.

PP: We're seeing fielding teams throwing the ball in on the bounce, sometimes two bounces, to try and gain an advantage. Your thoughts on the ruling where the fielding team is being warned by umpires for throwing the ball in on the bounce?

DN: It's a tricky one. As a bowler you are trying to do everything humanly possible to swing the game to your advantage. Throwing the ball into the crease and getting the ball to reverse swing can save your team 50, 60, 70 runs if you can get it done early enough and get the ball hooping for a long period of time. Everyone wants to do it and throwing the ball into the wicket is one way of doing it whilst holding the ball cross-seam is another method. Any way you can rough the ball up is a good thing. Now the umpires over the last three to four years are increasingly cracking down, to the point that one throw and they are on to you. As soon as you throw once [like that], you get a warning for it. It gets frustrating from a bowler's point of view because you can't scuff the ball up. I don't think that this is necessarily the right way to police it, especially with two new balls. You know, there’s all that controversy at the moment about whether England are scratching the ball or not or tampering with the ball. The easy way to fix it would be to let the umpires to decide at the end of an over; "Well I’ve had the ball in my hand six balls ago, now I’ve got the ball in my hand again and it looks completely different to the ball I had an over ago. Let’s not penalise you, but just change the ball."

PP: As they did the other night when England were bowling?

DN: Yes, just change the ball, you don’t have to accuse anyone of anything just change the ball and move on, you know, you’re not trying to tell anyone they are guilty of doing something, you’re just changing the ball and no one should argue with that.

PP: Ball tampering has been a controversial subject over the years and it’s reared its ugly head in the Champions Trophy. Have you seen any evidence of any ball tampering during the tournament?

DN: I haven’t seen any evidence in this tournament, but seeing someone swing the ball in the eight over, my word! I’ve never seen that done before. Yes I don’t understand how people could do that as was the case in the recent England Australia game. Who knows how they got it to happen, but anyways! The trouble that England have at the moment is that they are the best in the world at reverse swing. Everyone is trying to do it; it’s just that they’re getting a lot of flak because they are so successful at getting the ball to reverse swing.

PP: Teams like Pakistan, who’ve been able to do it at will over the years, are struggling with that. Now there are a few raised eyebrows how England can do it so quickly?

DN: I think that’s happened with Pakistan because there is more scrutiny on Pakistan, everyone is watching them. That’s just what happens and sometimes you just need a good proponent of it at mid-on or mid-off or somewhere in the field that can assist in getting the ball to reverse swing — whether that’s through lollies on one side or scratches on the other or whatever else they are doing. You just need someone to look after the ball properly and England are doing that the best at the moment.

PP: What did you make of the recent David Warner and Joe Root incident? Have you ever been tempted to clock someone on the chin?

DN: No, I’ve never been in a fight in my life. I don’t know where the truth lies with that whole thing, so it’s difficult to comment. At the end of the day no matter what has happened, clocking somebody in the bar is never the right decision to make, so clearly Warner is in the wrong. It’s not good for Warner, especially when you know he’s already in the spotlight. Everyone is looking for him to do something wrong. If it was a Phil Hughes or Xavier Doherty you probably wouldn’t even hear about it.

David Warner (right) and Australia captain Michael Clarke talk to the press at Royal Garden Hotel on June 13, 2013 in London, England after the former was suspended for an alleged attack on England's Joe Root © Getty Images

PP: Your thoughts on the Australian bowlers and how they’ve gone about their business in this tournament?

DN: The bowling has been good, I think Clint McKay and James Faulkner have both been good, Mitchell Johnson looks excellent again, Shane Watson’s been good with his subtle variation, he bowls straight and doesn’t give any width. Australia’s problem is just their batting, pure and simple, not much else to it. I think the bowling attack is well suited to the conditions we’ve got at the moment — but it would have been nice to have another quality spinner.

PP: Take Michael Clarke out of the batting lineup and it’s a fair chunk of the experience, the expertise, especially on these kind of wickets. What is Australia’s problem at the moment: good batsmen not coming through or is it just that the wrong ones were selected for the Champions Trophy?

DN: It’s not that the wrong ones that have been selected, you can’t be the best team in the world forever; form comes and goes. You can’t replace all those players. So, at the moment, this is the best Australia have got; it’s not that they are picking the wrong people. Maybe a couple, you could probably put a Dave Hussey or Aaron Finch or a few of those sorts of guys in this team, but by and large there’s nobody who’s knocking or banging the door down, maybe with the exception of Aaron Finch. His form probably demanded that he gets picked but there’s not much else you can do unless someone is scoring thousands of runs at home.

PP: Mike Hussey and Ricky Ponting’s retirements so close together seemed to have hurt the team as well?

DN: Yes, it’s difficult to replace those guys, but life goes on. Both men were on the threshold of retirement for a long time, so Australia should have planned to fill the huge holes that were inevitable by their [Ponting and Hussey] exits. Probably the big thing Australia miss now is someone like a Mike Hussey who debuted age 30 for Australia or older. At the moment there’s no one thirty years old demanding selection or having had thousand run seasons for the last three to four like Mike Hussey would’ve done. There’s just no one of that quality so what do you do.

PP: What are Australia’s chances in the Ashes? Some of the English press and fans seem to think it’s a foregone conclusion; do you think Australia could spring a surprise?

DN: Look, Australia will do well if they can sort out their batting and if Michael Clarke can play. That, of course, is a big deal. And if Watson can make some runs. I also think Chris Rogers in there is a good addition, I think our bowling is going to be alright, and if our top and middle-order can stand up then we will certainly be very competitive. Hopefully, it just turns out to be a great Ashes summer. All you can hope for really is close Test matches. Who knows if Australia are good enough to win or not. I don’t know, but it’s probably too early to tell, but there’s certainly a lot of pressure on England — that’s for sure.

(Saj Sadiq is Senior Editor at PakPassion.net, from where the above article has been reproduced. He can be followed on Twitter at @Saj_PakPassion)

Ravindra Jadeja: ODI career in numbers

Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:23:03 +0530

Ravindra Jadeja has become a genuine all-rounder for India © Getty Images

By Nishad Pai Vaidya

Ravindra Jadeja has made his innumerable critics eat humble pie as he is undoubtedly the most improved Indian cricketer in 2013. The all-rounder has firmly established himself as a vital cog in the Indian one-day machinery and provides the eleven with much-needed balance. His cricketing stocks soared early this year and he has built on them at the ICC Champions Trophy 2013 with impressive performances. The future certainly looks bright.

Since the retirement of Kapil Dev, India have always longed for a stable all-rounder in One-Day Internationals (ODIs). Many candidates came and fell by the wayside. An attempt to get the best out of Irfan Pathan as a batsman backfired as it affected his bowling and he had to fight his way back to the side. His brother Yusuf also provided hope with his hard-hitting batting and gentle off-breaks. However, he was inconsistent and couldn’t hold on to his spot.

In Jadeja, India felt they had someone with genuine all-round potential due to his equal prowess in both departments. However, when he burst on to the scene in 2009, one felt his skills needed some polishing. As a result, he wasn’t able to assert himself and became the butt of all jokes on the social media — a trend that continued until recently.

Jadeja’s ODI career can be broken up into three distinct parts. The first phase is from his debut in February 2009 to December 2010, a point where he was dropped. The second phase begins in September 2011, when he was recalled in England and ends after the Asia Cup in March 2012. The third period begins with his return to the side against Pakistan early this year. A statistical break-up helps one understand his trysts with international cricket.

	M	R	Ave	50s	SR	HS	W	Bowl. Ave	BBI	Eco
Feb 2009-Dec 2010	35	535	31.47	4	76.97	61*	29	42.93	4/32	4.86
Sept 2011-Mar 2012	23	325	25.00	1	81.45	78	28	33.75	4/33	5.14
Jan 2013-present	10	215	53.75	1	93.88	61*	22	13.59	5/36	3.41

Overall	68	1075	31.61	6	81.25	78	79	31.50	5/36	4.72

In the first phase, Jadeja wasn’t very confident with the bat and was slow in the middle. A strike-rate of 76.97 shows that he wasn’t able to adjust to the demands of the format. He wasn’t very effective with the ball either as he scalped only 29 victims in 35 matches at an average of 42.93. Thus, he found himself out of the side and wasn’t considered for the 2011 World Cup.

During India’s difficult summer in England in 2011, Jadeja answered an SOS call with a complete all-round performance at The Oval. He looked a different player as there was more urgency with the bat and more variations with the ball. That form continued into the home series’ against England and the West Indies later that year. However, his numbers took a beating Down Under and he was axed after the Asia Cup in March 2012.

The current phase may be only 10 games long, but there is tremendous promise for the future. His strike-rate with the bat is into the 90s and the Jadeja who was once tentative and cautious is now free-flowing and confident. Test cricket has perhaps helped his bowling as he gives it more air now and can fox the batsmen with his length. An average of 13.59 shows how well he has bowled and kept it tight.

It is imperative that Jadeja performs consistently as he has fizzled out in previous instances. He is a much better player now and there is an air of dependability around him. In the past, his promising runs have ended abruptly as inconsistencies marred his progress. The axe was nothing but a natural conclusion.

A very pertinent fact is that India have lacked patience when it comes to all-rounders — Irfan being a case in point. They lose patience with them far too early and that leads to instability in the ranks, which is why Jadeja should guard against complacency as an inconsistent run may see a few heads roll. With the 2015 World Cup two years away, India would hope he grows into a better player as his progress so far has been heartening.

(Nishad Pai Vaidya is a Correspondent with cricketcountry.com and anchor for the site's YouTube Channel. His Twitter handle is @nishad_44)

ICC Champions Trophy 2013: Final edition throws up a few surprises

Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:19:01 +0530

A new-look Indian side has dominated their opponents in all areas of the game in the ongoing ICC Champions Trophy © Getty Images

By Prakash Govindasreenivasan

In what seems like a good parting present, the ICC Champions Trophy in its final edition has thrown up a few surprises in the group stages that ended with the clash between Sri Lanka and Australia on Monday.

Most of these surprises could not have been better timed, with the 50-over format of the game starting to lose popularity and demand. We are in an era where Twenty20s is being embraced as the new kid on the block while Tests are still likened to a veteran and given its due respect. In such a scenario, One-Day Internationals (ODIs) are clearly going through what is commonly termed as ‘mid-life crisis.’

Here’s what has transpired in the group stages for one last time in the Champions Trophy.

Indians make merry in England

Play videos from India’s tour of England in 2011 in a split screen with their performances in the ongoing tournament and you will see the contrast. Just under two years ago, India was a side that meekly surrendered to the might of the English attack and returned home battered and bruised. Two years hence, here they are, with a new-look side, dominating oppositions in all areas of the game. The celebrated batsmen are retired, some are dropped, the bowling unit is fresh, the squad is inexperienced yet performances and results have a different story to tell. Tigers at home, pussy-cats away? No longer.

The great South African reverse choke

Another major tournament began with a strong South African unit in it. Yet, not many were fully convinced that they have the knack to go all the way. Call it ill-fate or momentary brain fade, South Africa have always underperformed in major tournaments, earning the reputation of ‘chokers.’ However, they turned the tide this time, to prevail in a rain-marred match against West Indies with D/L method calling the shots. It was as if all their unceremonious exits in the last couple of decades were avenged for. In a do-or-die clash, they held their nerve and picked up a wicket off the last delivery bowled before rains took over. West Indies were ahead of the par score till that last delivery. The wicket stretched the par score a bit, leaving the two sides tied. The result meant South Africa would just about scrape through based on Net Run Rate.

Three hundred-plus totals in English conditions

Looking at the way things started off during the warm-up matches, it was as if someone from the backroom staff of the English and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) came up with the idea of bringing ‘drop-in pitches’ à la Kerry Packer’s World Cricket Series. Nothing else could probably explain the flat nature of the wicket, allowing batsmen to score freely and leaving the bowler with much to desire as the ball just refused to swing or seam off the wicket. That however, changed over the course of the tournament but the beginning which saw India chase down 333 against Sri Lanka was rather surprising. India went on to post another 300-plus total in the tournament opener against South Africa, while there a couple more totals in the range of 280-290, with bowlers struggling to find their feet.

Australia’s worst team in a major tournament?

Whether it’s the void left by Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey’s retirement or the longer vision to focus better on the upcoming back-to-back Ashes series, Australia came as the most undercooked side and crashed out before even featuring in the semi-final. Skipper Michael Clarke sounded warning bells when he said that his team was looking to defend their title and win it for the third time in a row. However, that wouldn’t be as they failed to live up to the hype.

It started off with an absolute carnage at the hands of India in the warm-up stages. After letting MS Dhoni’s men pile on 308, they were skittled out for just 65. The worrying part for the side was the fact that the collapse was caused more due to poor shot selection, than exceptional bowling. Clarke’s back injury resurfaced and he ended up watching his side struggle on the pitch, remain win-less and eventually bow out.

New Zealand’s extended run in England… almost!

Brendon McCullum’s team was touted as the underdogs of the tournament. However, they entered the tournament after beating England in England in three-match ODI series. Their ability to carry forward their form and confidence into the tournament saw them give most sides a run for their money.

They started with some good bowling performance and held their nerve in the end to beat Sri Lanka by one wicket in a low-scoring affair. Rain played spoilsport in their next two fixtures and as fate would have, it impacted their position in the tournament. Their fixture against Australia was washed out midway with both teams taking a point each. Against England, rain played a bit of hide and seek in the truncated 24-over-a-side game. England posted 169 from their 24 overs, but rain kept interrupting the match. If it had been washed out before 20 overs of New Zealand’s chase, one point from it would have taken them to the semi-finals. Instead, they ended up 10 runs short and had to depend on Australia to do them a favour and beat Sri Lanka by a small margin. Sri Lanka went on to thump Australia and eliminated both Australia and New Zealand one go. McCullum’s side had displayed fearless cricket over the past couple of months and a spot in the semi-finals would have been interesting.

A fitting end?

The ‘glorious uncertainties of the game of cricket’ have truly come alive and makes for a good send off for the tournament. India, Sri Lanka, England and South Africa will battle it out to get their hands on the Champions Trophy and end its era with their name on it.

Can England clinch their first title after coming agonisingly close in 2004? Can Sri Lanka finally go a step further and win a final? Will a young inexperienced Indian outfit take the honours ? Or will South Africa close the chapter they had started in 1998? That indeed would be life in full circle.

Whatever transpires between now and a couple of days time, it will be a fitting end.

(Prakash Govindasreenivasan is a reporter with cricketcountry.com. His twitter handle is @kya_toh_bhi)

1979 World Cup: India suffer shocking defeat against an Associate Nation

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:40:25 +0530

Duleep Mendis's dazzling strokeplay agaist India was a delight to the eye © Gettty Images

On June 18, 1979, Sri Lanka, the then associate member of International Cricket Council (ICC) stunned India by playing fearless brand of cricket in Manchester. Positive batting coupled with incisive bowling were ingredients of a rare Sri Lankan win which was highly deserved. Sarang Bhalerao revisits the watershed moment in Sri Lankan cricket history.

In 1979, Sri Lanka were the winners of the inaugural ICC Trophy, ahead of the cricket World Cup. The islanders had beaten Israel and Denmark before routing Canada in the final of the competition. By the virtue of that win, Sri Lanka qualified for the World Cup — which was their second World Cup. In the 1975 edition of the competition, Sri Lanka had lost all their three league matches.

Sri Lanka had lost against New Zealand and a washout against West Indies ensured that they were out of the semi-final run. They were now up against Srinivas Venkataraghavan’s India, who had lost their previous two games — against West Indies and New Zealand. The game was a dead rubber; both teams only played for ‘pride’ in Manchester.

India won the toss and put Sri Lanka in on a docile Old Trafford track. Sri Lanka were without their captain, Anura Tenekoon, who had damaged a hamstring the previous day at practice. Bandula Warnapura led the side in Tenekoon’s absence.

After the early loss of captain Warnapura, opener Sunil Wettimuny and Roy Dias took charge of the situation. Wettimuny played eye-catching drives while Dias’s wristy strokes were a treat to watch. The second wicket alliance of 96 off 25 overs laid a solid platform for Sri Lanka. If caution and steadiness were features of Wettimuny-Dias partnership, then Duleep Mendis’s dazzling strokeplay was a delight to the eye. Mendis bashed the Indian attack. He clubbed Kapil Dev, Karsan Ghavri and Mohinder Amarnath for a six each. The Indian attack was clueless in the middle overs.

Ranjan Madugalle was dismissed for four and was replaced by Sudath Pasqual, who was the youngest player of the competition. He complimented Mendis well, adding 52 off seven overs. Mendis made 64 off 57 deliveries, while Pasqual remained unbeaten on 23. Sri Lanka put 238 on the board, which was a fighting total.

The game had started late on Saturday, June 16 and hence at the close of Sri Lankan innings the day ended. India’s run-chase was supposed to begin on Monday morning, since Sunday was a rest day. Chasing 239, India began solidly. The opening pair of Sunil Gavaskar and Anshuman Gaekwad was batting with assurance. They put on 60 for the first wicket before Gavaskar was dismissed for 26. Gaekwad departed soon for 33. At 76 for two, India needed stability and a big partnership.

Dilip Vengsarkar and Gundappa Viswanath provided stability and batted till lunch. India were comfortably placed at 117 for two at lunch, needing further 122 runs off 150 deliveries. Shortly after lunch, Viswanath ran himself out for 22. That led to panic in the Indian ranks. There was a spring in the stride of the Sri Lankans. After that run-out, Sri Lankan leg-spinner Somachandra de Silva took over and wreaked havoc in the Indian batting line-up.

de Silva went through the defences of Brijesh Patel and then dismissed the well-set Vengsarkar and Amarnath as well. Kapil Dev contributed a quick-fire 19-ball 16 but was dismissed before he could inflict any more damage. India were precariously positioned at 162 for seven, needing a further 77 runs.

Fast bowler Antony Opatha returned to bowl after his none-too-impressing spell with the new ball. He worked up pace, good enough to confound the Indian lower-order. He cleaned up the Indian tail — Ghavri, wicket-keeper Surinder Khanna and Bishan Singh Bedi as India were dismissed for 191.

Sri Lanka earned wholesome praises from the entire cricketing fraternity. This performance was one of the main reasons for their ascension to the pinnacle — getting recognised as a Test nation, albeit two years hence.

Brief scores:

Sri Lanka 238 for 5 in 60 overs (Sunil Wettimuny 67, Duleep Mendis 64, Roy Dias 50; Mohinder Amarnath 3 for 40) beat India 191 in 54.1 overs (Dilip Vengsarkar 36, Anshuman Gaekwad 33; Somachandra De Silva 3 for 29, Antony Opatha 3 for 31) by 47 runs.

Man of the Match: Duleep Mendis.

(Sarang Bhalerao hails from a family of doctors, but did his engineering. He then dumped a career in IT with Infosys to follow his heart and passion and became a writer with CricketCountry. A voracious reader, Sarang aspires to beat Google with his knowledge of the game! You can follow him on Twitter here)

Gary Gilmour takes 6 for 14 and then plays a match-winning innings to shepherd Australia into the 1975 World Cup final

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:45:59 +0530

Gary Gilmour's six for 14 was rated by Wisden as the best-ever in ODI history © Getty Images

On June 18, 1975, Gary Gilmour picked up six for 14 and then rescued his side with the top score of the match at Headingley in the World Cup semi-final. Abhishek Mukherjee looks back one of the greatest performances in the history of ODIs.

What is the greatest performance in the history of One-Day Internationals (ODIs)? There have been Viv Richards’s 189 not out at Old Trafford, Kapil Dev’s 175 not out at Turnbridge Wells, and Sanath Jayasuriya’s 189 at Sharjah; on the other hand, there have been Aaqib Javed’s seven for 37 at Sharjah, Courtney Walsh’s five for one at Sharjah, and Shaun Pollock’s five for 36 at Edgbaston.

What about the greatest all-round performances? Yes, they have been there too. On 11 occasions a player has scored a hundred and has taken four or more wickets in an ODI, and on 15 occasions a player has scored a fifty and has taken five wickets.

There have been few that would have matched Gary Gilmour’s performance in the 1975 World Cup semi-final, though. Perhaps none. Scoring runs and taking wickets is one thing. Rip through the opposition with the ball and then win the match with the bat from a hopeless situation is something else. More so if it’s a World Cup semi-final. Especially if it’s at the opposition’s den. And if it’s your third ODI, you’ve never batted before, and have taken three wickets till date, it sounds almost absurd.

Yet that was what Gary Gilmour did. Let us look back at that historic day — perhaps the greatest of all ODI performances.

The England innings

The pitch had been used before in the tournament for the league match between Australia and Pakistan. However, to quote Wisden, “the groundsman had watered it and it looked green and damp.” There was a tinge of green, but it was evident that the moisture might dry up later in the day.

Ian Chappell, the Australian captain, admitted after the match: “The ball seamed all day and the bounce was a bit uneven. It was difficult to get on to the front foot against bowlers of the pace playing in this game and when you got one that kept low — well that explains the LBWs.” He added: “Perhaps it’s a good thing that batsmen do not have it all their own way all the time.”

Chappell won the toss and had no hesitation to bowl first. England opened with Dennis Amiss — possibly the first great ODI batsman — and Barry Wood. After Dennis Lillee had sent down the first over, Ian Chappell brought on Gilmour, the burly southpaw, from the other end, ahead of Max Walker.

It was evident that the Australian fielders were running between overs to get as many overs in as possible before the Sun came out. Or was it because they did not want to bat in the fading light of the evening? Whatever it was, it turned out to be unnecessary.

Playing his first match of the tournament Gilmour somehow extracted unreal movement, both in the air and off the moist surface. It was not every day that Lillee was pushed into the background, but it was simply going to be Gilmour’s day. Sure enough, he soon bowled on the leg-stump that straightened, and Amiss was trapped leg-before for two.

Wood cover-drove Lillee exquisitely for the first boundary of the match, but Gilmour soon pitched one on off-middle, and the swinging yorker made its way through Wood’s ‘gate’, and the off-stump was pegged back. Eleven for two. Wood had looked positive, it was a special delivery.

Lillee, certainly nowhere close to Gilmour’s form, pitched one on the middle stump that Tony Greig flicked for four to bring the home crowd to its feet. At 26 for two, with Greig looking good and Keith Fletcher looking determined, England looked to have found a hold of some sort.

It was then that Rodney Marsh produced a catch that has made his supporters claim that there has been none like him: Gilmour bowled one wide (moving it away from the right-hander for a change), Greig slashed hard, and the ball flew at Ian Chappell at first slip, who was standing reasonably wide; Marsh flew in front of Chappell and somehow managed to come up with the ball in his right glove.

Frank Hayes walked out. The broad-shouldered elegant Lancastrian on-drove to hit the first boundary off Gilmour, but soon shouldered arms to one against the same bowler. Gilmour appealed, and the David Constant raised his finger; replays, however, showed that the ball would possibly have missed the off-stump.

Gilmour followed with Fletcher’s wicket. The ball nipped back in viciously to trap Fletcher leg-before. Gilmour had claimed his five-for, and Fletcher was eventually dismissed for a painstaking 45-ball eight. England were 35 for five, and were in serious trouble now. Gilmour had now become the second bowler in ODI history to have claimed a five-for, the first being Lillee earlier in the tournament. The television commentator confessed that “Alan Davidson would have been proud of a spell like this”.

Alan Knott followed soon for nought: Gilmour pitched one up, Knott played back, and the Constant had no hesitation when the ball hit his pad. Gilmour leapt in joy: he had become the first bowler to pick up six wickets in an ODI, and with figures of six for 10, definitely looked hungry for more.

Lillee had meanwhile given way to Max Walker: Chris Old flashed hard at Walker, and Greg Chappell moved swiftly to his left to complete the catch at second slip. It was the first wicket from the other end, and at 37 for seven, England were as good as out of the match.

Mike Denness, the English captain, soon square-cut Walker hard to become the first batsman to reach double-figures in the match. The shot also brought up the fifty. Soon afterwards, though, John Snow tried to leg-glance Lillee — who had replaced Walker — and the snick landed in Marsh’s gloves. Snow walked.

Walker, with his unusual wrong-footed action, replaced Lillee again after lunch, and finally ended Denness’ resilience by clean-bowling him for 27. He had batted for 60 deliveries, and England, though in a situation less worse than before, were still in a hopeless 73 for seven.

So good was the Australian bowling that Jeff Thomson could not be brought on before the 26th over. He immediately found Geoff Arnold’s edge, but the ball raced to the fence through the slips. Walker ended England’s misery, though, by trapping Peter Lever leg-before: Bill Alley had no hesitation in raising his finger.

England were bowled out for 93 in 36.2 overs: other than Denness, Lever (with 18 not out) was the only one to go past ten; and there were only six boundaries. Gilmour finished with phenomenal figures of 12-6-14-6, while Walker supported him ably with three for 22.

Gilmour’s spell had been rated by Wisden as the best-ever in ODI history. His figures remained the best ODI bowling analysis for eight years till Winston Davis took seven for 51 in the 1983 World Cup (though Imran Khan had equalled Gilmour’s six for 14 in 1985). He was not through, though.

The Australian chase

A target 94 from 60 overs was supposed to be a paltry target, but England had a four-pronged attack in Snow, Chris Old, Geoff Arnold, and Peter Lever; each of the bowlers was a formidable name on a surface whose kind was familiar to them, and when Alan Turner and Rick McCosker strode out to open batting, the English bowlers had vowed to give it back to them.

The openers took the score to 17 before disaster struck: Turner was trapped in front of the stumps to Arnold, and Alley raised the telltale finger. The Chappell brothers were both leg-before off identical deliveries that kept low. Snow — who had managed to generate some serious pace — had removed both in the space of nine balls.

It was then up to the local hero Old to wreak havoc: coming on first-change, he clean bowled the trio of McCosker, Ross Edwards, and Marsh in quick succession in an inspired spell of hostile bowling. Old had taken the three wickets at the expense of two runs from seven deliveries.

Gilmour found himself walking out again, this time to join the inimitable Doug Walters — who was hanging around with uncharacteristic grimness — with the score on 39 for six and 55 runs required. England’s seamers had bowled her back into the match. The 20,000-strong Headingley crowd had found their voices now, and as banners with “’roos can’t play cricket” and other similar slogans came out on the cloudy day at Leeds. It was Australia’s turn to resurrect now.

Walters, despite his reputation as an explosive batsman, went on to average only 25.68 in Tests on English soil, and a similarly measly 19.00 on the ODIs. The crowd expected some stroke play, but did not expect him to last long. Sure enough, Snow found his edge when he tried to fend one off, and the ball raced through the slips.

Gilmour, however, batted with confidence from the first ball he faced, and his confidence buoyed his New South Wales captain. Walters drove one, and square-cut another fiercely — and the target got closer. Other than those two special strokes, he generally preferred to take the backseat.

Gilmour, on the other hand, was as serene as one could imagine. He drove calmly, and cut the occasional delivery. Then, suddenly, something snapped: Gilmour edged one to Greig at second slip, but the chance was spilled. Australia were 78 for six then, and had the catch been taken, England might have managed to scrape through, with only Walker, Lillee, and Thomson to follow.

The catch being spilled, Gilmour took Australia to a victory in no time: the 55-run partnership came up in only 58 balls. Gilmour remained unbeaten on 28 from 28 balls, while Walters hung on with 20. The target was achieved in 28.4 overs with a no-ball and a leg-bye off Arnold.

Jeff Stollmeyer’s choice for the Man of the Match was one of the easiest in history.

What followed

-          West Indies defeated Australia at Lord’s to lift the World Cup. Gilmour picked up five for 48, and finished the tournament with absurd figures of 11 for 62.

-          Gilmour played only one more ODI after the World Cup — against at Adelaide six months later, where he accounted for Lawrence Rowe and Richards, and Australia won the ODI.

-          Gilmour finished with an ODI batting average of 42.00, and picked up 16 wickets from his five ODIs at an incredible 10.31 (along with a strike rate of 20 and an economy rate of 3.09). Strangely, he never played again.

Brief scores:

England 93 in 36.2 overs (Mike Denness 27; Gary Gilmour 6 for 14, Max Walker 3 for 22) lost to Australia 94 for 6 in 28.4 overs (Gary Gilmour 28*, Doug Walters 20*; Chris Old 3 for 29) by 6 wickets with 188 balls to spare.

(Abhishek Mukherjee is a cricket historian and Senior Cricket Writer at CricketCountry. He generally looks upon life as a journey involving two components – cricket and literature – though not as disjoint elements. A passionate follower of the history of the sport with an insatiable appetite for trivia and anecdotes, he has also a steady love affair with the incredible assortment of numbers that cricket has to offer. He also thinks he can bowl decent leg-breaks in street cricket, and blogs at http://ovshake.blogspot.in. He can be followed on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/ovshake and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ovshake42)

Aamer Sohail is not the first to accuse Imran Khan of ball tampering

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:10:29 +0530

Imran Khan (right) leaves court on July 16, 1996 with his lawyer Sir George Carman QC during the libel case in the High Court between Ian Botham and Imran Khan © Getty Images

Aamer Sohail’s charges against Imran Khan have come as a surprise attack from within, but this is hardly the first such allegation against the legendary all-rounder. Arunabha Sengupta traces the numerous associations of Imran and his disciples with the murky art of ball tampering.

Aamer Sohail has dropped a bombshell on the already devastated cricketing landscape of Pakistan with his comment: “Imran damaged Pakistan cricket by encouraging our bowlers to tamper with the ball. This has led to a culture where we can't produce good new ball bowlers or quality openers.”

The former opening batsman shook the cricketing establishment by airing his views in a much-publicised outburst during a televised program. With the nation trying to digest the poor performance of the present team, Sohail has effectively jerked the rosy carpet of past glories from under many blissful feet.

This is a surprise strike from within the very core of the team that had thrived on the vagaries of reverse swing. Especially so because Sohail had been one of the major successes of the team that won in England in 1992, a rancorous affair which ended in charges of ball tampering and libel cases involving Imran Khan, Allan Lamb and Ian Botham.

However, Pakistan cricketers have seldom been a very close knit unit. Neither is this the first time such allegations have been brought up against Imran Khan’s hallowed name. Indeed, there have been far too many such charges and through the years the legendary all-rounder has not really taken pains to deny his role in such practises.

The origins

While the art of swinging the old ball was kept an ingenious secret for long among the pace bowlers of the country, the finer points meticulously whispered into the ear of the next generation, Imran had not been silent about his own curious ability and that of the fellow Pakistani bowlers. He was not known to keep the curriculum vitae of himself and his protégés under cover, even when the techniques bordered on, or sometimes gravely trespassed into, the shady zone.

Yes, it was Sarfraz Nawaz who pioneered the art, sending down unplayable banana like deliveries which confused many. “Yes Lambie, I am the king,” he is supposed to have smugly remarked after beating his Northamptonshire colleague and future High Court opponent, Allan Lamb. With slow, grassless wickets offering little movement off the seam — sometimes none at all — and with the original lacquer that aids traditional swing disappearing rapidly in the conditions, necessity was the mother of invention. It was Sarfraz who pioneered the movement of turning the weakness into opportunity, the disappearing shine into a virtue.

As Wasim Akram recalled, “We started to avoid the usual method of keeping one side polished… instead we kept one side smooth and the other rough. The idea was to weigh down one side of the ball so that it acts as a bias against the other, leading to unexpected and late swing. We would weigh down the smooth side with sweat, spit, earth, mud, so that it would be heavier than the dry, rough side.”

Sweat and spit should not have been a problem, but the use of earth and mud come under the ball tampering violation. But then, Imran and company have not really restricted their tools of the trade just to sweat, spit, earth and mud.

It was Imran who learnt this new art from Sarfraz and added his intelligent artfulness into the fray. With time, he produced dramatic movement with the old ball. “After every lunch or tea interval the ball did crazy things,” recalled Ravi Shastri of an early tour to Pakistan. Once, after the final Indian wicket went down, the ball rolled down behind the wicket to the fine boundary and was picked up by veteran cricket journalist Rajan Bala. There seemed to be something sticky on the red cherry. When Bala asked Imran, his answer was combined acerbic wit and skilful evasion: “Must have been something the Indian batsmen left behind.”

“I got the 12th man to bring on a bottle top”

However, when the action shifted to the temporarily less-volatile fields of English county cricket, Imran was far more forthcoming about his views. According to him, all seam bowlers down the generations have tailored the ball to suit their needs. “I have occasionally scratched the ball and lifted the seam. Only once did I use an object. The ball was not deviating at all, so I got the 12th man to bring on a bottle top and it started to move around a lot.” This was during the county encounter between Sussex and Hampshire in 1981, and the methods remained undetected.

A year later, however, people started noticing. Perhaps aware of the boasts of Sarfraz, Lamb was suspicious about the movement Imran and Mudassar Nazar obtained during the Lord’s Test, when English bowlers seasoned in those conditions could hardly get the ball to wobble. An examination of the ball after the match showed no use of any foreign substance, and Imran attributed the difference in swing to the Pakistani bowlers being ‘more delicate polishers of the ball.’

“It looked like a dog had chewed it”

When Imran took six for six from 23 deliveries, including a hat-trick, for Sussex against Warwickshire in 1983, umpire Don Oslear voiced his suspicions. Although Alvin Kallicharran, who saw the destruction from the non-striker’s end, deemed it the best bowling he had ever seen, others were not that effusive. England seamer Chris Old told the Daily Mirror, “I saw the ball [Imran] had tampered with, and it looked like a dog had chewed it.”

According to Oslear, “This was the first time I had seen one side of the ball scratched and torn with pieces of leather ripped out. The quarter seam had been opened up at a point where it meets the stitched seam and it appeared that some of the stitches had been cut. This allowed a triangle of leather to be pulled up from the surface of the ball, it was a piece large enough to be gripped between forefinger and thumb, and by which the ball could be suspended.”

A report was sent to Lord’s.

“I would not have been surprised if they used knives”

Almost a decade later, Imran’s disciples, Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis, started producing late swing with the old ball. Not too far behind in this particular skill was Aaqib Javed. When New Zealand visited Pakistan in 1990-91, they were convinced that tampering was taking place. On their return, manager Ian Taylor said, “I’m not sure how they did it — whether they used fingernails or sandpaper. I would not have been surprised if they used knives.”

Chris Pringle of New Zealand had experimented with the same tactic during the series and had ended with seven for 52 in Faisalabad.

And much before Sohail, another Pakistan opening batsman actually voiced his reservations about the techniques employed. Surprisingly, this gentleman had been suspected of being a willing party to the same crime. Mudassar Nazar, now Pakistan national ‘B’ coach, declared after the New Zealand tour: “The outlawed practice of roughing up one side of the ball to enhance swing must be eradicated in Pakistan. It’s got to stop.”

Imran, who had not played against the weak Kiwi side, returned to take on West Indies when they visited later during the same season. He marshalled his wards with renowned attention to detail. Pakistan won the first Test at Karachi by eight wickets. Akram and Younis captured 15 wickets in the match and prompted comment from West Indies manager Lance Gibbs. However, according to the Pakistan Board secretary, after being shown the evidence at the end of the match, the former off-spinning great agreed that the ball used by the West Indians were in a much worse condition that the one used by the Pakistanis.

“This looks like one of ours”

In the following summer, Younis turned out for Surrey and picked up 113 wickets. Akram and Aaqib too played with success for Lancashire and Hampshire respectively. Umpire Don Oslear later noted in Tampering with Cricket, “Reports were received by the TCCB [Test and County Cricket Board] from a number of their contracted umpires about illegal interference with the ball by two or three sides, all of which contained a Pakistan Test bowler.” According to Vic Marks of Somerset, when an abused ball was handed around the table at the county captains’ meeting at Lord’s in 1991, many showed signs of recognition. David Hughes of Lancashire ‘gulped’ at the evidence. Ian Greig of Surrey blurted out ‘This looks like one of ours’ — in keeping with the straightforward traditions of the Greig family.

“Yes, I’ve told him to be more discreet when he does it”

Allan Lamb reported a relaxed exchange between Imran Khan and Robin Smith outside the wine bar at St John’s Wood before the start of the Lord’s Test against West Indies in 1991. Imran asked Smith, the Hampshire captain, how Aaqib was doing. According to Lamb: “Robin said, ‘Very well — he is doing a good job for us but has got warned on numerous occasions for tampering with the ball.’ Imran replied, ‘Yes, I’ve told him to be more discreet when he does it’”

“Wasim, Waqar and Aaqib Javed were in clear and direct contravention of those laws”

When the three young Pakistan bowlers were instrumental in the victory in the 1992 series in England, the fallout was as disastrous and much more far-reaching than the Mike Gatting — Shakoor Rana incident of 1987.

In The Botham Report, Ian Botham summarised it as: “At the heart of the controversy lay the conviction of myself, Allan Lamb and several other England players, not to mention Mickey Stewart [the England manager] that the Pakistan bowlers Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis and Aaqib Javed tampered with the ball throughout. I remain convinced to this day that all three of them cheated by contravening the laws of the game… In my opinion, the actions of Wasim, Waqar and Aaqib Javed were in clear and direct contravention of those laws (42.4 Lifting the seam and 42.4 Changing the condition of the ball). Using their fingernails, they made such an unholy mess of the ball at times that a ball that had been in use for 40 or 50 overs looked as though a pack of dogs had chewed it.”

Across three Tests at Lord’s, Headingley and The Oval, the England side collapsed five times, accumulating 221 runs in these capitulations for the loss of 36 wickets. Akram and Younis claimed 24 of those wickets. In the fifth Test at The Oval, Mickey Stewart declared that he knew how they did it. He did not say more, but the implications were obvious.

Shambles or cover up or both

In the One-Day International (ODI) at Lord’s during the tour, the umpires were forced to take action. Because of rain, the match was extended into a second day, and during the lunch interval, umpires Ken Palmer and John Hampshire, with third umpire Don Oslear, decided to replace the ball. This was prompted by a complaint from Lamb. Match referee Deryck Murray was informed.

According to Oslear, “What followed was a shambles or cover up and most likely both, with neither the TCCB, which appointed the umpires, nor the International Cricket Council (ICC), which appointed the match referee, prepared to state why the ball had been replaced …” These curious methods of averting eyes and looking the other way are supposedly ways that cricket is kept ‘A Gentleman’s Game’.

However, the English dressing room was enraged and Botham tipped off the press. Lamb went further, writing his column for Daily Mirror giving it the provocative title: “How Pakistan cheat at Cricket.”

According to Pakistan coach Intikhab Alam, however, the ball was changed because it had gone out of shape, and the change had been made at the behest of the Pakistan team!

Akram maintains that it was the silence of match referee Murray that led the speculations and ball tampering allegations. However, very few believed no tampering had taken place.

“Silencing the Sacrificial Lamb”

Agitated by the controversy brought about by Lamb’s article, TCCB slammed him with a £5,000 fine and followed it up with a £1,000 fine on Surrey for ball tampering during the previous season. Donald Saunders of Telegraph wrote under a headline ‘Silencing the Sacrificial Lamb’: “Now we are left to conclude that talking to newspapers about controversial incidents in an international match is far deadlier a sin than cheating in a County Championship.”

“Why should it be such a crime?”

While Lamb was considering challenging the fine in court, he was warned by the authorities that his stand might result in diplomatic issues and involve race riots. And at this juncture of his confusion, the doyen of manipulating the condition of the ball, Imran Khan himself, delivered a telling reverse strike in an article headlined “Cheats Tag Rooted in Colonial Attitudes”.

According to Imran, “They accuse us of doctoring cricket balls, with one side of the ball apparently scratched by the bowlers. Why should it be such a crime to do that?”

Don Oslear’s reply to this almost inane question is documented in Tampering with Cricket as: “Because it is against laws of cricket. In my remarks to Lord’s about Imran in 1983, I did not accuse him of cheating, although the weight of evidence pointed that way and is now endorsed by his own admission.”

However, Imran was vehement about Lamb’s accusation — linking it to racist taunts from sections of Edgbaston and Headingley crowds in the 1980s, the infamous Sun headline ‘Paki cheats’ and even Ian Botham’s ill-advised comment about Pakistan being the place to send one’s mother-in-law. Lamb and Botham filed for libel against Imran, and famously lost the case.

Lamb however successfully defended the libel case brought on him by the original master of reverse swing, Sarfraz Nawaz. It was his claim that he had been libelledin Lamb’s original article in the Mirror. However, during the proceedings, the controversial Pakistan bowler dropped charges saying, “There are nine young girls on the jury who don’t know the difference between a football and a cricket ball. We should have a multi-racial jury, instead we have 11 English people.” Lamb was awarded the costs.

Allan Lamb (centre) leaves court on July 16, 1996 with wife Lindsay (left) and Kathy Botham [wife of Ian Botham] during the libel case in the High Court between Ian Botham and Imran Khan © Getty Images

“I don’t call that ball tampering”

In his autobiography, Wasim Akram devoted an entire chapter to denying the charges — naming the section ‘England’s Bad Losers’. According to the book published in 1998: “I’m certain the English camp tried to catch us out in 1992 because they failed to understand that they had been undermined by a radical new bowling technique… At various stages we all do little things to help the ball along. When I want it to get drier to aid reverse swing, I’ve thrown the ball on the square, into a rough patch… I’ve taken mud off the seam and raised the seam with my finger, but so has many another bowler. Sometimes when my grip isn’t too good, I’ll put mud or earth on the seam and wet my fingers, but I don’t call that ball tampering.”

It seems that Imran Khan has not only done a remarkable job passing on the secrets of the trade to his celebrated successor, but has also successfully handed him the baton of righteous indignation bordering on ridiculousness.

Well, the English, specifically Mike Atherton, were caught with dirt in their pocket only two years after all the furore of 1992. Since then, a full Test match between the two countries has been forfeited because of ball-tampering charges. A Pakistani captain has even chomped down on the cricket ball.

The controversy has been given a new shot in the arm, but Imran Khan is no stranger to it.

(Arunabha Sengupta is a cricket historian and Chief Cricket Writer at CricketCountry. He writes about the history and the romance of the game, punctuated often by opinions about modern day cricket, while his post-graduate degree in statistics peeps through in occasional analytical pieces. The author of three novels, he can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/senantix)

ICC Champions Trophy 2013: The difference between India and Pakistan

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:02:46 +0530

The true state of Pakistan's batting now lies in front, as clear as the midsummer sky © Getty Images

By Zain Abid

The Champions Trophy 2013 was a debacle for Pakistan in every sense of the word. The team played three and lost all three — indeed, outclassed.

Sometimes unprecedented failure can do wonders.

Had Pakistan somehow bowled West Indies out before 170, as they were so close to doing so, and had the batsmen somehow chased down 235 even after losing nine wickets against South Africa, the team would have been in the semi-finals. Regardless of what would have happened after it, the nation would have given the boys a pat on their backs for showing tremendous fight and will power. Thank God that did not happen!

The true state of Pakistan’s batting now lies in front of us as clear as the midsummer sky. Pakistan’s destroyer has been its batting, the failure of which during the Champions Trophy can be branched into three core issues:

The unavailability of good, quality batsmen

Consider this: How many batsmen from the current Pakistan team would make it to the Indian starting 11?
Take our two most relatively successful batsmen. Would they even make the cut? Would you choose Nasir Jamshed over Rohit Sharma or Ravindra Jadeja? Would you choose Misbah-ul-Haq over Virat Kohli, Suresh Raina or MS Dhoni?

I seriously doubt it. It speaks volumes about the batting talent that Pakistan have to offer.

A lot has been said about Kamran Akmal not deserving a place in the batting line-up. The bitter truth is Pakistan does not have a better wicketkeeper-batsman than him. Its supply talent is choked.

The absence of international cricket in Pakistan has hurt its cricket. Slowly, but surely, the galli cricket tradition is also disappearing. It is naive to deny it. Pakistan are just not selecting good enough players anymore. The nation’s domestic cricket is in shambles and its college and school cricket withering.

The Pakistan Cricket Board needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

The selection

I do not know what the selectors were thinking while penning the team for the Champions Trophy.

Imran Farhat had a decent series against South Africa, but he failed miserably in the two games against Ireland. What was the need of another opener, who had been tried and tested four times, when we already had Jamshed, Mohammad Hafeez and Akmal?

If the selectors wanted to play Akmal down the order and needed another opener, Ahmed Shehzad or Shahzaib Hasan were all reasonably viable options.

Shoaib Malik’s last batting milestone was a century against India in September, 2009. Four years down the line, he has not had a single half-century to his name in the One-Day International (ODI) format. And Pakistan seldom uses him as a bowler. One wonders why he still made the cut.

There was not a single dynamic pinch-hitter in the team. No Hammad Azam, no Shahid Afridi, no Umar Akmal and no Abdul Razzaq. If Afridi, Razzaq and Umar Akmal needed to be dropped, they needed to have been replaced by effective pinch-hitters.

The management absurdly backed the young Umar Amin to bat at No 7, where he isn’t accustomed to, even in First-Class cricket. Amin is a proper top-order batsman, a steady timer of the ball; he is not a big hitter.

The captaincy

Personal performances aside, Misbah has failed to inspire the team. The difference between Pakistan’s approach and that of the Indian team was apparent. The Pakistan batsmen bat to save their wickets, whereas Indian batsmen bat to score runs. Pakistan are batting with the mindset of trying to stay at the crease long enough for the runs to magically come by.

Misbah needs to be more proactive. He needs to be more attacking. He needs to instill confidence in the team. The players need to be attacking, not reckless. There’s a fine line between the two, and playing at the top-most competitive level, you expect the players to realise what that line is.

Totals of 170 runs, 167 runs and 165 runs prove that Pakistan’s batsmen failed to score more than 170 on dry wickets. This is a country that has produced legendary batsmen like Zaheer Abbas, Javed Miandad, Inzamam-ul-Haq and Saeed Anwar, so one cannot write off Pakistan as a country that only produces fast bowlers and the occasional exceptional spinner.

(Zain Abid is currently studying at Lahore University of Management Sciences. The above article has been reproduced with permission from http://tribune.com.pk/)

ICC Champions Trophy 2013: Have India-Sri Lanka clashes lost the shine?

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:56:35 +0530

India and Sri Lanka will face each other in the ICC Champions Trophy 2013 semi-finals © Getty Images

By Nishad Pai Vaidya

It is almost as if fate mysteriously conspires to setup India-Sri Lanka contests. While the two teams have faced each other innumerable times in bilateral and tri-nation tournaments in the last few years, they invariably clash at the big events as well. An Australian fight-back in the last league game of the ICC Champions Trophy 2013 ensured that Sri Lanka finished second in Group A — a result that set up a semi-final encounter against India on June 20 in Cardiff.

India and Sri Lanka are two fantastic One-Day International (ODI) outfits. India have a young side that has bashed preconceived notions and are expressing themselves in the middle. On the other hand, Sri Lanka have a unique blend of youth and experience that is eying a new era. However, the surprise element of the contests between the two sides is lost and the levels of excitement would be tempered as the semi-final approaches. There clearly has been an overkill of India-Sri Lanka cricket.

Since the end of the 2007 ICC World Cup, India and Sri Lanka have faced each other 44 times. India have been the dominant side — winning 26 of those matches. All these encounters have been spread across four bilateral series, six tri-nation tournaments, three Asia Cups and a World Cup. While the clashes in tourneys such as the World Cup and the Asia Cup are unavoidable, the boards of both countries could have avoided the meaningless bilateral series and a few unnecessary tri-nation events.

To get a broader understanding, one must look at these events chronologically (excluding the multi-nation tournaments). India played Sri Lanka in the Commonwealth Bank series Down Under in early 2008. The same year, they toured the Emerald Isle and played five ODIs. Early in 2009, India obliged again by visiting Sri Lanka for another five-match affair. In September 2009, they were involved in a tri-series with New Zealand and towards the end of that year, Sri Lanka visited India.

Having played each other throughout 2009, one would have felt that the two teams would have taken a break from each other. Wishful thinking? In 2010, they played each other in three tri-series — in Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka. By these standards, the frequency of their match-ups reduced and they only came across each other for a full series in 2012 for the Commonwealth Bank tri-series Down Under, followed by another five games in Sri Lanka.

Such overkill beats the very purpose of the ICC’s Future Tours Programme (FTP). The basic principle underlying that is that teams should face each other at home and away for optimum number of games maintaining a balance between all sides. It almost looks as if that India and Sri Lanka find no one but each other to play. Through all that, an Indian Premier League (IPL) angle has also emerged.

The West Indies were supposed to host Sri Lanka for Tests, ODIs and T20Is in April this year according to the FTP. However, since players from both sides are involved in the IPL, the boards decided to do away with that. Instead, they scheduled a tri-series in June, the third team being — India. So, the two sub-continental giants would move from the cloudy backdrop of England to the sunny setting in the Caribbean. This is yet another example of an avoidable face-off.

Keeping the facts and statistics aside and moving to the field of play, there are no secrets between the two sides. Both know each other’s strengths and weaknesses in and out. Sri Lanka’s major players also hone their skills at the IPL alongside the Indian stars. That too diminishes the aura of such games as there can be a predictable pattern to them. They would know how to react to each others’ game plans and the suspense wears out.

Poor scheduling and administrative greed have resulted in such a scenario. Due to the constant encounters, games like the upcoming Champions Trophy 2013 semi-final lose their sheen and excitement. The boredom is inevitable and it wouldn’t be surprising if some of the players share the same opinion.

(Nishad Pai Vaidya is a Correspondent with cricketcountry.com and anchor for the site's YouTube Channel. His Twitter handle is @nishad_44)

ICC Champions Trophy 2013: India’s performances make them overwhelming favourites

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:52:18 +0530

Victory in the ICC Champions Trophy 2013 may just be the tonic Indian cricket needs © Getty Images

By Dhananjay Devasper

Indian cricket was in a siege when Mahendra Singh Dhoni arrived in England. The team built a protective wall around itself to insulate itself from the negativity arising out of the spot-fixing and betting issues in the Indian Premier League (IPL). But adversity brings out the best in champions and India have unmistakably shown that quality thus far in the ongoing ICC Champions Trophy 2013.

Right from the start of the tournament they have emerged as a dominant force. Whether it was chasing down over 300 runs against Sri Lanka and decimating Australia in the warm-up matches, or putting up an emphatic display of some top-class cricket in the group stages, the Indian team has risen like a phoenix to emerge as favourites going into the semis.

In Rohit Sharma and Shikhar Dhawan, they have discovered a fearless opening pair — and a very productive one at that. At the top of the order, two century partnerships and Rohit Sharma rediscovering form should allow Dhoni to breathe a little easier as far as the team’s opening woes are concerned. And isn’t it ironic that Rohit Sharma should suddenly find his calling as an opener, very similar to Sachin Tendulkar? After all he was touted to replace Tendulkar a while ago, but he never let his performances match his talent.

Dhawan is proving to be a class act. Two consecutive centuries, which were a mixture of caution, aggression and some audacious strokeplay, have firmly put the spotlight on him. He has a confident swagger of someone who is ultra-confident, yet not cocky. Indian fans will be praying for him to continue in this vein in their quest for the trophy.

It almost seems that no discussion on the Indian cricket team will be complete nowadays without discussing ‘Sir’ Ravindra Jadeja, who has quite clearly given his captain huge options by his abilities as a wicket-taking bowler. He has been brought on when the going has been rough for India and he has responded with crucial breakthroughs. And he’s brilliant on the field as well — one of the best in the world.

The bowling, however, continues to be a bit worrisome and could be India’s Achilles' heel in the semi-finals or final. Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav continue to leak runs at crucial junctures in the game, giving the opposition a sniff of a chance to pull themselves back in the game. Bhuvneshwar Kumar, with his medium-pace, is surprisingly the best among the three seamers. In the first two group matches it was the spinners who swung the match in India’s favour, when it looked like the opposition had the measure of India’s bowling.

But the biggest surprise of the tournament has to be India’s fielding which has got the kind of attention that is normally reserved for teams like South Africa and Australia. Young, athletic fielders like Virat Kohli, Jadeja, Rohit Sharma, Suresh Raina, Dinesh Karthik and Dhawan have made India the best fielding side in the tournament.

Victory in the Champions Trophy tournament may just be the tonic Indian cricket needs to ward off the negativity of the IPL.

Stay tuned…

(Dhananjay Devasper is an "IT guy" by profession and a sports fanatic at heart. He has an unbridled passion for sports and Indian achievements in sport. Extremely opinionated, he attempts offering perspectives around sports which are simple to understand and easy to relate with)

Australia: Anatomy of a disaster

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:46:10 +0530

George Bailey-led Australia crashed out of the ICC Champions Trophy 2013 after their 20-run defeat to Sri Lanka in London © Getty Images

By James Marsh

George Bailey has his critics, but on Monday he achieved the impossible by making poor Michael Clarke grimace at something other than his cursed vertebrae. It was a slovenly piece of running from the affable Australian stand-in captain ambling towards what he thought was the non-danger end — he clearly hadn't studied Sri Lanka's previous exploits in this tournament — and up on the balcony the official skipper covered his face in his palm as his replacement was caught a long way short of his ground.

Bailey, as is often stated, is easy to warm to. With his midwest American farm boy smile ever present despite constantly being caught in the eye of whatever cyclone Australian cricket is most recently swept up in, he resembles a poor man's Kim Hughes on Valium — a decent, twinkle-eyed chap under immense pressure in the midst of a failing national side but who, rather than exiting in an explicable flood of tears, remains charmingly oblivious to it all and is happy to take the positives, moving forwards and so on. The only time there has been any genuine ill-feeling on record towards the Tasmanian was when an executive of Channel Nine claimed Bailey would be "flipping burgers" if it wasn't for the money the station invested into cricket, which, given the paucity of that network's coverage is rather like President Assad claiming Syrian rebels would be fecklessly unemployed if it wasn't for him.

Clarke, though, was justified in his frustration towards the dozing Bailey on this occasion, but the stand-in captain's lot is not an easy one. In 2010 he himself replaced Ricky Ponting — absent due to the death of his grandmother — as Australia took on Sri Lanka at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) in 2010.

Despite having the visitors staring into the barrel at 107 for eight chasing 240, somehow, Clarke allowed the match to fatally drift as Angelo Mathews (with the sort of swashbuckling knock he used to play), Lasith Malinga and Muttiah Muralitharan stole one of the most unlikely One-Day International (ODI) victories in history. On Monday, it seemed as if Australia's last-wicket pair might do something similar to Mathews's side, and thus allow New Zealand to proceed instead, which would have been an ironic, arsenic-laden cherry on top of the rotten form the Sri Lanka skipper has taken to and maintained throughout his time at the helm. It didn't happen, however, and Bailey was again left to front up to the cameras with not even a consolation win to lend authenticity to his impervious grin.

Despicable

James Sutherland, Cricket Australia's Chief Executive Officer, labelled David Warner's punchy exploits in a Birmingham Walkabout "despicable", and he's entitled to lay it on thick when a member of his staff transgresses to the embarrassment of the firm.

CA's culture of high morality and homework clearly isn't working, however, and the national side is now left with a state of affairs where David Gower's recent claim that Australian cricketers can turn "feral" now looks ludicrous as well as slightly nationalistic.

Sutherland and Arthur, with their self-assessment forms and condemnation, are turning Australia into the anti-feral — a toothless beast, albeit with nice cheekbones and good manners — which comes across well in defeat, a scenario happening increasingly often. This isn't about meterosexuality, peroxide or underwear shoots — the easy targets often used as an generational excuse for the side's failings — but more an attitudinal shift to a scenario where maintaining outward decency seems of greater importance than the side's recent indecent results.

Ironically, it was actually Bailey who broke with establishment protocol when he labelled Warner's behaviour a "minor incident", an admission which brought him admonishment from those who've bought into the new Australian cricketing culture of sweetness and apple pie. Perhaps they are correct, and Bailey was wrong to term an apparent physical assault as such, but as his nation lurches onward directionless, Warner's fist and even Clarke's spine seem ever more irrelevant compared to the more general weaknesses afflicting the body cricket in Australia.

(James Marsh is a TEFL teacher based in the Czech Republic, although his real occupation is alienating those close to him by wallowing on statsguru. He blogs on cricket at Pavilion Opinions and can be found on Twitter at @PavilionOpinion)

Kapil Dev’s ODI record 175 not out masterminds World Cup’s "Great Escape" after India were reeling at 17 for 5

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:19:17 +0530

Kapil Dev on the way to a ODI record 175 not out off 138 balls against Zimbabwe in the World Cup at Nevill Ground, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, on June 18, 1983. India won the match by 31 runs and later won the tournament © Getty Images

June 18, 1983. The idyllic setting of the Tunbridge Wells cricket ground was witness to extraordinary fireworks as Kapil Dev engineered a remarkable victory from the veritable jaws of defeat. Arunabha Sengupta recounts the epic 175 not out that rescued India from possible elimination, and paved the way for the miraculous World Cup triumph.

Mythological proportions

It has gone down as probably the grandest of legendary cricketing feats of India, told and retold from generation to generation in words of wonderment and awe. As if to add to the almost mythological proportions of the innings, no moving images exist in public domain. BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation] was on strike on that spectacular day and no professional video camera recorded Kapil Dev perform that miracle fit for fantastic fables. It is a pity, an immense loss, but in some ways fitting as well. It allows us to pay homages to a hero with the spark of imagination, much like our recounting of the majestic feats of historical heroes of yore.

This is perhaps one innings that deserves to be embellished by fanciful extrapolation with each retelling, and not suffer from the imperfections of reality — the excruciatingly difficult skier missed by Grant Paterson on the boundary when Kapil was in the nineties, a flurry of fortuitous strokes that veered in the air before falling safe in no-man’s land, a mingling of mishits that sped to the short boundary on one side aided by the pitch located on the very edge of the square of Tunbridge Wells. Indeed on one side of the ground there were just singles, fours and sixes. The same strokes gained innumerable threes on the other side. But, every great feat requires dollops of fortune. And whatever be the minor imperfections, this was a supreme innings that took Indian One Day cricket by the scruff of the neck and dragged it to unprecedented, unchartered levels.

A defeat might have meant a very deep hole in the tournament from which India might have never been able to climb out to feature in the semi-finals. And at nine for four and 17 for five, a loss seemed likely before lunch. In the end, the win demonstrated to the team that the realms of impossibility could be trespassed with utter disdain for the most prominent writing on the wall. India went on to beat Australia in the next game — comprehensively and with conviction. And then they won the semi-final and final in two matches etched in glorious cricketing folklore. But, this was the match — to be precise, this was the innings — that proved to be the watershed moment in the history of Indian cricket.

There are associated tales of some Indian spectator capturing the action on his hand held video camera. But, if such a film exists, it has escaped the ken of millions of cricket-lovers who yearn to catch a glimpse of the splendid deed. The innings lives on in our fantasies, like the fairy tales it so remarkably resembled.

Over before lunch?

The Tunbridge Wells cricket ground is beautiful, if quaint and small — an hour away from London, tucked away in the Kent countryside. EW Swanton described it as “no mean contender for the most delectable cricket ground in England.”

For such an idyllic setting, it has been the scene of untold violence. In 1913, the pavilion was set on fire by militant suffragettes, amounting to more than a thousand pound in losses. And seventy years later, Kapil Dev set it ablaze yet again with his furious strokes scorching the turf and sizzling through the atmosphere.
The small ground was packed with a large crowd, mainly expat Indians, making their way between the marquees and hospitality tents around the playing arena. And most of them were forever happily singed by the fireworks of Kapil’s bat.

The start was anything but auspicious. Kapil called correctly and decided to bat, on a pitch providing bounce and encouragement to seamers. Peter Rawson and Kevin Curran — excellent bowlers both in such conditions — opened the operations for Zimbabwe and made the ball move sharply off the seam and bounce disconcertingly past wary bats.

Sunil Gavaskar pushed forward defensively down the wrong line, and the very second ball from Rawson caught him plumb in front of the stumps. Partner Krishnamachari Srikkanth tried to pull Curran, and the top edge was taken superbly by Iain Butchart, running thirty metres backwards from mid-on. Neither of the openers troubled the scorers.

Mohinder Amarnath failed to cover an off-cutter from Rawson, and it flew off the inside edge and Dave Houghton dived to his left to make it six for three. Sandeep Patil departed after an outside edge flew to the ’keeper of Curran. Nine for four. This was when a rather bemused Kapil Dev walked in to join Yashpal Sharma. And eight runs later, an outswinger from Rawson got the snick from Yashpal and Houghton threw it up to make it 17 for five.

Dave Ellman-Brown, the chairman of the Zimbabwe Cricket Union, was now approached by some worried organisers. It was turning out to be a farce and there were dangers of the match getting over by lunchtime. The wise Ellman-Brown advised them that things could change.

Zimbabwe had already pulled off an upset in the first round, beating a beleaguered Australia. With the news of the disastrous Indian start filtering in, the BBC, strike notwithstanding, called up Ellman-Brown, intending to do an interview soon. Ellman-Brown’s sagacious answer was, “The game isn’t over.”

The Haryana Hurricane

And it was not.

Indian tail was one of the best in the tournament. Roger Binny batted sensibly. Kapil Dev drove, cut and pulled with nonchalance. And Duncan Fletcher, the Zimbabwe captain, probably played his cards wrong by removing both Curran and Rawson from the attack together. He put himself on along with Butchart, and the two medium pacers could not maintain similar pressure. Fletcher had taken four for 42 in Zimbabwe’s upset win over Australia. But today, he did not bowl well. And Kapil took full advantage of the short boundary, threading the field with drives and cuts from one end and flicks and pulls from the other.

At 77, John Traicos struck. The canny off-spinner got past Binny’s bat and trapped him leg-before for a steady 22. And a run later, Ravi Shastri was snared by Fletcher. It was 78 for seven and yet again, there were signs that it could be all over before lunch.

But, as mentioned earlier, India batted deep. Madan Lal was perhaps the most accomplished of batsmen to come out at number nine. And Kapil continued to blossom. In the words of Alan Gibson, who borrowed heavily from Cardusian imagery, Kapil’s innings was built on solid fundaments and was extended to strokes of ingenuity: “The foundations were classical and he put a bloom on the orthodox. He did hit the ball very hard but they were rhododendron-sized blooms. The strokes were correctly conceived and executed.”

By the time Curran returned to get Madan Lal to snick for 17, the partnership was worth 62. The comeback notwithstanding, Curran had been hammered and looked a shadow of his threatening self in the morning. And when Syed Kirmani came in at No 10 with the score on 140 for eight, the bowling hardly troubled him.

Kirmani had told CricketCountry in an interview,“ When I walked into bat after the fall of Madan Lal’s wicket, I told Kaps, ‘You just play your natural game” to which he said, ‘Humko 60 overs khelna hai’. I told him that I would try my best to hold one end up.”

As Madan had done, the little Indian wicketkeeper excelled at working the ball into gaps and getting Kapil on strike. And the Indian captain struck the ball as cleanly as he was ever to do in his long and distinguished career.

His hundred came off 72 balls, and finally he raced to 175 from just over three hours of exhilarating batting, facing 138 balls, hitting six sixes and 16 boundaries. In spite of the shorter boundary where a majority of his fours rebounded off the fence, most of his sixes were struck over the long field. Apart from Butchart, who managed to keep the ball at the blockhole, all the other bowlers were slaughtered mercilessly — mainly with a new bat Kapil used after reaching his century.

The 175 not out stood as the highest ever in a One-Day International (ODI) till Viv Richards got past him the following year with 189 at Manchester.

In World Cup tournaments, again it was Richards who went past this feat when he plundered 181 against Sri Lanka at Karachi in the next edition.

The ninth wicket partnership of an unbeaten 126 with Kirmani stood as a world record for 27 years before Angelo Matthews and Lasith Malinga added 132 against Australia at Melbourne in 2010.

As Kapil walked out at the end of the innings, Gavaskar met him with a cup of water. Later the master was to say that this was the best innings he had ever witnessed in a limited overs match.

What followed

The final score of 266 for eight in 60 overs was an incredible feat after being reduced to 17 for five and later 78 for seven. But, by the time Kapil’s strokes had stopped reverberating around the countryside, the wicket was playing wonderfully well and the ask was not quite beyond a competent Zimbabwe line up. They began well with Robin Brown and Grant Paterson putting on 44 for the first wicket. But, the Indian medium-pacers kept striking, and soon the inexperience told and the fledgling cricketing nation was floundering at 113 for six.

Curran, the immensely successful all-rounder in the county circuit, launched a superb counter-attack, adding 55 with Iain Butchart, and raising hopes of another epochal turnaround. At 230 for eight, with Curran still there Zimbabwe fancied their chances of winning it. But, in the end he lobbed a rather docile catch off Madan Lal. And Kapil Dev ended the match by holding Traicos off his own bowling. Zimbabwe lost by 31 runs.

In a gesture of acknowledgement to destiny, Kapil Dev bent down to kiss the turf of the picturesque ground — that had seen him play the most magnificent innings of his superb career.

Brief scores

India 266 for 8 in 60 overs (Kapil Dev 175*; Peter Rawson 3 for 47, Kevin Curran 3 for 65) beat Zimbabwe 235 in 57 overs (Kevin Curran 73; Madan Lal 3 for 42) by 31 runs.

(Arunabha Sengupta is a cricket historian and Chief Cricket Writer at CricketCountry. He writes about the history and the romance of the game, punctuated often by opinions about modern day cricket, while his post-graduate degree in statistics peeps through in occasional analytical pieces. The author of three novels, he can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/senantix)

Are batsmen aged 28 to 32 better than other age-groups?

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:22:33 +0530

Former Australia captain Ricky Ponting was one of the most prolific batsmen in the 28 to 32 age category © Getty Images

There is a common notion that 28 to 32 is the time in which a batsman is in his most prolific form. Abhishek Mukherjee tries to check whether the concept actually holds ground.

When I was young, I have heard several pundits claim that 28 to 32 is when batsmen are at their productive best. I had always wondered how true this was, but had never thought of verifying. Alastair Cook’s prowess before he had turned 28, however, had motivated me to dig deep into this for some time.

Disclaimer:

I have ruled out all innings in the pre-World War II era. There are two reasons for this:

There have been several cricketers who have had their careers punctuated or truncated by the wars (Don Bradman, Wally Hammond, and Len Hutton are only a few examples); it will be unfair to include them in the analysis. I agree that the numbers will be evened out (some cricketers may have missed during age 21 – 25, some others during 28 – 32, etc, but then, evening out things in the long run), but then, post-World War II is obviously a large sample in itself.
The proportion of older players was a lot more common in the pre-World War II era, which would, if anything, create a bias towards the higher age-groups. It can be safely assumed that the 2010s would not produce a Jack Hobbs, who had played on till he was 48, and produced some of his finest innings at that age. The aim of this analysis is aimed at a more recent era.

Basic year-by-year analysis

A basic year-to-year analysis shows that the numbers generally take an upward slope from age 23, and reaches a summit at age 31. However, it must be noted that after the petering away at the age of 32 to 34, the average once again takes an upward movement from 35, continuing till 37 – with values higher than 31, which has the highest batting.

One may argue that the sample sizes at ages 35 to 37 is smaller compared to the age-groups with relatively lower numbers. However, despite the fact that the counts are lower, 3,133 dismissals (the times a batsman has been dismissed) and 110,296 runs is certainly not a small sample.

Table 1: Performances by age

	Dismissals	Runs	Average
<=18	457	8970	19.62
19	578	12525	21.66
20	1099	26278	23.91
21	1831	48456	26.46
22	2445	60516	24.75
23	3007	85202	28.33
24	4086	118212	28.93
25	4134	124940	30.22
26	4468	131993	29.54
27	4981	152224	30.56
28	4655	145807	31.32
29	4486	141088	31.45
30	3858	127352	33.01
31	3483	119649	34.35
32	3077	101065	32.84
33	2530	83296	32.92
34	1991	65727	33.01
35	1395	48530	34.78
36	997	33910	34.01
37	741	27856	37.59
38	461	15625	33.89
39	277	10865	39.22
40+	366	10394	28.39

The difference is more evident if we group the averages by age-groups. It is to be noted that not only does the 33 to 37 group have a higher batting average than the 28 to 32 group, it works for the 38-plus group as well. It can be argued that the logic may be a bit flawed, since only the best of the crop go on to play after 38 (the others either retire or get axed before that age), and hence it’s a biased sample. Even then, the same argument does not hold for 33 to 37.

Table 2: Performances by age (summary)

	Dismissals	Runs	Average
<=22	6410	156745	24.45
23 - 27	20676	612571	29.63
28 - 32	19559	634961	32.46
33 - 37	7654	259319	33.88
38 +	1104	36884	33.41

Home vs away

Even if we consider the home versus overseas (away and neutral venues combined), the 28 to 32 theory does not hold good. Batsmen of the age-group 33 to 37 have outscored them both home and away, and even the home-to-away dip is less for the 33 to 37 group. The eye-opening bit, however, is the difference between home and away performances of the 38-plus batsmen.

Table 3: Performances by age

	Home	Not Home	% Dip
<=22	26.58	22.68	0.1467
23 - 27	31.37	28.09	0.1046
28 - 32	33.93	31.09	0.0837
33 - 37	35.19	32.6	0.0736
38 +	37.43	28.98	0.2258

By country

Of course, the numbers may vary country-to-country, since different countries allow their batsmen to make their debut at different ages. For Bangladesh, the 28 to 32 group is the clear winner, and the group has a marginal advantage for Australia and New Zealand as well, but for the other countries.

The superlative numbers by Australian batsmen in the 38-plus group stand out, as do the dismal ones of the Pakistanis and Sri Lankans. The Indian and South African numbers make interesting reads, though – it is as if the batsmen keep getting better with time!

	Aus	Ban	Eng	ICC	Ind	NZ	Pak	SA	SL	WI	Zim
<=22	28.02	19.66	22.9		22.93	20.14	22.04	29.16	20.82	24.8	18.44
23 - 27	30.95	21.07	29.39	17.11	31.65	27.02	30.62	32.74	28.73	29.49	23.42
28 - 32	36.3	25.39	31.45	24.6	32.26	27.32	32.74	33.22	35.45	32.63	29.23
33 - 37	34.93	18.43	33.1	7.33	35.34	25.85	36.4	36.53	36.21	35.76	35
38 +	44.23		31.09		37.54	24.47	28.28	39.48	23.72	32.01	28.25
Overall	33.8	21.34	30.76	16.05	31.66	26.34	30.64	33.16	31.18	31.17	24.62

The champions

Disclaimer: In this section, ages are calculated as per calendar years. So, if a batsman was born on June 13, 1972, the entire year 2000 was considered as his 28th year.

How did the champions progress with time, then? Let us consider the eleven men who have scored over 10,000 Test runs. Ricky Ponting definitely had a phenomenal 28 to 32, and so had Rahul Dravid, Allan Border, Steve Waugh, Mahela Jayawardene, and Sunil Gavaskar.

The two West Indians, Brian Lara and Shivnarine Chanderpaul, on the other hand, have been more prolific in the 33 to 37 group (Chanderpaul is getting even better after he crossed 38, while Lara actually had a dip in the 28 to 32 group, and has scored more on either sides of it).

Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis, and Kumar Sangakkara, though, have been consistent (and have averaged 55-plus in each of their most prolific periods). This is probably the reason that they are the ones with the highest average in the 10,000-run club.

Table 5: Summary by batsmen (over 10,000 runs)

Disclaimer: In this section ages are calculated as per calendar years. So, if a batsman was born on June 13, 1972, the entire year 2000 was considered as his 28th year.

	Tendulkar	Ponting	Dravid	Kallis	Lara	Border	Waugh	Chanderpaul	Jayawardene	Sangakkara	Gavaskar
<=22	51.73	33		31.81	24.5		29.95	54.44	44.43		83.45
23 - 27	61.45	46	53.58	59.91	56.58	45.48	39.41	34.31	49.42	49.28	41.39
28 - 32	55.81	72.25	60.01	60.68	46.99	62.66	61.17	49.41	61.72	61.01	55.75
33 - 37	56.12	39.71	45.73	60.02	57.01	48.67	49.71	64.63	34.41	62.49	47.39
38 +	35.9	42.86	48.5			41.21	76.62	93.42			42.86
Overall	53.86	51.85	52.31	56.1	52.88	50.56	51.06	51.81	49.56	56.98	51.12

(Abhishek Mukherjee is a cricket historian and Senior Cricket Writer at CricketCountry. He generally looks upon life as a journey involving two components – cricket and literature – though not as disjoint elements. A passionate follower of the history of the sport with an insatiable appetite for trivia and anecdotes, he has also a steady love affair with the incredible assortment of numbers that cricket has to offer. He also thinks he can bowl decent leg-breaks in street cricket, and blogs at http://ovshake.blogspot.in. He can be followed on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ovshake42)

‘Charles’ Dhawan and the evolution of moustache in Team India’s growth

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:24:45 +0530

Team India and the Indian team management is now fully convinced in the power of the twirling moustache

By Sarang Bhalerao

Please note this is a humour article – work of pure fiction

India have been a dominant force in the on-going ICC Champions Trophy 2013. One can hardly believe it’s the same team that looked so pathetic on their previous visit to England.

What is the reason for the incredible transformation?

What was hitherto a well-kept secret is now out in the open.

“We knew it would work as we found success in nets and practice matches, but we kept it a secret because we did not want to be ridiculed ahead of the tournament. Believe it or not, our success has a lot to do with the moustache-twirling men. Our strength lies in their moustache,” said a member of the team management who prefers to be anonymous.

Shikhar Dhawan’s moustaches have brought him luck. He has had scores of 187, 114, 102* and 48 sporting his trademark moustache. Inspired by Dhawan, Ravindra Jadeja sported a similar moustache. Jadeja’s faith has been repaid as he is now the leading wicket-taker in ICC Champions Trophy 2013. He has also been top class with his fielding.

Team India and the Indian team management is now fully convinced in the power of the twirling moustache. The team management has ordered all members of the team to sport twirling moustaches before their semi-final match in Cardiff!

Jagmohan Dalmiya, the interim chief of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), told reporters in Kolkata that he is fully supportive of the team management’s strange decision. In fact, he says that as a solidarity measure he himself will be sporting a twirling moustache!

Expectedly, the team management and BCCI received brickbats. “This is bizarre. The BCCI wants to take the cricketing world for a ride. Where is the co-relation between moustaches and performance?” questioned Kirti Azad, told a television channel.

Team India, meanwhile, has given Dhawan a new name — ‘Charles” Dhawan, thanks to the cerebral Ravichandran Ashwin.

“Charles Darwin formulated the theory of evolution while ‘Charles’ Dhawan formulated the evolution of the twirling moustache!”

(Sarang Bhalerao hails from a family of doctors, but did his engineering. He then dumped a career in IT with Infosys to follow his heart and passion and became a writer with CricketCountry. A voracious reader, Sarang aspires to beat Google with his knowledge of the game! You can follow him on Twitter here)

South Africa unbelievably let go opportunity to beat Australia and enter the 1999 World Cup final

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:56:28 +0530

Allan Donald is run out and Australia go through to the World Cup final after a dramatic semi-final at Edgbaston in Birmingham © Getty Images

On June 17, 1999, Australia and South Africa were involved in what was perhaps the best game of cricket ever played. Karthik Parimal looks back at that eventful fixture, its outcome and what it meant to both the nations.

Just four days prior to this fixture, Australia and South Africa were involved in what many believe was one of the finest One-Day Internationals ever played. Steve Waugh played one of the greatest innings in World Cup to steer Australia to a famous victory for a place above South Africa in the Super Six standings. That piece of statistic looked inconsequential at the time, but little did one expect it to hold the keys to the door of the final. The two teams now moved to Edgbaston, where a game that would top the previous one at Headingley, and go on to become the greatest one-day match in history, would be played.

The build-up

Australia had just managed to gain the upper hand in the tournament. They were beaten by Pakistan and New Zealand, and it took a dramatic change in attitude to edge ahead in the Super Six stage. On the other hand, the South Africans looked assertive, although they faced a minor hiccup in the form of a loss to underdogs Zimbabwe. Nevertheless, they were stronger than the rest of the teams in the mix.

Apparently, Shane Warne was fired up on the eve of Australia’s semi-final clash. He indicated that, if Australia failed to qualify for the final, the outing against South Africa could be his last on the international stage. “His emotional plea for a big performance further charged the atmosphere,” Steve Waugh recollects in his autobiography Out of My Comfort Zone.

The Shaun Pollock and Allan Donald show

The weather at Edgbaston was sombre and, hence, South African skipper Hansie Cronje had unflinchingly asked the Australians to bat first upon winning the toss. Shaun Pollock was in his element, prodigiously swinging the ball and accounting for the wicket of Mark Waugh in his first over. Thereafter, Ricky Ponting and Adam Gilchrist consolidated in a fine manner, but Allan Donald, who was the fourth change bowler on this occasion, struck twice in his first over, dismissing Ponting before flummoxing southpaw Darren Lehmann with extra bounce off the turf. Then Jacques Kallis had Gilchrist caught, and at 68 for four, Steve Waugh — the hero of the previous match — walked out to bat alongside a certain Michael Bevan.

Strokes from the magical willow of Waugh, ones that delighted the crowd at Headingley, began to light the overcast Edgbaston as well. He flicked Donald nonchalantly off his pads; saw off the threat posed by Pollock and smashed Lance Klusener over his head more than once. He found an able ally in Bevan, as the latter ensured the scoreboard did not stagnate. Strike was rotated meticulously and the ante was upped appropriately. Ninety runs were added. When their partnership commenced, the two set their sights at 220, but at 158 for four in the 40th over, more looked possible. However, Pollock was roped in for his final spell, and he responded with wickets of Waugh (56) and Tom Moody (0) in the same over. The South Africans instantly gained upper hand.

Bevan, though, dropped anchor, realising his presence in the final overs was of utmost importance. With Warne at the other end, he tore into the attack, but Donald’s blistering pace and Pollock’s guile wiped out the rest of the tail. The Australians could manage just 213, but considering the conditions and constant nip in the air, it was a decent one. Pollock pocketed five wickets whereas Donald finished with four.

Shane ‘fiery’ Warne

Gary Kirsten and Herschelle Gibbs started positively. Neither Glenn McGrath’s accuracy nor Damien Fleming’s deftness could make inroads in their defences. By the 12th over, the South Africans coasted to 48 for no loss, and Steve Waugh became fidgety. A gamble had to be taken, for his opening bowlers could yield absolutely nothing off the wicket. The ball was tossed to Shane Warne.

In just the second ball of his first over, Warne dismissed Gibbs with a delivery very similar to the Mike Gatting ‘Ball of the Century’, a ball that pitched outside leg and turned enough to hit the top of the off-stump. “He was so fired up and animated that it took a wall of players to stifle his forward thrust. His drive and will were literally scary, but he sparked life into others who were tensing up under the South African onslaught and got us back into the game,” writes Steve Waugh in his book. Indeed, Warne took two more scalps, that of Kirsten’s and Cronje’s, to put South Africa into a spot of bother at 53 for three.

Then, an incredible piece of fielding from Bevan saw the back of Daryll Cullinan, and it further pushed the Proteas to a corner. Like Waugh and Bevan did for Australia, Kallis and Jonty Rhodes got together and began the process of recuperation. An 84-run partnership ensued before Paul Reiffel had Rhodes caught off Bevan in the deep. Warne was then called upon again, and he duly dismissed Kallis, his fourth victim, to leave South Africa in a precarious position at 175 for six in the 45th over. But, in Klusener, they had the perfect man, tailor-made for such situations, in the middle.

As was his approach throughout the tournament, he pummelled everything that was thrown at him, despite the constant fall of wickets — that of Pollock, Mark Boucher and Steve Elworthy — at the other end. At 198 for nine, a nervous looking Donald walked out to the centre, but doubly nervous were the Australians, who made every attempt at keeping Klusener off strike. In the penultimate over, the southpaw slogged McGrath towards long-on, and Reiffel — the fieldsman at that position, misjudged the speed at which the ball was travelling and palmed it over the fence for a six. The Australians were understandably aghast, as the South Africans now needed just nine to win off six balls.

The final over

Damien Fleming was entrusted with the responsibility of saving those nine runs, but considering Klusener’s current state of mind, the chances of that happening looked bleak. As expected, the first two balls were bludgeoned through the covers, giving no fieldsman a chance to cut it off. With one run needed to win from four deliveries, Waugh brought the field in to stop the single and hoped to create panic. Klusener, though, was looking to romp home with another hit to the fence. He threw the kitchen sink at the third delivery too, but mistimed it as the ball travelled straight to Lehmann at mid-on. Donald set off looking for the non-existent single, and Lehmann, sensing an opportunity, hurled the ball but, owing to immense pressure, missed the stumps by the slightest of margins. Donald survived and so did South Africa’s hopes of a berth in the World Cup final.

Despite the insanity, Klusener refrained from having a word with Donald. Fleming bowled the fourth delivery, full and just outside the off-stump, and Klusener mistimed it for a second time in a row; and perhaps for just the second time in that World Cup. However, it was he who set off for a tight single this time around, oblivious to the fact that Donald wasn’t looking at him. Realising he had to make a dash Donald turned around to scamper, but in the process lost his bat. He nevertheless took off, but Fleming, who had by then received the ball from the fielder at the bowler’s end, passed it down the pitch, underarm, to wicket-keeper Adam Gilchrist, who duly dislodged the stumps to snatch the winning run away from South Africa.

Australia’s joy knew no bounds. The match was tied, but owing to the fact that they were placed above South Africa in the Super Six stage, made the cut to the finals. The South Africans were dumbstruck. Klusener kept running toward the pavilion, no doubt disappointed. Donald kneeled on the pitch, appalled, even as the crowd invaded the turf. A dream was shattered, yet again.

“I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a crestfallen individual as Hansie Cronje when he and I waited to be interviewed by Ian Chappell after the match. He was zombie-like and barely acknowledged my words” ‘No one deserved to lose such a great game.’ Actually, no one did on the scorecard, but the fact was we were off to Lord’s,” Steve Waugh finishes describing the great match in his book.

Brief scores:

Australia 213 in 49.2 overs (Michael Bevan 65, Steve Waugh 56; Shaun Pollock 5 for 36, Allan Donald 4 for 32) tied with South Africa 213 (Jacques Kallis 53, Jonty Rhodes 43, Lance Klusener 31*; Shane Warne 4 for 29).

Australia qualified for the final as they finished above South Africa on the Super Six table.

(Karthik Parimal, a Correspondent with CricketCountry, is a cricket aficionado and a worshipper of the game. He idolises Steve Waugh and can give up anything, absolutely anything, just to watch a Kumar Sangakkara cover drive. He can be followed on Twitter at https://twitter.com/karthik_parimal)

ICC Champions Trophy 2013: India’s fielding the biggest positive

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:25 +0530

India's Virat Kohli (R) takes a stunning catch to dismiss Pakistan's Kamran Akmal in the ICC Champions Trophy 2013 © AFP

By Nishad Pai Vaidya

Did one ever imagine that an Indian side would the best fielding unit at a world event? That the youthful Indian team has eclipsed the likes of Australia, South Africa and New Zealand with their fielding skills has baffled their usual critics. Captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni beamed with pride as he proclaimed his young army’s superiority on the park. Is it only the exuberance of youth that is working, or there is more to it?

Fielding wasn’t exactly a core area of focus in Indian cricket. It was merely incidental and the skills with the bat or the ball were the sole criteria for getting into the team. This was a neglected department and budding players would at times treat it as a punishment — a necessary evil even. It was due to that mindset that India were falling behind the world as One-Day International (ODI) cricket raised the standards of fielding.

Over the years, India have had brilliant fielders, but few and far in between. The first time they had a decent unit was in the early-2000s when the young Yuvraj Singh and Mohammad Kaif burst on to the scene. The sight of them diving around, leaping to save the ball or take an impossible catch inspired the team on the field of play. There was a sense of confidence within them, forming an almost impenetrable ring on the off-side.

Yuvraj and Kaif were the two brilliant fielders who set high standards. Some of the others around them were stable, but not spectacular. As a unit, at their best, they were average and one could see that there was some distance to go. Then the worst possible thing happened to Indian fielding. Kaif lost his spot in the Indian team and injuries dogged Yuvraj’s fitness as he lost his trademark zing in the process.

The first time India saw a proper fielding unit was during the 2007 ICC World T20 — a tournament which witnessed Dhoni’s young turks march towards an improbable victory. But, that did not spill into the ODI arena as India still had a few slow movers. Even during the 2011 ICC World Cup, India raised their standards as the tournament progressed. There were a few agile customers on the field, but the others were fuelled by inspiration and the desire to do the ultimate.

The ICC Champions Trophy 2013 is a major turning point for the Indian ODI side in more than one way. The fresh pair of openers have given ample evidence of their talent and technique. Ravindra Jadeja is stamping his authority as an all-rounder. However, this could be a defining moment for Indian fielding as that department has certainly raised the bar. The youngsters to come in the future could make it into the team by virtue of their ability to protect the field.

During the 2012 ICC World T20, a commentator had said that India only look a good fielding side when the ball follows Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli and Suresh Raina. Today, after you add Dinesh Karthik, Shikhar Dhawan and Jadeja to that list — you have a brilliant unit. Umesh Yadav and Bhuvneshwar Kumar are decent in the deep. Ravichandran Ashwin may not be very agile, but is stable in the slips. Ishant Sharma can get better as he is fit and only the skill-set needs polishing.

What has led to this complete shift? Has the Indian Premier League (IPL) brought about this change? Yes, the league has certainly helped raise standards in India, but that alone isn’t the reason. If one looks at this squad, one would see that majority of them have been around for a few years. All of them weren’t together as a group until this tournament and that is why one can sense a radical change. These players have always been electric fielders, but this is the first time they have combined as a unit.

Poor fielding has been an unshakable anchor for the Indian ship in the past. It was something that held them back and kept them rooted to a spot even as the other departments fought hard to surge ahead. Now, they have unchained themselves with consummate ease and that augurs well for the future. As this team would aim to raise the bar with each passing tournament, the usual culprit wouldn’t be around to hinder them.

(Nishad Pai Vaidya is a Correspondent with cricketcountry.com and anchor for the site's YouTube Channel. His Twitter handle is @nishad_44)

Tom Graveney: The man who played his best cricket after he turned 39

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 16:08:59 +0530

Tom Graveney, born June 16, 1927, was one of the most elegant and graceful batsmen to play for England. Arunabha Sengupta remembers the man who enjoyed the best part of his career after being recalled to the England side to face Wes Hall and Charlie Griffith at the age of 39.

“Heh, Graveney, haven't they got a pension scheme in this country?”

The comment was hurled from the crowd by a West Indian spectator as the 39-year-old Tom Graveney retrieved a ball from the outfield. For the supremely stylish Gloucestershire batsman these taunts were hardly unexpected. What had indeed been out of the blue was the sudden recall to the English cricket team, after Lance Gibbs had spun them to submission in the first Test at Manchester.

Graveney had believed that he had played his last game for England three and half years ago. He had appeared 55 Tests in all till the end of the Australian tour of 1962-63. Just 116 runs in three Tests Down Under got him the axe on return. A pity, because the West Indians visited England in the summer of 1963 and the elegant stroke-maker always feasted on the Caribbean attack.

His record in those 55 Tests had been decent — 3107 runs at 41.98 with six hundred. But Graveney knew that he had left the initial promise largely unfulfilled. When he had emerged as a tall, slightly-built youngster for Gloucestershire, the delights of his driving had sent old timers on a delicious nostalgic spree. Obvious parallels had been drawn with the recently-retired Gloucestershire great Wally Hammond. The front foot play of young Graveney almost echoed the celebrated willow-work of the great Hammond, and like the old master, he was a scratch golfer as well.

However, with time, Graveney’s batting enthralled and frustrated in equal proportions. His twirly backlift, the booming strokes and the flourish at the end of the cover drive gladdened many a heart, but, as Frank Keating put it “the batsmanship of Our Tom was of the orchard rather than the forest, blossom susceptible to frost but breathing in the sunshine.” His successes were many and laced with elegance and grace, but punctuated by ordinary efforts when England needed him most.

The Ashes failure hurt — it was the fifth time that he had played a series against the arch rivals, and apart from a dogged century under the hawk like eyes of skipper Len Hutton, he had never succeeded against them. When he was omitted from the side Graveney resigned himself to spending the rest of his cricketing days on far-flung county grounds. And suddenly at 39, he was asked to go out there and face the thunderbolts sent down by Wes Hall and Charlie Griffith.

The second coming

And Graveney delivered in style. He fully believed that he had been the best batsman in England between 1962 and 1966, ‘not that what I though really mattered.’ And now, at this advanced age he came out at No 3 and played a majestic innings of 96. The drives through the off and forcing shots towards the on were as crunchy and effortless as ever. Even when Hall or Griffith sent one rearing for his eyebrow, he plonked his left foot down the pitch hooked them with élan off the front-foot. In later years, only Viv Richards showed the same inclination to play the hook shot without rocking on to the back-foot.

The Lord’s effort was not a residual flash in the old pan. In the following Test at Nottingham, he blasted 11 fours and a six to score 109, rescuing the England innings from 13 for three, and adding 168 with Colin Cowdrey. It could not prevent West Indies from winning, but Graveney was not done yet. In the final Test at The Oval he was absolutely regal in his brilliance. He spent six hours at the crease, once again reviving England from yet another collapse. From 166 for seven, he put on 217 with wicketkeeper John Murray before being run out for 165. It was a breath-taking effort and won England the Test match. Graveney was back in the forefront of cricket and the entire world basked in the glory of this second coming.

English batsmen Tom Graveney (left) and John Murray leave the pitch at The Oval, after a record unbroken 8th wicket partnership of 164 runs in a Test match against the West Indies. The Englishmen are applauded by the West Indies players, led by captain Gary Sobers (right) and Wes Hall (behind Sobers) © Getty Images

The following summer, against India at Lord's, Graveney constructed another masterpiece –151 against —Bishan Bedi, Bhagwath Chandrasekhar and Erapalli Prasanna. The New Year of 1968 rang in with the Queen awarding him the OBE. He rejoiced by creaming another 118 against his favourite West Indies attack in Port-of-Spain — a century he considers his best ever. He was in the islands as the vice-captain to Colin Cowdrey.

That summer, the Australians were back for another Ashes tussle. Graveney did not really pile runs in the same vein, but given the hard times earlier in his career, he did quite well. Alan Connolly bowled him for 96 at Edgbaston. And in the final Test at The Oval he scored a thoughtful 63 before Derek Underwood bowled England to that incredible win after the outfield had looked like marshland on the final day. In the fourth Test at Leeds, in the absence of Cowdrey, he led England for the first time.

A few months shy of 42, Graveney scored 105 at Karachi, putting together a rollicking partnership with Colin Milburn. He was seriously considered as a candidate for captaincy, but finally the selectors opted for Ray Illingworth. Finally, with his favourite West Indians visiting again in 1969, he started off with 75 well compiled runs at Manchester in an innings win.

From the day of his unexpected recall, Graveney had scored 1775 in 24 Tests at 49.30 with five hundreds. The second phase of his career soared to the heights that the first had always promised but never really scaled.

The unfortunate exit

Yet, Graveney knew that his purple patch would not last forever. Time was busy breathing down his neck and his days were numbered. And to secure his future, he travelled down to Luton during rest day of the Manchester Test, to take part in a match between Tom Graveney XI and Bobby Simpson XI. It was played for his benefit, and earned him £1000.

This triggered the problem that ensured his final dismal departure from Test cricket. Nine months earlier, Graveney had expressed his desire to play in the match to the chairman of selectors Alec Bedser and the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) secretary Billy Griffith. Bedser had been vague, “I don’t know I will be a selector then.” And Griffith had been non-committal.

Nine days before the Old Trafford Test, Graveney had been informed by Bedser that he could not take part in the game at Luton. The graceful batsman had answered that financially he could not afford to miss the event and had advised the selector to keep him out of the side if they could not grant him permission to play. He had been included and had interpreted it as permission to appear in Luton.

However, he was wrong. On the morning of the match, Bedser informed him that Luton was out of question. When Graveney protested, Bedser promised to call the organiser of the match, the millionaire who owned the Luton Town FC —Tony Hunt. Unfortunately, Hunt was in hospital and hence unavailable.

Graveney had no option but to go down to Luton and play the game, returning to the team hotel in Manchester at midnight. The following morning witnessed Graveney’s 42nd birthday and marked three years of his recall to the England side. At beakfast Bedser informed the batsman that he was reporting him to the disciplinary committee. The Test and County Cricket Board banned him for three Tests. Graveney never played for England again.

“It was a miserable way to finish,” he reflected later.

Beyond the tally

The final figures of Graveney read 4882 runs in 79 Tests with 11 centuries, the average hauled up to 44.38 by his late revival. It could indeed have been better, if his cricketing days had not ended this abruptly, or if he had not – as some of the selectors in the fifties maintained — “treated Test cricket like festival matches” in his earlier days.

But, one of the joys of watching Tom Graveney bat was the unrestrained zest with which — as a youngster — he matched Denis Compton stroke for stroke and later held his own while batting alongside such masters of stroke-play as Peter May and Colin Cowdrey. His relish for attacking play may have been too genial, too light-hearted, but they brought people to the grounds in hordes — even in the dull post-War days of fifties and sixties that led many to lament, “Should we ration our runs too?”

Even when out of the England side, he continued to enchant crowds every summer, first for Gloucestershire and then crossing the border to Worcester, where, according to Keating, “the mellow architecture of his glorious strokeplay matched the resplendence of the ancient cathedral.”

He was there to enjoy and entertain and did it the way he knew best. Be it hitting balls straight down the ground as if on the adjoining golf links, or hooking Ray Lindwall and Wes Hall off the front foot. “It is a miracle I was not killed,” he said many years later.

The first steps

Graveney heralded from Northumberland, born into a family steeped in the flavour of sports. His father was enthusiastic about all ball games but sadly passed away when the future England batsman was only six. His brother Ken, father of future county cricketer and England’s chairman of selectors David Graveney, was the first to get into the Gloucestershire side as a medium-pacer.

Graveney postponed a career in accountancy to join the army and served in Greece and Egypt. It was in Egypt that he played a lot of cricket on matting wickets that perfected his front foot game. When he returned to England, Ken Graveney introduced him to the Gloucestershire county officials, saying, “This is my younger brother. I can't get a ball past him.”

Graveney’s initial days for Gloucestershire, starting 1948, were full of the exciting promise of stepping into the spirit of Wally Hammond. He also became the Henbury club champion in golf, but the county coach advised him to temporarily abandon the other sport to tighten his back-play.

The youngster was blooded in the Manchester Test against South Africa in 1951, when Denis Compton missed the match after being hit on the foot by a full toss. “It must have been the only full toss he missed in his career,” Graveney used to joke later. The debutant scored just 15 but impressed with his technique on an awkward wicket. He made it to the side to tour India that winter.

A severe bout of dysentery hit him when he was in Delhi, and it resulted in his missing the first Test match. At the second in Bombay, he ‘felt and looked like a skeleton’ as he walked into bat. Every half hour he took a pint of water and a salt tablet. There must have been a virtual ocean frothing about inside him by the time he finished, for he batted eight hours against Vinoo Mankad, Lala Amarnath and Sadu Shinde to score 175. It remained the highest score by an English batsman in India for quarter of a century before Dennis Amiss made 179 in 1976.

Fits and starts

The scores, however, remained fluctuating and inconsistent. And as the years rolled by, Graveney did not really go out of his way to please the people in power.

In an interview to The Independent Graveney recalled his first tour to the West Indies: “We lost the first Test at Sabina Park, and the second at the Kensington Oval. The Navy were in at the time, and we had a bit of a party at the Barbados Yacht Club, where this bloke walked up to me and said, ‘You'll never be any good until you stop [Trevor] Bailey, Evans and Compton drinking’. I gave him a suitable reply, but he happened to be staying with the Governor General, and the next day Len Hutton and [player-manager] Charlie Palmer were up at Government House trying to stop me being sent home.”

Another bloomer he confesses to making was to beat Gubby Allen at golf. He was supposedly never quite the blue-eyed boy after this display of audacity.

It was during his first Australian tour that he fell into the bad books of Hutton as well. Off the very third ball in his second innings of the second Test, he tried to drive Bill Johnston and nicked a catch to Gil Langley. It made Hutton decide that he was not yet cut out for the tough world of Test cricket. Although the captain later used his own methods to groom him, this was a stigma that would dog him for the entire first half of his career. He was dropped for the third and fourth Tests. At the last minute, after toss of the fifth Test at Sydney, Hutton informed him that he was to open the innings. “Put your pads on, Tom, and come in with me”. Till then he had no idea that he was even playing in the match. Graveney scored 111, his only Ashes century.

His career progressed sketchily, with an odd spate of runs amidst a number of insipid performances. He got a taste of wicketkeeping too when Godfrey Evans broke his finger in two places during the Old Trafford Test against South Africa in 1955. Graveney had scored a duck in the first innings and had dropped a few in the slips, when captain Peter May handed him the gloves saying, “You might as well keep wicket”. The first ball he caught was an express from Frank Tyson. Since then the middle knuckle of his little finger does not work anymore — the digit can be bent back all the way to almost horizontal.

His rather ordinary form saw him miss the first Test at Edgbaston against the West Indies in 1957, and he scored a duck in the second at Lord’s. He was almost certain to be dropped in the third game at Trent Bridge when vice-captain Doug Insole, who had struggled to pick Sonny Ramadhin all through the summer, asked the selectors not to include him in the side if the mystery spinner was in the fray. Hence, Graveney was handed what looked like his last chance to establish himself as an England batsman. He batted almost eight hours to score 258.

He followed it up with 164 at The Oval to cement his place in the side.

Yet, his performances remained inconsistent, and for the next five and a half years, his only two hundreds came against a limited Pakistan attack in 1962. After the Ashes of 1962-63, he was not persisted with. At 36, Graveney had every reason to believe that he had played his last for England.

The style and the man

He continued to play for Worcestershire, fully believing that he was the best batsman in England. Against Northamtonshire in 1964, he bottom-edged an attempted pull off David Larter, and as the ball bounced over short-leg, he scampered a single to bring up his hundredth hundred in First-Class cricket. It was not the ideal way to get to the landmark for someone considered the most graceful post-War batsman for England before David Gower, but there would be 22 more centuries, five of them impeccably scored for England following his triumphant return to the top level.

Three years of county cricket followed the unfortunate Luton incident, before Graveney left the game for good. Cricket writer JM Kilburn wrote of him: “In an age preoccupied by accountancy, he has given the game warmth and colour and inspiration far beyond the tally of the scorebook.”

Graveney continued to spend his time on the green fields, although hitting a stationary ball. At the age of 57, he finished fourth in a national long driving contest. He played for many years with a handicap of one, and once appeared in a televised match alongside Johnny Miller against Nick Faldo and Henry Cooper.

Graveney became chairman of MCC in 2004 and was inducted into the International Cricket Council Hall of Fame in 2009. Those who watched him in his prime, especially in impressionable years, swear by the grandeur and grace of his batting. As Christopher Martin-Jenkins wrote in 1997, “All opinions are subjective, but in his long career [1948 to 1972], I believe truly that there was no more elegant or charming batsman.”

Tom Graveney (right) of England is inducted into the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame by ICC President David Morgan during Day Two of the npower 1st Ashes Test at the SWALEC Stadium on July 9, 2009 in Cardiff, Wales © Getty Images

(Arunabha Sengupta is a cricket historian and Chief Cricket Writer at CricketCountry. He writes about the history and the romance of the game, punctuated often by opinions about modern day cricket, while his post-graduate degree in statistics peeps through in occasional analytical pieces. The author of three novels, he can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/senantix)

Shane Watson: A multi-skilled Australian powerhouse

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:23:42 +0530

Shane Watson, born on June 17, 1981, is one of the best all-rounders plying his trade in the world of cricket today. Jaideep Vaidya goes through the still unfinished career of 'Watto'.

On the outside, Shane Watson looks like a well-built, broad-chested, tall Australian bloke with enough muscle power to rule the roost and intimidate the opposition. However, the inside story has been something of a stark contrast. Ever since his debut in Australian colours in 2002, Watson has played host to a catalogue of injuries that have hampered his progress and forced him out of the team at vital junctures.

Yet, in a career spanning more than a decade now, Watson, to his credit, has carved a reputation for himself as one of the best all-rounders in the world. Today, at 32, he is even considered one of the elder statesmen in the young and inexperienced Australian unit that is undergoing a difficult period of transition after the retirement of stalwarts such as Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey.

For all the criticism that is showered upon it, the Indian Premier League (IPL) has popped out a few talented cricketers and brought them to the world's notice; Watson is one of them. While he had already played for Australia in both formats for a while, the inaugural edition of the glitzy Twenty20 league was easily his breakthrough tournament. Bought by the Rajasthan Royals for what would turn out to be a bargain $125,000, Watson savaged his way to 472 runs. He also bent his back to get 17 wickets. His efforts won him four man-of-the-match and the man-of-the-series awards as well, thereby helping unheralded Rajasthan to win the title, ahead of heavyweights such as Chennai Super Kings, Mumbai Indians and Delhi Daredevils. In the sixth edition in 2013, Watson scored his first century of the tournament, against the Chennai Super Kings, hitting 101 runs off just 61 balls — 60 of those runs came in 12 scoring shots, six boundaries and as many maximums.

This doesn't go to suggest that Watson is just a Twenty20 or limited-overs player. Even though some of his better performances have come in the shorter formats, he has become a vital component of the Australian Test side in the last few years. Ever since he was catapulted as an opener right in the middle of the 2009 Ashes, from where he scored three back-to-back half-centuries, Watson has been a different man. Usually, such a makeshift and last-ditch promotion has an adverse impact on a player's performance and career, but not Watson. He scored seven fifties and a hundred in 14 innings after being promoted. Around this time, he also scored consecutive hundreds in the semi-final and final of the 2009 Champions Trophy as an opener to seal his place at the top. A couple of months later, he notched his maiden Test ton at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) against Pakistan, after luck favoured him with a dropped chance on 99. By the end of that home season, Watson was one of Australia's most important players.

This doesn't go to suggest that Watson is just a Twenty20 or limited-overs player. Even though some of his better performances have come in the shorter formats, he has become a vital component of the Australian Test side in the last few years. Ever since he was catapulted as an opener right in the middle of the 2009 Ashes, from where he scored three back-to-back half-centuries, Watson has been a different man. Usually, such a makeshift and last-ditch promotion has an adverse impact on a player's performance and career, but not Watson. He scored seven fifties and a hundred in 14 innings after being promoted. Around this time, he also scored consecutive hundreds in the semi-final and final of the 2009 Champions Trophy as an opener to seal his place at the top. A couple of months later, he notched his maiden Test ton at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) against Pakistan, after luck favoured him with a dropped chance on 99. By the end of that home season, Watson was one of Australia's most important players.

Watson has a funny relationship with the Pakistanis. On his Test debut against Yousuf Youhana's (now Mohammad Yousuf) men at the Sydney Cricket Ground (SCG) in 2005, he fell over in his delivery stride while trying to bowl his first ever ball. The same bloke, five years later, got his name on the honours board at Lord’s with a five-wicket haul against the same opposition. In that very series, he was to record his career-best figures of six for 33 at Leeds.

Riddled with many an injury in his career — including back stress fractures, hamstring, calf, shoulder and hip niggles — he tweaked his bowling action to put less stress on his body. After breaking down in the Australian summer of 2012-13, he even gave up bowling for a brief period in order to be fit and raring for the ensuing double Ashes series. He has lost his pace over the years, but that probing quality in his deliveries that troubles batsmen around the world was never to fade. However, you can’t help but rue the fact that he could have done so much better than 62 wickets in 41 Tests and 156 scalps in 159 ODIs had he remained fit for a longer period.

That being said, Watson’s most dangerous qualities come out in his batting, especially after moving up the order. Since making the switch in 2009, Watson averages 43.06 in Tests, compared to his 35.34 overall. Both his Test tons have come as an opener, so have his seven hundreds in One-Day Internationals (ODIs). You can say that Watson has assumed the role vacated by Matthew Hayden at the top.

Watson is as aggressive a batsman as you would find up the order, with an innate ability to pick the length of the delivery early. He has the capability to stick it out in the middle and keep the scoreboard ticking in his own destructive swagger. His cover drives with minimal follow-through pierce the off-side field more often than not, while his pulls are one of the most powerful ones you'll ever see on the cricket field. When Watson is in flow, he will dictate terms to you and you have no choice but to meekly surrender.

Two of Watson's most memorable knocks have come after Australia faced a major disappointment. Following his side's humiliation in their own backyard in the 2011 Ashes, Watson struck an unbeaten 161 off just 150 deliveries in one of the ODIs against England, helping Australia chase down 295. Then, after the Aussies' quarter-final exit from the 2011 World Cup, Watson scored a blistering 185 not out off just 96 deliveries against Bangladesh, thereby breaking three records — the highest number of sixes in an ODI innings (15), the highest second-innings individual score in ODIs and the fastest 150-plus innings at the time.

Growing up in Queensland and idolising the Waugh twins, Watson has come a long way in his more than decade-long career in cricket. He has since been made vice-captain of the Australian Test team and has steered clear of controversies, except for the Homeworkgate charade in early 2013. Despite his injury problems, he is a player who is good enough to walk into any team on the face of the earth. One of Australia's favourite poster boys, Watson is married to former Fox Sports presenter Lee Furlong and the couple just had their first child, Will, in March, 2013.

(Jaideep Vaidya is a reporter, sub-editor and analyst at CricketCountry. A diehard Manchester United fan and multiple sports buff, you can follow him on Twitter and Facebook)

Percy Holmes and Herbert Sutcliffe add 555 runs for the opening wicket

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 16:15:32 +0530

Yorkshire's opening batsmen Herbert Sutcliffe (L) and Percy Holmes going out to bat against Essen at Leyton on June 16, 1932 © Getty Images

On June 16, 1932 Percy Holmes and Herbert Sutcliffe reached their 555-run stand against Essex at Leyton amidst a lot of confusion. Abhishek Mukherjee looks back at the one-time highest opening stand in First-Class cricket.

Charlie Bray and his team were already psychologically down when they reached Leyton for the match against Yorkshire. In the previous match at The Oval that had ended the previous day, Surrey had chased down 252 against them for the loss of one wicket. They had got Tom Barling out with the score on 20, but Jack Hobbs and Robert Gregory had put on an unbeaten 232-run partnership to pull off a victory on Day Three.

After the leather-chasing on the previous day, all Bray wanted was to win the toss and bat: he could not. Brian Sellers did, and had absolutely no hesitation in deciding to bat first on an absolutely placid pitch against a tired lot. As Percy Holmes and Herbert Sutcliffe walked out to bat, the Essex fielders had no idea whatsoever about what was about to follow.

Day One

Sutcliffe was never under any trouble whatsoever against the Essex attack, which, to be fair could hardly be classified as exceptional. One of the greatest openers of all time (and statistically the greatest ever), he was never bothered about the fact that he had never received the kind of accolades some of the lesser cricketers of his time had. There was a reason that Don Bradman had used the words “Herbert Sutcliffe had the best temperament of any cricketer I ever played with or against” to describe the great man, while Holmes himself had used the words “if only I had Herbert’s [Sutcliffe’s] patience!”

Holmes, on the other hand, was not at his confident best since his bout of lumbago some time back. The man whom Neville Cardus had once called “versatile and impulsive, always alive by instinct” and someone who “seemed to brush an innings, comb it, making the appropriate whistling noises” was not at his nimble best. He edged one off Arthur Daer, but Roy Sheffield grassed the chance. Essex would rue the opportunity missed by the gloveman for the next day and a half.

Thus reprieved, Holmes grew in confidence, and supported Sutcliffe in the run-accumulation. Yorkshire reached 113 without loss at lunch. Sutcliffe, on the other hand, started in the businesslike manner that was so characteristic of him, and set about scoring runs.

Once his seamers failed to break through, Bray had to fall back on his young leg-spinner Peter Smith. Smith toiled on, but could not stop the flow of runs. The Essex attack, consisting of Stan Nichols, Daer, Smith, Jack O’Connor, and Laurie Eastman seemed completely ineffective against Sutcliffe’s dominance and Holmes’ resilience. At tea Yorkshire were 237 for no loss.

The real fun began after tea. Sutcliffe began to open up, and Holmes, after passing his hundred, joined him in the furious onslaught that followed. Sutcliffe passed his 150, and then raced to his double-hundred. Holmes, too, brought up his 150, and at stumps, Yorkshire were 423 without the loss of a single wicket with Sutcliffe on 231 and Holmes on 150.

Day Two

By now Essex had conceded 655 runs without taking a wicket, that too over a period of two days. England’s most famous opening pair — Hobbs and Sutcliffe — had contributed to their misery, albeit in separate partnerships. When they took field on Day Two they were almost defeated psychologically.

To make things worse, a huge crowd had gathered at Essex’s home ground — to cheer for Sutcliffe and Holmes as they took on the challenge to go past the existing world record for the first wicket — the 554 set by Jack Brown and John Tunnicliffe against Derbyshire at Chesterfield in 1898.

The duo continued from where they had finished the previous afternoon. When he reached 245, Sutcliffe reached a thousand runs for the season, and at 256, he went past his previous First-Class best. Holmes, meanwhile, went past his double-hundred, and the pair looked on track.

Before play had started that day, Sellers had announced that he would declare at 1.00 pm. Holmes was at home with the statement, acknowledging that Sellers “had come to get the 15 points so that [the announcement] was fair enough. Sutcliffe, however, was not happy: “Percy [Holmes], do you or do you not want to go for this record?”

Sutcliffe soon went past his first triple-hundred. Then, as the leg-spinner Eastman bowled a long-hop, and the Harrogate legend pulled him for a four to bring up the magic figure of 555. He was bowled the very next ball for 313 with 33 fours and a six, and Sellers declared immediately; Holmes remained unbeaten on 224 with 19 fours. The partnership had lasted 465 minutes.

The iconic 555-run partnership between Herbert Sutcliffe and Percy Holmes reflecting in the scoreboard at Leyton, Essex © Getty Images

The crowd was jubilant, and the dressing-room celebrated in unison with them. Sellers recalled: “Stacks of 555 State Express [sic] cigarettes arrived in the dressing-room for Herbert [Sutcliffe] and Percy [Holmes]. Later Herbert bought an AC car with 555 on it.”

There is an urban legend that the famous cigarette brand State Express 555 (mentioned by Sellers in the quote above) was named so after this partnership between Sutcliffe and Holmes. The brand name, however, was coined in 1896, 36 years before the partnership.

Essex, on the other hand, had ended up conceding 787 runs between partnerships in approximately two days of playing time!

The confusion

It took half an hour for Essex’s innings to commence, though — for a reason that has not really happened very frequently in Championship matches. In Bray’s words, “the scoreboard often went wrong at Leyton because the scorers sat underneath and could not check visually.”

The scorers — Billy Ringrose of Yorkshire and Charlie McGahey of Essex (who had also played two Tests) — had mutually agreed that the score was actually 554, though the scoreboard showed 555. McGahey had also appeared late on Day One, which complicated matters even more.

The media, meanwhile, was completely confused and tried desperately to find out the proceedings, but Ringrose was adamant. It was then that umpire Tiger Smith intervened: he claimed that he had missed a no-ball from Daer before McGahey had turned up. As Ringrose reluctantly agreed, McGahey rushed to the Essex dressing-room.

McGahey reported to a completely exhausted Bray, who had no idea regarding what was going on outside: “Sorry to disturb you, skip [Bray], but all hell is going on out there. They want us to find an extra run to beat the record and I won't do it without your permission.” Bray, somewhat graciously, responded: “Find a run for them, Charles [McGahey]. They've batted magnificently and more than deserve the record.”

Everyone had agreed on the 555-run partnership now, and poor Daer ended up with an extra run against his name.

The rest of the match

Essex was completely demolished cheaply twice by some quality bowling from Bill Bowes and Hedley Verity. Play ended soon on Day Three as they were bowled out for 78 and 164. Nichols, with 59 not out in the second innings, was the only one to put up some resistance. Bowes finished with match figures of nine for 85, while Verity’s figures were even better — 10 for 53.

What happened next?

-          Bray got accused for breaking the laws by the Sussex captain Percy Fender a week later. Fender also accused the umpires, Smith and Frank Field: Yorkshire won the Championship that season with Sussex coming second.

-          A young EW Swanton was covering the match for Evening Standard. He could not get the report of time (mostly due to the fact that the only mode of quick communication out of Leyton was a solitary public telephone). As a result he was not allowed to cover the Bodyline trip with the words “if you can't file on time from Leyton then I don't trust you to do so from Australia.”

-          Sutcliffe and Holmes’ record stood for over 46 years till Waheed Mirza and Mansoor Akhtar added 561 for the first wicket for Karachi Whites against Quetta in 1976-77.

Brief scores:

Yorkshire 555 for 1 decl. (Herbert Sutcliffe 313, Percy Holmes 224*) beat Essex 78 (Hedley Verity 5 for 8, Bill Bowes 4 for 38) and 164 (Stan Nichols 59*; Hedley Verity 5 for 45, Bill Bowes 5 for 47) by an innings and 313 runs.

(Abhishek Mukherjee is a cricket historian and Senior Cricket Writer at CricketCountry. He generally looks upon life as a journey involving two components – cricket and literature – though not as disjoint elements. A passionate follower of the history of the sport with an insatiable appetite for trivia and anecdotes, he has also a steady love affair with the incredible assortment of numbers that cricket has to offer. He also thinks he can bowl decent leg-breaks in street cricket, and blogs at http://ovshake.blogspot.in. He can be followed on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/ovshake and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ovshake42)

ICC Champions Trophy: Dhoni, Misbah and other players from India and Pakistan discuss Saturday’s match

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 19:27:16 +0530

By UnReal Mama

Please note this is a humour article – work of pure fiction

Going into the dead rubber, Mahendra Singh Dhoni was faced with a problem of plenty, and we are talking about the bowling. “Please MS bhai, let us have a go at the Pakistani batting line-up,” pleaded bench-warmers, Irfan Pathan and Vinay Kumar, realising such opportunities don’t come frequently.

Eventually, Dhoni decided to stick with the original combination and opted to bowl after winning the toss. After all, with Ishant Sharma one never knows what to expect, and Dhoni was hoping that his team would get to chase a score in excess of 300, with a flamboyant finish by him, of course.

However, Dhoni’s hopes were belied as Pakistani wickets began to fall in regular procession, the second wicket partnership between Kamran and Mohammad Hafeez notwithstanding. At 56 for three, the question uppermost in the minds of most Indians was:

168 in 40 overs against Indian bowlers. Makes one wonder how the hell Pak batsmen face their own bowlers in the nets #IndvsPak
— The UnReal Times (@TheUnRealTimes) June 15, 2013

It didn’t help matters that after the second rain interruption, Dhoni set the cat among the pigeons by unleashing 'Sir' Ravindra Jadeja. 'Jadejageddon' ensued.

Sania Mirza: "I am proud that my husband gave his wicket to Sir Jadeja" #IndvsPak
— The UnReal Times (@TheUnRealTimes) June 15, 2013

After yet another blink and you miss appearance, Malik tried to plan for the rest of the evening:

Shoaib Malik: "Honey, shall we go watch 'Man of Steel'? | Saina Mirza: "I'd rather watch Sir Jadeja" #IndvsPak
— The UnReal Times (@TheUnRealTimes) June 15, 2013

On an aside, it wasn’t just the Pakistani batsmen who were rattled by 'Sir' Jadeja. Some years ago, on a dying planet named Krypton, this happened:

Wickets tumbled left, right and centre, and suddenly Pakistan’s strike bowler, Mohammad Irfan, found himself staring at a pumped up Ishant Sharma in the middle. “One step for Irfan, one giant run for Pakistan,” screamed Navjot Singh Sidhu with childish glee, only for the Indian fielders to promptly run out the 7’1″ giant before he could even figure out what was happening. If there were Indian fans who hadn’t already fainted by the blistering fielding display by the Indians, they promptly collapsed when someone commented on air that India has been the best fielding side in this tournament.

Pakistanis slumped to 165 all out in 39.4 overs (later adjusted to 167 by our beloved Duckworth-Lewis method). The low score induced an otherwise reclusive Dr. Manmohan Singh to cheekily call up his Pakistani counterpart to resume cricketing diplomacy:

Meanwhile, during the innings break, Misbah-ul-Haq tried in vain to intimidate MSD:

Misbah: we have Ajmal, Wahab, Irfan. What've ya got? MSD: yawn. We've got Jadeja #indvspak
— The UnReal Times (@TheUnRealTimes) June 15, 2013

Back in the Pakistani dressing room, however, the team spirit wasn’t quite there, as players sought to find the reasons behind the poor batting performance:

The Indian innings began slowly; Rohit Sharma and Shikhar Dhawan got things going cautiously, treating every ball on its merit, as the Pakistani pace battery of Mohammad Irfan and Junaid Khan bowled a probing line and length. After easing into the innings, the openers gradually began to assert themselves, caressing a few boundaries either side of the wicket. In no time, with hardly any effort, the score motored to 45 for no loss, before rain intervened.

Indian openers playing with Pak bowlers like a cat plays with its prey before killing it #IndvsPak
— The UnReal Times (@TheUnRealTimes) June 15, 2013

At this point, the match lost more than half of its viewers worldwide. Pakistani fans saw the writing on the wall and switched their TV sets off, whereas Indian fans, benumbed by the ease by which the Indian batsmen were doing it, turned to Jhalak Dikhlaja to watch Krishnamachari Srikkanth violently shake his body dance to hit numbers.

More rain interruptions meant Duckworth-Lewis (D/L) came into play again, and it was a miracle that the computer being used to execute the D/L algorithm did not break down. The match was soon done and dusted with, and as the Indian batsmen completed formalities, the stands witnessed an unusual sight:

After the match, as Indian players walk back to the pavilion, Pakistani batsmen scramble to get autographs from Sir Jadeja #IndvsPak
— The UnReal Times (@TheUnRealTimes) June 15, 2013

The match, earlier declared by Misbah-ul-Haq as equivalent to a final for Pakistan, almost resulted in a revolt in the Pakistani dressing room, before Dhoni stepped in to bring things back to normalcy in his own inimitable manner.

(Originally published in www.theunrealtimes.com. “Unreal Mama” is the pen name of CS Krishna & Karthik Laxman, founding editors of the site which is India's favourite satire, spoof, parody and humour portal)