Barrels of 'Cricket is Life' Bytes with S&T

Crickblog is Looking for Writers

2008-09-15T21:26:00.002+05:30

Crickblog is Looking for Writers!

Welcome to Crickblog! : The cricket blog channel that tinkers with your thoughts about the game and attempts to unravel the so:called mysteries amongst the glorious (and not so glorious) uncertainties. Writers should be able to write with style and wit and take responsibility for stories and follow up if necessary. You are requested to send some writing samples and/or links to some of your previous works.
Get onto www.crickblog.com or email the editor with your details and a sample write up of about 400 words to editorcrickblog@gmail.com

Strip Sydney Test of its Official Status!

2008-01-07T17:28:00.001+05:30

Strip Sydney Test of its Official Status!

Australia: World beaters or World cheaters?

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

The only logical manner that cricket can now move on at a saner level is if the Sydney Test is stripped off its official status. It will not be the first time (remember the last time India, and Sachin Tendulkar in particular, was targeted by then match referee Mike Denness in South Africa). Consider the other options. Consider the magnitude of the repercussions. This is not about one-upmanship. This is about delivering justice, where it belongs.

Consider for the moment that not one or two but a good many instances where the umpires have botched up the rules of ruling someone out. Consider the impact where at least seven of the alleged bad decisions were declared wrong when all an opposition side needs is 20 wickets to win a match. This was simply not a case of the umpires getting it wrong. To err is human; to be bias, is to aid the opposition.

Admittedly India's batting on the final day of the second Test in Sydney was far from encouraging, especially given that India had done so well in the first innings to set the cat amongst the pigeons for Australia. Australia were determined to shake India’s morale. Instead they have only highlighted their bullying ways and ungentlemanly approach to the game, whose crown they wear but whose respect they have failed to command.

The guffaws must be really loud. How does one gentleman’s rule apply to India and not apply to Australia? Adam Gilchrist’s comments to a channel here in India spoke of downright double standards. When Gilchrist asserts that India should accept the umpire’s decision, why is it that on more than one occasion, Ricky Ponting has stood his ground in sheer arrogance? Had the tables been reversed, would Australia stand for this blatant one sided affair? If Ponting is acting dictatorial with the media about being questioning on his double stand on how the game should be played, does not a player of Sachin Tendulkar’s stature speak of a greater integrity when he claims Harbhajan made no racist remarks to warrant this punishment?

Ponting is asserting Michael Clarke has taken the catch cleanly when the replays clearly show that there is more than an element of doubt to suggest Sourav Ganguly was only given out under dubious circumstances. While the members of the Australian team had conveniently brushed it as Mark Benson’s oversight in not consulting with the square leg umpire (thought given that that gentleman was Steve Bucknor, would it have been any different?) , the fact remains that Ponting is claiming a significant wicket. Who gave him the authority to decide who goes (having seen as it can be so biased) just as who did give him the authority to decide how the media should report? How does anyone believe when the captain has claimed a catch when the captain himself stands blatantly despite being out? Is this honesty, or Australia’s meaning of honesty, like their interpretation of racism?

Gilchrist may have made walking a new phenomenon for Australian cricket but to claim mighty that he does not make appeals unnecessarily and that it is India who have gone over the top is foolhardy. Need we remind Gilchrist of his vociferous appeal against Rahul Dravid in the second innings when the bat was nowhere close to the ball? Australia were desperate for victory, and they did employ the sub continent’s tactics of vociferous appealing, and rather needlessly so. Did they not succeed?

The loopholes are many. Consider the fact that these nonsensical charges of racism were labeled by Ponting on behalf of Andrew Symonds and the testimony on which Harbhajan was slapped the three match ban came through Matthew Hayden and Michael Clarke. In the same manner that without evidence, the committee decided to pass judgement against Harbhajan, why was the word of Sachin Tendulkar not taken into account? Does Sachin not command respect simply for the way he has played the game all these years, forget Ponting’s colourful past?

The result simply shows insensitivity in understanding such serious allegations of racism. Racism is not even a concept in India. Yes, casteism is understandable, although deplorable. But racism is a raging matter in Australia where the aborigines for long have been handed a raw deal. Perhaps the word has become rather loose to rattle at the first hint of disruption.

Symonds is playing cry wolf. When it didn’t work in India, he has done it again back home. Someone of his own background must be careful of not degrading the meaning of the word ‘race’, because the word soon loses its charged meaning when used so blatantly. What it once again shows is the divisive nature even in the ten nations that this ‘world’ game is played. Is Symonds the type who will stand still while he is childishly labeled a ‘monkey’? Would the pictures lie when they show that more words were exchanged by Symonds rather than Harbhajan Singh?

If conspiracy theories must abound, this was a well planned ploy. Australia have already had their sixteen match winning streak broken once. That too, humilitation handed by India. The way India bounced back in Sydney, another upset was on the cards. Whether the umpires were adhering to the white supremacy theory or if Bucknor has coloured his vision is subject to debate. But this was an obvious attempt to shift the focus and what could be more poignant that shaking the one man Australia thought was an easy subject? How else does one explain how the two teams appeared to make truce on the field only to have the issue take of racist allegations when the day’s play was done with?

The thing about Steve Bucknor’s age and vision is rubbish. His vision is just fine if he is giving only one team obviously disgraceful levels at the international team (in this case, India, in all cases, India) while the other team is allowed to get away. (the vision of the third umpire may need an optmologist though.) One wondered why Symonds was not sharing the ‘Man of the Match’ trophy with the other ‘men of the match’ Bucknor, Benson and company.

This was well thought out and executed to perfection. Kudos must be given to Australia, not only for playing the game hard, ruthless even in the face of obviously deplorable decisions, but also, bullying the game, the opposition and the ICC authorities to rule in their favour. Australia dare not touch Tendulkar. Dravid has his own grave to ponder over while Ganguly has come back raring stronger. Anil Kumble will fight fire with fire. Who then would make for an easy target and who could be provoked into playing the perfect ‘bakra’ (that goat for non-Hindi folks)?

It is no small matter that Australia have been smarting ever since India won the Twenty20, to even denounce the nature of the format of the game. That Australia nursed that grudge through their one day series in India became pretty obvious as the series progressed. Now it is the threat of the Test series becoming more formidable that set fear in the hearts of the Australian players. Australia has played a rather dirty game off the field, and revealed even the top world beating team is not exempt from behaving shamelessly under the threat of fear and humiliation.

(if anything should come from this, Harbhajan must learn to keep in tongue in check; Australia have just exploited his easily provoked nature to malicious intent.) Sunil Gavaskar hit the nail on the head when he said it was hard to accept the honesty of the players who claims a dishonest catch and who has the temerity to stand his ground when he is obviously out. There is only one way to solve Kapil Dev’s dilemma that five years hence on, everyone will forget the injustice delivered to India. Obliterate the result. India should accept that. Australia must live with that.

Just ask Australia if they would accept their sixteen match streak coming to a halt because of such poor umpiring decisions. Gilchrist says, India must accept the umpire’s decision. If India does accept the loss, who gains by the maladies of the Test? Ponder on that and Gilchrist’s assertions will become easier to understand. If the umpired have sullied the game, Australia have shown why despite being world champions all these years has not improved their reputation as unreasonable bullies for their blatant ungentlemanly conduct, unbecoming of a team and nation of their stature. Sri Lanka have suffered, South Africa have suffered. And it is easy to see why racism is such a ‘hot’ (disgracefully) term in their game. Education is required for Australia and the men who dictate the rules of the game to understand sensitivities of people better than they do the laws of the game.

The only decent way this game can go on is for Australia to get an educated lesson on what constitutes racism , for Harbhajan’s ban to be revoked, for Ponting a lesson on what constitutes the gentleman’s game and whether his authority as Australian captain ends, for Bucknor to bid goodbye to cricket, and for the Sydney Test to be stripped of its official Test status. In the game where so many decisions have been wronged; no other balm can effect a reversal of fortunes or stop the Border-Gavaskar Trophy (ignominious if Australia wins the Trophy on the basis of the Sydney Test) from being unfairly retained by the Australians on the basis of this Test.

If there was a time to rebel for the Indian team, it is now. There is integrity at stake and (not Ponting’s kind of integrity, please) and no sport can be a leveler that chooses to divide peoples of nations and people of one world and worse, promotes behavior that sabotages games by using these divisive forces. Neither the game has won, nor has the people who have followed it. Australia has scream from the rooftops; they did not shape this particular game on their cricketing acumen.

If a middle ground cannot be found, if such a champion beating side cannot decipher that their opposition has been handed a raw deal (which could also mean Australia is afraid to take on the challenge again in trying to retain the trophy), India must pack its bags. Forget financial repercussions; there is a lot more at stake here and it simply ain’t cricket, mate! Who wants to play a game like this, let alone watch it?

(As for public information, the author of this piece did not grow up as a fan of Indian cricket. As a sports writer-columnist, she has tempered an objective view about the game and it is from this that steams the anger at the obvious sullying of a game she so reveres. Again for the sake of those myopic to view this as anti-Australian, the author holds the game in reverence as does the champions, but not their unruly behavior. Besides, Australia is much too beautiful a country to be done in by a couple of their uncouth cricketers.)

free-website-hit-counters.com

South Africa revel in Pakistan’s haze!!!

2007-10-17T22:45:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Another Test series draws to a close and yet again Pakistan are unsure how much progress they have actually made. Shoaib Akhtar’s antics, Mohammad Yousuf’s change of heart and Inzamam’s winding career were the only stand out features of a Test series that should have brought home advantage to bear. For South Africa though, exceeding expectations with a team looking at becoming self-sufficient could not have had a sweeter reward!

Back-to-back were supposed to drain the tourists. Instead Pakistan appeared beleaguered even before the series got underway. With Akhtar’s behavior still hanging like a dark cloud, Pakistan forgot their pace potential and shockingly tried to force South Africa into submission with just Umar Gul and Mohammad Asif to bear the brunt. Flawed tactics cost Pakistan an opportunity to square the series in Karachi. Worse still, they failed to stem the swing of momentum that set the South Africans on a roll.

Jacques Kallis showed his defiance was not without conviction. Openly annoyed and disappointed at being overlooked for the Twenty20 championship, Kallis showed why he is rated as one amongst the few and rare all rounders with match winning ability. His double ton towering presence in the first Test was matched only by his fighting knock in the first innings of the second Test only to be backed by another century that put South Africa in the driver’s seat.

But South Africa backed up their batting with a bowling that they can be truly proud of. For long, South Africa’s bowling have had as much to do with their sometimes apparent sameness to the attack, pedestrian under assault as much as with the lack of a genuine world class spinner. At the height of getting over excited, South Africa may have rediscovered Paul Harris and in him, their spin hopes of the future.

Harris made a comeback of sorts to the South African side and standing taller than his skipper, he comes across as an odd career choice for a spinner. But Harris has wrecked havoc for Pakistan and scintillating positions for South Africa through the two Test series to ensure that he would have a major role in setting up South Africa’s subcontinent victory in seven years, the last being conquering India in India on that now infamous tour in 2000.

Harris nullified Pakistan’s batting with a five wicket haul in the first innings of the first Test and then, came back to break the crucial opening partnership in the first innings of the second Test as Pakistan’s openers made overhauling South Africa’s first innings a cake walk. More importantly, he showed patience, practice and perseverance that is required of a spinner at the international level. In sub continent conditions and against an opposition that is well versed in countering spin, Harris has earned kudos and deservingly so.

But South Africa had also gambled on another plan, one without Shaun Pollock. While Pollock was turned into a tourist in this series, Andre Nel and Dale Steyn were given the responsibility of making his absence seem as minimal as possible. While Nel played senior pro, Steyn vindicated the selectors’ decision with a victory sealing five-fer in the second innings of the first Test and what turned into the series deciding match.

Pakistan’s tactics were baffling from the point of view of understanding whether they were made with team interests in mind. While Pakistan relied on spin, they have had a history of fast bowlers and their current line up displayed none of that confidence and considerably reduced the strength of Pakistan’s match winning ability. It was almost as if they had no intention of winning.

Playing for a draw was meaningless in the second Test. And Pakistan rightly went after the colossal target with the right attitude on a gamely pitch. But Pakistan were underdone by the lack of a third pacer. South Africa fought to get out of a tightrope situation in the second Test and came out looking considerably comprehensive.

Mark Boucher’s 400 catches as wicket keeper proved the highlight. But he will also be remembered as the man who ended Inzamam’s career with a stumping. Inzamam may have missed out on Zaheer Abbas’ high score of 8332 runs by two runs but if Inzamam was unhappy only for missing out on that landmark, then it would reflect poorly on Pakistan’s interests. After all Inzamam’s presence in this match was secured with the agreement that he would call it quits at the end of day.

Another factor that caused considerably turmoil for Pakistan to show up with a consistently strong line up was Mohammad Yousuf’s side swinging stunts. Slated to join the rebellious Indian Cricket League, Yousuf disappeared from the public eye only to surface on the eve of the first Test. With changing lanes being cause for concern, Yousuf traded his place in the Pakistan side for the first Test for sorting out his loyalty conundrums. Yousuf did come back to play the second Test. But Pakistan had already let the initiative slip, much like they did everything else related to the serious game on the field!

Monkey around Indian cricket?

2007-10-17T22:39:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

In a classic case pot calling the kettle black, the Australia team is threatening to take India apart for a few stupid spectators who allegedly passed racist comments against a so-called one of their own!

Indian cricket fans, who not long ago were reveling in India’s winning the inaugural ICC World Twenty20 championships, have had to face much frustration with Australia showing why they are the world champions in one day internationals. Playing like a well knit unit, Australia have brought all their skills to the fore in one composite picture and the result has been an overwhelming series victory in what should have been India’s home territory.

It was this annoyance that led to a few irate fans supposedly making monkey like gestures at Andrew Symonds, the only player in the Australian who does not bear resemblance to the traditional Caucasian male. Admittedly, if that were the case, then it would be a really stupid uncalled for gesture on the part of the fans. In the land of Lord Hanuman, (to term him loosely as the monkey God does not seem appropriate.) that people even indulged in such behavior shows a small section of completely ignorant or disrespectful bunch of Indians. But by no means, are they a representative of the hospitality accorded to foreign teams.

But here lies the contention. The Australian team is acting so offended over the entire episode, it makes one wonder if they are just as skilled in donning pastoral robes with the same finesse with which they take the opposition apart. To call it a racist insult is taking things too far. And it is the Australians alleging that this tour to India has been hostile!

The Australian team had better get a hold of themselves because they are not about to find too much sympathy from anyone else in the world. Teams that have toured Australia in the past have tales of mental torture that they will not be forgetting in a hurry. In a country with a great sporting history, their acceptance of aboriginal society within their own fold has been appalling. In fact that Australia is consistently a group of all whites makes it a racist issue in itself and something that Australia has dodged, again with equal panache.

How does one explain Australia’s tolerant culture when Sri Lanka’s Muttiah Muralitharan was mocked at a decade ago and yet again Australian fans’ boisterous behavior was against on show as they targeted the coloured members of the South African squad not so long ago? Australia have failed at an integral integration policy and the reflection of it comes through certain sections of ignorant fans.

India is one of the most hospitable countries to tour. And the joke is that the generosity does not end off the field but extends of it as well. New foreign players receive baptism, foreign teams get unusual success and the Indian team often folds when it should blossom. Take a look at the number of former Australian player who have continued to come to India much after their retirement. And watch the Australian players cash in on the endorsements while in India! And they are received with fanaticism by the Indian media and fans. Therefore, to isolate one incident and throw a circle of darkness about the tour is downright disgraceful.

Mahendra Singh Dhoni may have uttered these words in another context but it is relevant that Australians do not talk anything at all just because they can. The series has been more fiercely fought with words rather than with any nail-biting encounters. Australians have shown cohesion and clinical determination, something that India would do well to emulate. But for Australia to be already sounding horns about what the Indians will face when they tour Australia down under is taking things a little too far. Australia would do well not to imitate Sreesanth’s antics of putting words before concrete action.

There is no denying that the Australians have been a bunch of men gripe with a bad case of sour grapes. The timing of the one day internationals bang after the Twenty20 tourney has meant that Australia has spent a fair time watching the Indian team being praised and feted like none else in the world. The Australians have been generous in their statements to the media talking of how all this felicitation has gone out of hand and that the Indians are in over their heads.

Yet again it shows Australia’s contriteness behavior of not understanding the cricketing culture of the nation. If the Australians thought the Indian team was being treated like ‘princes and rock stars’, they are absolutely right. The Princely states may have gone out fashion and India’s fame to the ‘western’ rock stars of the world may be next to negligible. But such is the fanaticism for the sport that the Indian cricket team is like a bunch of rock stars. They have their number hits and they have their doldrums. The only thing irking the Australians is the fact they missed out on having their cake and eating it too!

Formula One and Hamilton – A Heady Affair!

2007-10-08T23:23:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

The season is about to end just the way it started. Lewis Hamilton stormed his way into stardom and now the fate of the championship hinges on his! Who would have thought that Formula One would have such a sensational season in the very first year since Michael Schumacher’s retirement? Yet the season has roared on, ingloriously or otherwise, and no one could have predicted this kind of down-to-the-wire scorching finale! And Hamilton will, one way or another, determine who wears the crown made exclusive by the Ferrari’s phenomenal icon!

“Hamilton who?” was not only the banner held up by a Fernando Alonso fan. It was also on the lips of most racing aficionados. Would McLaren gamble on a rookie? Was this not the same McLaren that had two Finns heading their line up? Mika Hakkinen may have hung up his boots, but Kimi Raikkonen moved on. But both of them had sufficient star power even as they climbed into the prestigious seat. What was McLaren trying to pull off?

But Lewis Hamilton shrugged challenges of races, culture and a sore, vengeful past champion to make his entry into Formula One not only dramatic but also, one that history would feel proud to be have chronicled. Even Ferrari fans, who felt lost in the absence of their colossal icon, tried to stay loyal to two stars in Felipe Massa and Raikkonen, could not help but acknowledge Hamilton’s presence, admire even.

This is not an ode to a McLaren player against a Ferrari. (The author of this piece has moved where Schumacher has travelled and has ended up showing loyalty where Schumacher left her, in the Ferrai pit garage!) But this is a curious reflection on how a debut driver stands not only on the verge of being crowned champion but also, holding the fate of other established drivers, including a two time world champion in his nimble but firm fingers.

Hamilton went from one ‘fluke’ victory to a champion-like stand repeatedly. Causing consternation for Fernando Alonso was not on the agenda. But causing the world championship to change hands was. Alonso has gone from being heir apparent in Schumacher’s presence to a grouchy, bitter, and embattled and surprisingly aging champion. Empathy would perhaps best describe the emotion one feels for Alonso.

It is apparent Alonso has moved on from being reserved to being

McLaren have fallen from grace and ironically, in the same season they should have been hailed to take considerable risk on a debutant, one that would go on to challenge the world order, nay, turn it on its head.

The two week wait (a normalcy between races in the Formula one race season) seems suddenly interminable. The Brazilian Grand Prix, always a race held with fascination and trepidation, will now also hold the key to the suspense. No matter what happens, Hamilton will have a say. This page of the history of the Formula One season 2007 hinges on Hamilton. Go on, turn the page, Hamilton! Can’t wait to see what’s on the other side!

The Day the Twenty20 Champs beat the World Champions!

2007-10-08T21:02:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

He is not the first. And he certainly won’t be the last. Ricky Ponting may be an aggrieved batsman. But at the end of the day, his grievance as a skipper would have only been graver with India beating Australia in a one day match in a very long time. More importantly, the Australian juggernaut needed a super special effort to be brought to a halt. The brakes are red hot from the Herculean task. Can they now last the distance? Or was it a mere minor dent?

As gaudy as the headline sounds, that is precisely how the ongoing series has been billed. Much has been said and written and for Ponting to correct the Indians that they were not world champions was like Australia saying – don’t ignore us just because we make a habit of winning! Incredible as that sounds, that has precisely been Australia’s bane. Victory for Australia has become mundane; victory for everything else, out of this world! It only naturally follows that celebrations are louder, words more garrulous, the tantrums more annoying or delightful, depending which side of the fence one is sitting on.

After looking inept to take on the wounded Australians, India staged a revival by winning the fourth one day international in Chandigarh. In the three games preceding, Australia bludgeoned the Indian ego with the bat and a few garbled words. Their garish behavior further added to the tag of sore losers that Australia have portrayed themselves to be. It could not have easy swallowing the exit from the inaugural ICC World Twenty20. It would have been far worse still to be camping in the country at a time when feting the Indian cricket team had become the norm.

Ponting- all agony.

The cameras continued to trail Ponting much after he was declared stumped. The reason was the rather magnanimous gesture from the third umpire in a rather close affair and one whose benefit should have been given to the batsman. Ponting stood his ground in disbelief, trudged off the field willingly, and stood defiant and menacing in the team area. The visuals painted the anguish of every batsman who has been unfairly sent back to the dressing room.

But to think what has happened to Ponting is a rare phenomenon is preposterous. The tour to England has shown that the Indian team, and in particular Sachin Tendulkar, has been at the receiving end of some rather unfair decisions. In the match in question, umpire Suresh Shastri refused to send back Andrew Symonds even though Dhoni, Harbhajan and company had a confident appeal for a neat piece of caught behind. Would Australia complain about that?

The match was set on a knife’s edge, perhaps even tilting Australia’s side while Matthew Hayden was on song. But his departure caused a wobble that India were smart to capitalize on. Arguably the turning point of the match was R.P. Singh’s bowling in the 47^th over taking Symonds out of the equation. The double wicket bonus in the follow up delivery showed Australia could topple in the pressure just as easily.

Triple retirements? Think not.

Ponting does like to face the embarrassment of finding excuses for his team’s loss. But even he would have to admit that the Australian team allowed India to get away from a wobbly start. The Indian think tank may be openly exchanging opinions that create divisive distractions. But on the day Mahendra Singh Dhoni played another masterstroke by giving credit to the seniors within the team. It always helps to keep former skippers, and three powerhouses at that, in one’s pocket. Dhoni acknowledged that the opening pair set the match up for the Indians.

While it was not small feat to face the brute of the Australian bowling, Sourav Ganguly appeared to nurse the Indian opening while Sachin Tendulkar fought off an uncharacteristic inability to see through the opening overs with grace. Far worse, the way the bowlers constantly beat his bat, it would have given any number eleven hope. But only a man of Sachin’s stature could come out glorious with gumption from such an awkward situation. It certainly would have not sat pretty with chairman of selectors, Dilip Vengsarkar, especially after being criticized in public for his thoughts of the triumvirate by none other than the team manager, Lalchand Rajput. But Sachin came out unscathed and with team India glorious, tensions are expected to ease ever so slightly.

Pressure –another matter.

Notice it or not, Dhoni appeared a little older than he did a week ago. While his batting has not been affected ( if anything, captaincy has only added to his aura), Dhoni is fighting a few many battles that have little respite with the bat in hand. His forthright, no-nonsense talk has meant he has openly talked out of the role of the seniors with the juniors while also, stating firmly that he has a mind of his own that is far more reasonable than those that rule the BCCI.

How long the dream run will last before the BCCI will want to reel the young hand is subject to speculation! (Besides the fact that the BCCI may have to first wake up to realize that Dhoni has grasped the matter with both hands on two occasions- the Ganguly episode and the balance concerns- already in the course of this match.) Will Dhoni be able to take his straight talk into making the business of cricket on the field a straightforward matter? These are interesting times for Indian cricket, not to mention accompanied by a certain fragrance of freshness even in defeat. But can it be powerful enough to overcome the stench of cumulative bureaucracy?

Without being rambunctious.

There was one person missing. But how many did miss him? There is a fine line between being hyperactive and downright annoying. Contrary to belief that he is a product of nurtured environment of Gen next, Sreesanth has decided to market himself as the flamboyant player on the field and a charmer off the field. His smile and guile fool no one, not even those innocuous looking glasses. People rejoiced and mocked him for his jig against Andre Nel in South Africa last year.

His McEnroe antics were interesting initially. But once the novelty effect fails, nothing else works. Sreesanth has gone from being aggressive to becoming obnoxious. And when the Australians think that, it really is telling! Everyone knows of Australia’s bully behavior but Sreesanth makes them look holier-than-thou. After looking at Australia, no one would be blamed for thinking there is a method in madness even for the Australian behavior. To stand up is one thing. But Sreesanth, of late, has become a case of empty vessels make more noise. That is unfair. Perhaps it would help him recall that his jig in South Africa was only funny because he had tonked the previous delivery for six. Would Nel have taken it on the chin otherwise? Grow up, Sreesanth, have your day in the sun, then rejoice, wait, rage!

Make no bones: Three years and eleven one day matches of defeats against Australia, victory had nearly slipped away from India. It took everything up till the final ball for India to recover to a hard earned victory. Everything hinged on India believing there was a little more in the tank. It was an uphill climb before this game. They won’t forget that. Ponting certainly will make sure of that.

Victory in Karachi, shocks at home...

2007-10-08T20:58:00.000+05:30

Trevor Chesterfield

Anyone who has been listening to the Po-faced gloom and doom from some radio and television studious around South Africa, defeat loomed large for Graeme Smith's side in the build up to the first Test against Pakistan.

Why even polls in a couple of newspapers predicted defeat and suggested the tour a waste of time. This was after the earlier dizzying and frenetic ICC Twenty/20 Championship and South Africa's exit for the tournament in Durban before what was termed a largely 'unpatriotic' Asian crowd.

As it is, certain factors surrounding the team added to the Po-faced views of the critics, doubting media and general public. Andrew Hall had gone into retirement, a 'disgruntled' Jacques Kallis had quit as vice-captain to concentrate on his batting, Morne Morkel was injured and sent home and Shaun Pollock was axed for the first time in his career.

An added backgrounder was how rumours 'back home' were that new Cricket South Africa Norman Arendse was unhappy with the whole team management system and its 'non-quota' and 'non-target' stance.

Yet, on the day Arendse told a board meeting in Johannesburg that he demanded more say in selection of Test squads and teams, South Africa achieved what for many what was said to be impossible. They beat Pakistan at the National Stadium in Karachi by 160 runs.

Only as big win this one was it was not met with universal approval in South Africa by the media that was on tour with the team. The way it was spread around, a South African cricket reporter of Asian extraction, Durban-based Iqbal Khan, Pakistan are not supposed to lose in Karachi. Are they? His largely ineffectual stereotype news agency style reports of the Test in the country's largest newspaper group reflected the mood of the nation.

Anyway, it was he knowingly suggested that Pakistan sources said South Africa had the wrong team: that Dale Steyn was not capable of taking five wickets in a five match series let alone an innings and, Paul Harris was not an effective bowler, the team management had their selections all wrong.

But when for Pakistan the coach, Geoff Lawson, instead of the captain turns up to the post-Test media conference to field a lot of prickly questions, there is the feeling that something is not quite right. Hansie Conje pulled this stunt after the defeat to Zimbabwe at Chelmsford in the 1999 World Cup and Bob Woolmer fronted up to the media while the captain sulked in the showers.

When spotted afterwards, Cronje decided to duck again and refused to acknowledge a greeting in Afrikaans by one of his former Free State players in England following the series. It gave many an unpleasant illustration of how to accept victory and defeat.

Shoaib Malik, in his first Test as captain, it was said 'had a flight to catch'. That's a new one. So is the comment that the win by South Africa is the first victory against a major subcontinent team in more than seven years suggests that Sri Lanka are not major.

Lawson though took umbrage at the suggestion that Malik was too embarrassed to face the media. 'Respect the Pakistan captain,' he fired back. It appears there was none as the implacable view was how the new captain was embarrassed to meet the media.

It was the old story of 'ifs' and 'buts'. You know the one, 'if we had held a couple of catches' and 'but for Steyn and Harris taking five wickets for the first time in an innings' and 'but for a couple of centuries by Kallis, we too would have been in a better position'.

Naturally when you have five days to prepare for a Test as this one, and the background sniping was doing what it could to sap certain psychological points, to shove the win, and its size as well, under the noses of the armchair critics, was no doubt a good feeling for Smith.

Other Saf styled reporters and wannabe analysts on tour, boasting about dinner arrangements on the network and sucking up to the more important TV types (for some, being the sycophant goes with laptop, borrowed copycat phrases 'passed off as his own' image), lose touch with what is actually going on. Asking them what is their point of all this showing off and they wonder why they are suddenly being told impolitely to naff off by others.

Meanwhile, back in the CSA boardroom, Arendse is pushing his case of what he wants and how he wants it. South Africa beating Pakistan by 160 runs is waved aside. It's not important enough for the Cape Town advocate. He wants his thoughts to be heard and wants to bend the ear of anyone willing to listen.

Part of this planning (or that of a committee of which he was a member) are proposals of how to (re)structure cricket in South Africa to the benefit of all in the game. This, it is said, will form part of wide ranging discussions that took place the day Smith, Steyn and Kallis helped beat Pakistan on a fallow field far, far removed from Johannesburg .

The CSA governance structures, the (annual) review of the franchise system, national team selection policies and transformation are all part of the discussions. Part of this planning has it that the sport, below national team level, be re-organised. A lot of this is updating housekeeping arrangements.

But when it came to the CSA showpiece, the team (now in Pakistan) there was a reemphasis of the prioritisation of the Proteas, although some still questioned this approach. But the side did not lack for anything. There are the same management structures as Australia and England, 'despite them being First World and us not,' Arendse added.

But there came a problem when a national player, Johan van der Wath, announced on the day South Africa exited the recent ICC Twenty20 that he had signed for the Indian Cricket League, represented an attitude felt in some quarters to be reason enough to re-think the emphasis on the national side.

He was then quoted in a Cape Town newspaper as saying, in view of the decision of Van der Wath that it was time 'to question that logic' of the team's priorities. That as they have not won anything and players, black and white, are eyeing the more lucrative Kolpak contracts in England, the issue needed a rethink.

'Money was spent in bringing players through the system, but now money is being spent to promote English cricket,' he grumbled without looking at the causes that has created this position.

Arendse said there was no clear answer to the question of when CSA should scrap targets/quotas. This was despite the SA Players Association's memorandum calling for the system to be revamped.

'The players are regarded as one of the main stakeholder groups. They are entitled to their opinion. That opinion will be put on the table, like any others, and we will discuss it,' Arendse is quoted as saying.

All this is most interesting, but it doesn't get around to supporting the views of the players and why the identity tag is still one of colour and not one of players. The third generation since unity in 1991 and almost fifteen years since is almost on CSA; the amateur wing has burgeoning talent, but the thrust is going in the wrong direction.

To produce talent that wins Tests, limited overs events and trophies and raises the sport's and players profile requires a common goal: not one that is forced artificially on the system. If CSA want to move ahead, they need to take a close look at England where they have a natural development system and based on merit.

CSA chief Arendse feels heat at the top!

2007-10-08T20:49:00.000+05:30

Trevor Chesterfield

Amid the fancy public relations act that followed Norman Arendse and his shoehorning into the post as president of Cricket South Africa to replace Ray Mali, now acting president of the International Cricket Council, there were a lot of grimaces as well that greeted the news.

Among those who didn't give it a second thought at first were the players and those members of the players' body, the SA Cricketers Association. Yet within weeks of Arendse taking over the post from Mali after a musical chairs duet, a few strange things have happened.

The first was how the decision by about 38 players to sign a moratorium that they were not in favour of so-called empowerment strategies and the dreaded quota system, as favoured by Arendse and certain others in the Cricket South Africa hierarchy, was leaked to the media. This had the president of the player's body, Ashwell Prince quitting. Little to nothing was said by CSA types. They were about to launch their bunfight, the ICC T20 Championship and didn't want disconcerting ripples to cloud the issue.

Nothing was publicly said either by CSA because they don't really enjoy it when players with a conscience take them on as they feel the system is marginalising others within the players' structure.

Prince was the first non-white South African to take over the role of captain in Sri Lanka last year. He is a humble enough young man with principles, and frankly, the strong egalitarian voice in me says that to use the term 'black' captain is wrong. Prince is the first from the previously disadvantaged society, group or whatever you want to call it, to earn the post. It is felt that he deserved it; labelling him 'black' because of his colour is wrong.

Anyway, calling him 'black' and not a South African is a mistake made by far too many South African journalists, reporters and so-called analysts and plays to the old classification gallery that displays certain lack of understanding of a nation still attempting to find a genuine identity. It would have been thought that after seventeen years since the formation of what is the United Cricket Board how such an egalitarian vision is still not accepted by all.

You don't read of people saying the white South African captain, Graeme Smith. And what is going to happen when an Asian is in line to become captain of the team?

There are a large number of critics in Asia of South Africa pushing the affirmative action line. One Mumbai-based writer said argued in a short message service (SMS) text before the ICC Twenty/20 Championship that in his opinion 'Proteans (sic) are liars, have no morals and are characterless'. If that is the view of an ordinary Indian, what would the new CSA president think of such a comment if it was sent to him? It would be interesting to find out.

Maybe it was, and perhaps why Arendse has found himself in the news again, allegedly shooting off his mouth over a second story leaked to an Afrikaans Sunday newspaper, which demanded comment. Whether this is a deliberate attempt to embarrass Arendse and his reaction begs questions about the accuracy of the comments he made.

Unlike the silence over Prince's decision to quit as president of the national players body when his opposition to quotas was made, this new disclosure caught Arendse wiping some sweat off his brow as the heat is turned up on his the statements he has since made.

Now he claims that his words have been twisted out of shape as much as the action of Paul Adams, and that he is not 'genuinely blaming at all whites for South African cricket's woes'.

This is all very interesting as there is the impression that Arendse didn't like one bit how the players association at large rejected the quota system and said so.

It is his view that criticism of transformation in cricket too often came from racist journalists, referring specifically to certain newspapers which had claimed that white English-speakers were being marginalised in all levels of cricket, while less competent blacks were placed in management positions. There seems to be certain paranoia creeping into this opinion.

'I'm not such a fool to think all our woes are the fault of whites,' he complains and says how many black, coloured and Indian people also do not believe in affirmative action, alluding no doubt to the views written in a report issued by the national players who met in a conclave and argued against such policies. But using classification as an identity label adds to the problem.

He wanted Cricket South Africa to talk about 'issues of patriotism' because though resources were being focused on giving the national team as much as those national teams of First World countries received, some players still left the country for greener pastures. Yet he uses ethnic labels to identify them: not as South Africans as it says on their passport.

Arendse said transformation since 1994 not only meant the promotion of more black and coloured players, but meant providing opportunities for women, the blind, the disabled, the rural poor and Afrikaners to advance in a sport that was traditionally dominated by 'privileged English boys from top high schools'.

This, however, did not mean that there was no space for white English-speaking players in the national team or management. Cricket SA is flexible about its transformation targets and would not enforce it in situations where it was inappropriate or impossible.

'I don't think there can be one white player who can say he has been denied opportunities,' he said, which flies in the face of a recent question sidestepped about why two talented players were said to be of the 'wrong colour' when asked why they were no longer in the mix.

Arendse had been aware from Makhaya Ntini, Herschelle Gibbs, Prince and about thirty others, who recently signed a memorandum against affirmative action how they were 'sick and tired' of being called quota players whenever the team loses.

Since then Tshwane Mayor Gwen Ramokgopa, which is part of the national capital Pretoria, suggests how Asians living in South Africa are 'adopted Africans without much of a voice'. That is an unnecessary xenophobic comment to make by a civic leader who should know better. This follows a row in some South African newspapers that Asians who supported India when they played South Africa in the T20 tournament at Kingsmead in Durban were being 'unpatriotic'. This is an ongoing argument in countries such as England, Australia and to a far lesser degree, New Zealand.

Yet when an fifth generation South African of Indian ancestry complains of being referred to as an Indian and not a South African, it requires not sympathy but a need to understand the hurt and feelings with the writer of a letter in a Durban Sunday paper about his identity.

No doubt as an advocate Arendse may have the same smart answer he gave to Heath Streak in early 2004 on what he should do when the dispute between Zimbabwe players and that country's cricket board over not only Streak's sacking as captain and the resulting players' strike because selection policy interference by the board, notably the bully Ozias Bvute, Zimbabwe Cricket's chief executive.

Bvute confronted me Queen's Sports Club in Bulawayo in mid-November 2003 during the second Test of the game against Zimbabwe and said, 'You whites from South Africa are not really welcome here. We only play with whites (teams) because we are told (by the ICC) that we have to.' This was after talking to a mixed group of mainly cheerful ten and eleven year olds and wanting to know their favourite Zimbabwe player(s). The chorus of 'Heath Streak' seemed to attract Bvute's attention and drew an immediate rebuke.

Recently, Ray Mali, former CSA president and now the acting ICC president uttered the words 'fairness, justice and equality'. They were not about the Cricket South Africa's current state of mind either. A quietly spoken, retired school teacher the words were offered at the start of the battle between Darrel Hair and the ICC about denying him his right to work. Mali was replaced as CSA president by Arendse and perhaps the words he offered might be useful for Arendse to remember.

Sensational Victory for India and for Twenty20!!!

2007-09-24T22:04:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Coming back from the brink of elimination was an extraordinary feat. To beat the high and mighty Australians into subjugation was the stuff of legends. But to snatch victory from under Pakistan’s nose needed every ounce of courage India could muster. Twenty20 could not have asked for a better encounter, or a harder fought winner in the end! The inaugural Twenty20 World Cup had two winners in cricketing spirit. But Twenty20 perhaps won more hearts than both teams put together.

Pakistan appeared gutted. And why should they not? Losing by five runs and losing their way after a phenomenal campaign will hurt Pakistan for some time to come. But Pakistan’s high jinx against India at World Cup continues. Led by Shoaib Mallik and a team of youth and exuberance, it was simply not to be Pakistan’s day. But Pakistan proved that they can be a sensation when they play like a team. There is much to be proud of, trophy in hand or not.

Pakistan were the team to beat. India did. Credit must go to India to hold on even when the game appeared to slip away. An extra edge of courage made India the first ever champions of Twenty20 on a World Cup platform.

The sedate manner in which India started their innings, threat lurked that this could be an antithesis of a final. Batting was not easy against the obvious superior Pakistan bowling attack. Wickets crumbled. Heroes fell by the way side. The target in the end seemed frighteningly short for a campaign to raise the Cup.

But India’s bag of tricks made this one magical atmosphere. Gautam Gambhir played his part. But there would not be fancy shots over the boundary for Yuvraj Singh. The stage was set perfectly. The team that wanted the Cup badly would have to fight. India fought back with aplomb. Pakistan’s wickets fell to a consistent R.P. Singh and Irfan Pathan and Pakistan shifted from cruise mode to a determinate struggle.

The task was getting onerous for Pakistan. But India could not afford to take it easy. The point could not have been driven home better by Misbah-ul-Haq and Shoaib Tanvir who connected the ball with ferocity that nearly snatched victory from India in the end. Joginder Sharma can take his place amongst the stars. Bowling at the death in two successive matches against Australia and Pakistan, Joginder saved India the blushes and spurred the team to victory.

It is hard to see beyond the youth to know why the team had a refreshing approach right through the tournament. Their courage to fight back from the mediocrity to stage three dramatic knock out matches to seal the World Cup has made India’s World Cup campaign a memorable effort, sealed by the sparkling trophy as a reminder of better days in India’s cricketing history.

For Mahendra Singh Dhoni, it has completed a three year honeymoon. His talk may appear confident but his body language speaks a rather positive dialect that reflects on the feedback from the team. A young captain, an inspiration leader and a man respected by the team he leads, Dhoni could not have asked for a better initiation to his captaincy.

He will come back to lead the charge against Australia and Pakistan. Not all days will be like this. But if Dhoni’s early inclinations suggest rightly, Dhoni has his head and his heart in the right place. Now if the BCCI can move away from geriatric redundancy, Indian cricket may well see men of these young boys.

Twenty20 has won over many a purist. Twenty20 cannot challenge the classic case of a Test. But what it has shown is that Twenty20 has its own place and niche and cricket has something to offer everyone. For Twenty20, it could not have asked for a better launch. Progressive Australia disposed, it has opened up the field for new champions, new heroes.

Twenty20 is not all about bang. The World Cup has been a short, sweet story no less inspirational than any other cricketing tale. India have raged with passion and enjoyed their game. Not all of cricket allows this, but any game is richer for the experience. In the translation of this exuberance into the other forms of the game remains paramount for India. Converting this victory into a successful formula should be India’s goal. Lifting the Cup is not the end; it is only the beginning that someone like future skipper Dhoni would do well to remind himself of.

That the final could swing either way is true. But the fact remains India showed a little bit more edge in the end, and were duly rewarded for plain sticking around. Their victories may not have been comprehensive (not many matches in the Twenty20 World Cup have been). But for fighting the odds, fighting their demons, fighting obvious weaknesses, fighting night after night, India passed an endurance test to herald what could potentially be a turning point in Indian history. India have shown more mettle and their victory is well deserved. On an even better note for the Indians, Irfan Pathan has bounced back and bleak days when one of India’s brightest shining stars faded gave way to a speculator array of dazzling fireworks. Bounce back ability is no longer a confined virtue.

It brings one to wonder: what would the men (who still happen to sit on the high chairs of the BCCI) who claimed India had no need to play Twenty20 have to make of this. Would they dare undermine India’s victory now? India’s victory and Twenty20 have proved a bonanza, the very princely purse that pays cricket’s luxurious days. Indeed the Cup flows over!

Tournament Favourites – Picky Finalists!

2007-09-23T21:57:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

It would be like killing two birds – money and mania – with one stone, er, tournament. But having come thus far, the scenario for the final suggests nothing could surpass a seething border rivalry. Pakistan and Australia have a ‘been there, done that’ feel about them while India-New Zealand seem a tad boring combination. On the other hand, Australia and New Zealand’s Trans Tasmanian rivalry has always had a combative thrill about them. Commercial cricket though would put the vote on the other piquant border- India and Pakistan in the final. But would Twenty20 throw up a new world champion or throw a new tantrum? The twist in the tale lay veritably in the semi finals.

Saturday’s double sundae featured some unusual entrants. Of the four semi-finalists, only one can truly claim to have held the banner of tournament favourites true. New Zealand was considered the most adaptive of all teams to this format of the game and reasonable performances kept the team on track to the semi finals. But thereafter Zealand played inexplicable cricket, one that they will sit back and look long into the sunset trying to decipher.

New Zealand may have just watched the match between South Africa and India a little too hard. The disease of failure can be quite contagious. If South Africa unraveled in a so called ‘safe’ game, New Zealand failed to perform to its potential. For all of the trying clichés used against Pakistan (including “Don’t know which Pakistan will turn up for the match), Pakistan performed uncannily professionally and consistently through the tournament.

New Zealand contradicted all the versatility they had displayed in the course of the tournament. Their tall hitters turned into tame batsmen and their running between the wickets was appalling. It was a lesson in cricket by the novice. Suddenly it showed not even the semblance of the New Zealand the world has come to expect of them.

It is an even sad reflection on Daniel Vettori and unfairly so. His selflessness for the team’s cause was evident as he sacrificed himself for some crazy misjudgement of running between the wickets by Ross Taylor, this one proving more costly than others. Taylor is a gifted batsman but his presence of the crease was reflective of the patchy, hesitant batting that New Zealand stuttered with. His mighty blows in the final over showed how his skipper’s presence of mind paid off. But would it be enough against a fired up Pakistan?

New Zealand looked remarkably relaxed at the change of innings. Perhaps it was a deliberate attempt to approach the Pakistan innings with nerves under control. But there would be not be many smiles for too long. Imran Nazir played a healthy innings, survived by a missed run out chance and a catch that neither wicketkeeper nor first slip really attempted to pouch. With a target that was never going to really test the opposition, Pakistan made their task all too easy. Except from a brief little melodrama that did not really threaten the outcome of the match, Pakistan were firm favourites for the finals come Monday.

New Zealand survive an own goal: On a cautious note, Lou Vincent was fortunate to survive a direct hit to his head from none other than his fielding team mate, Jeetan Patel.

The matter of the other semi final was not too far. Somehow while both, Australia and India, suffered hiccups, Australia appeared far less intuitive about the game and India’s resurgence against South Africa gave the latter that extra edge. But knowing Australia, India would not have it easy like Pakistan.

Australia have not shown the ability to crack under pressure. But pressure can do strange things to people. The greater the opposition effort, greater was the chance to put Australia under pressure. That was exactly what Mahendra Singh Dhoni and India did by batting first. Without the pressure of chasing on them or the fact that the bowlers could easily submit the initiative as Australia looked to make headway.

While other batsmen did play their part, yet again Yuvraj Singh proved the star of the show. More than his seventy, it was the alacrity with which he batted that set the tone for the way India would end in a flourish. Australia had to brace themselves and injured skipper Ricky Ponting could only look on concerned.

Australia’s reign thus far in the tournament can be attributed in large part to Mathew Hayden’s bat as much as some of their bowlers. On this occasion as well, Hayden nearly took the game away from India. Frenetic changes from Dhoni, not to mention taking a gamble on the odd occasion, paid off in the end. It did not come easy but it was helped by the fact that India had forty-fifty more runs in the bank than in their previous encounter against South Africa. From a possibly difficult situation for most teams, Australia holstered their chase in Hayden’s hands. Sreesanth, RP Singh and Irfan Pathan, all came good for the effort. But Harbhajan Singh held his nerve as did Joginder Sharma. In the end, it was the best team effort on exhibit for India in quite some time.

Australia appeared ill prepared for the scant regard and respect they would be met with by opposition teams. But even from a straight forward speaking stand-in skipper like Adam Gilchrist, excuses seemed to flow through at the end of the day. Gilchrist felt Australia missed it by one odd mistake. Let us be precise, Australia fell short by precisely three big shots. In Twenty20 matches, 15 runs are gold. And yes, Australia lost that sheen and they would have sounded a lot more dignified to admit it, accept their fate that this would be the first World Cup final since 1996 that would not see the famous green and gold.

For Australia to hide behind the excuse of Australia having come out of hibernation speaks of unprofessionalism. Surely, an event as big as the World Cup merited preparation, off season or not. Perhaps then Ponting was not off the mark claiming Australia needed to show a little more respect for the game. May be that is where Australia should look, in their backyard!

The tournament can rejoice; the outcome of the fanfare has outlived the expectations. Now if only it can continue for one final encounter…

SA’s worst dissection – as always at a World Cup!

2007-09-22T17:06:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Even the self-assured Graeme Smith appeared set aback by the stunning events of the just concluded encounter in the Super Eights of the World Twenty20 championship. This would be South Africa’s live nightmare at every cricket World Cup thus far. Just when it seemed South Africa had ridden over the storm, along came a hurricane and blew away the home team into bygone woe and piercing despair. Smith has a point. But the case hinges on more than his point. The host jinx stays; South Africa have once again missed the World Cup train!

‘Chokers’ is a cruel word, especially if you happen to be a fan of the team labeled so. However, if choking is a harsh word, it would be pretty hard to describe South Africa’s debacle against India on the sordid night. What would be fairer to say is that South Africa were faced with a scenario no one had foreseen. When the moment was upon them, they were plain too paralysed (and crippled by the early blows) to react, let alone salvage. When they realize they could lose it all, South Africa’s mind set changed – from staying crouched ready for an attack, the hunter suddenly became the hunted. Only in this case, it was not so much India that were preying on them, it was the burden of their sudden twist of fortune that proved to fearsome of one of the most ‘formidable’ teams of the tournament.

Graeme Smith seemed slighted by remarks that South Africa lost their virtual place in the semi final by virtue of their getting their equations wrong. Wherever that assumption came from, this time it did not appear South Africa were unaware of their target. It seemed a plain case of nerves making the tournament favourites stutter their way to another significantly shambolic World Cup loss.

Smith is a strong skipper and would not have let that predicament pass. But he is also shrewd to point out that the tournament that kicked out the team that had won all its matches thus far would have to be looked out. While he may have stated a thought provoking point, it must then create some cause for consternation that teams like Australia that have lost to the lowliest teams have made it thus far. The tournament has thrown open the doors such that most teams have scrapped through games and group tallies and perhaps, this must also be a case with Smith takes it all with a pinch of salt.

Smith was very aware of the loss of momentum. His fiery motivation in the middle of the Indian innings may have seemed like the tirade of a dictator. But Smith has his own way of gearing the team and leading the charge. In hindsight it would seem if the captain was not happy with certain mishaps in the fields (dropped chances, misjudged opportunities), he had every reason to be.

But just leafing back the articles in this column, one point was reiterated on the fateful night. South Africa’s top three never really fired in the tournament. There was no real charge from the start of the innings and if the law of averages had perhaps done their job, Smith would have been so aggrieved. But Smith has to take the blame for his own inability to see through the India’s resurgence and stayed on to impact the game more. South Africa were put to the ultimate test at thirteen for three. While in previous matches, the likes of Justin Kemp and Albie Morkel saw through the tough turmoil, to do it all over again was perhaps just a task too much.

It is all very well to boast of depth in the batting order. But to rely on the lower order while the top order does a lullaby is just not on, even in a short game like Twenty20. The recovery between Mark Boucher and Morkel did cause a few flutters for the Indians but it was another matter that held South Africa down while India motored on, right into the semi final.

Besides a difficult start to the chase, South Africa appeared paralysed. It was not just the possibility of loss, but also, rather the distant plausibility that they could go out of the tournament. Distant because all they has to chase was 126, a target not particularly frightening for a team of this depth and fortitude. What did them in was the sudden fear of an unanticipated scenario. The factor seemed to have crippled them beyond belief.

It would not have helped their chances that their prolific batsman of the tournament and their biggest connector of the ball, Justin Kemp, was felled by a run out. Some may even raise the issue of the dubious decision surrounding Herschelle Gibbs with the umpires coming increasingly under the scanner. But was it possible that the big three up the order, Gibbs, Smith and AB de Villiers, could have approached the innings differently? While it serves no purpose to ruminate on the past, these are perhaps the areas that the team should look at. It seems prophetic now when Kemp mentioned that there were a few more areas that South Africa could improve on.

But it is a matter to look into. Otherwise considered a formidable side, South Africa develop a sense of vulnerability about them when a World Cup comes around. Their fragility has bizarrely passed down even though significant personnel changes have come along as also a varied bunch of skippers, each more different from their predecessor. There is always next time, but South Africa are increasingly finding themselves reflecting more on their losses than setting their sights on significant victories.

This is nothing to take away from India’s plucky performance. Whether their batting faltered to reveal a rookie hero or one of their star bowlers proving wayward once again, India continued to fight. And that made all the difference. South Africa had the fate of this matches in their clutches. But when it was time to fight, the will and the might deserted them, with devastating effect.

Daniel Vettori openly said his team would support South Africa in the match against India in order to be able to go through. The match did turn on its head, and one does wonder, did New Zealand dare buy the Indians a round of beer knowing they could plausibly meet each other in the finals? Or did Vettori extend a conciliatory beer to the much disconsolate skipper of the home team? Not a pleasant treat, any which way one looks at it. New Zealand were fortunate, but South Africa have not ended the tournament a pretty sight. Ironically the team that first handed Australia its defeat in the warm up match, perhaps significantly of things to come, have to painfully look back only to realize they themselves had perhaps stymied their progress on the apparent road to victory!

Pakistan: Breaking out of the Cocoon in Impressive Style!

2007-09-20T20:10:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

In a thoroughly exhilarating inaugural Twenty20 World Cup, Pakistan is the only team to have made their final Super Eights match a contest of no threatening consequence. (South Africa, at the point of writing this article, still have a match against India and while it may not threaten to topple them from the virtual final four spot, still makes for a keen contest.) Pakistan though have come into the tournament rounds by leaps and bounds. But only a brave betting man would daresay Pakistan are the favourites to lift the cup by a mile.

Pakistan’s only loss came against India and that too not in the Twenty20 format of forty overs. It was in the bowl out that Pakistan got it all wrong and conceded the match to their fierce rivals. Overlooking the bowl-out clause cost them but not dearly. That would explain why the bowlers failed to strategize using the crease in a normal rhythm and run up and tinkered to make a mess. But Pakistan have not looked back in this Twenty20 and what was considered a slight imbalance with the fiasco with Shoaib Akhtar has died down to reveal a more stable, settled Pakistan under Shoaib Mallik.

Pakistan seem to have a hold on the game in a situation where another team would consider it dire. It does come as a surprise that Pakistan have done as well as they have and as cohesively as they have. Shahid Afridi’s coming down the order has raised many an eyebrow. But his usefulness with the ball has not gone unutilized, showing the value for having a blistering batsman who can also turn the game on its head with the ball.

Mohammad Asif suffered a bruise at Shoaib Akhtar and just to prove that Pakistan’s woes are usually self-inflicted, Asif has not really suffered the routine harrowing affairs of a bowler in a Twenty20 match. He has proved more than a handful, incisive, and deadly accurate from match one.

Another match who needs mentioning is Shoaib Tanvir. He is the biggest talk coming out of Pakistan and his performances have ensured he remains in the limelight. Although he attributes Wasim Akram for bringing the notice of the selectors to his talent, Tanvir seems to fit into the international arena with a degree of self-confidence and a down-to-earth personality. And if all goes well, the cricket world should hear more of the exploits of his enigmatic bowler.

But Pakistan’s strategy has a beautiful blend not just of youth and experience, but of bat and ball. Two seemingly scary scenarios and Pakistan made it without a scratch. Better yet, they looked decidedly on top of the game when the sun set on their encounters. Younis Khan and Shoaib Mallik have played their praiseworthy knocks with the bat. But the duo was joined by another name that hung around the international arena for a bit before he made a mysterious disappearances into the dry land. Misbah-ul-Haq could not have timed his return to the international game with greater aplomb and his mug shot gleams as he continues to remain the big to hit the ball the farthest (111m to be precise surpassing the likes of Justin Kemp, Albie Morkel and Chris Gayle).

Handsome are Pakistan’s gains as they have made a smooth and clean entry into the semi finals. For all of Pakistan’s clinical performance, and a well jointed array of skills with bat and ball and individual talents that make this a fascinating team to watch, Pakistan’s mercurial behavior of the past has not been on show. (Perhaps their batting against India as it fell away towards the end overs was a hiccup.)

Their bowling has been enigmatic; their batting has been superlative at the best of times. They may not have the high scores, or individual tallies. But Pakistan make a pretty impressive bunch and for all of the sub continent that has bemoaned of too much cricket, it is less likely Pakistan will be spared the circus of this enticing roulette that Twenty20 poses!

A lot rides on Pakistan. If not in the result, Pakistan have a major role in keeping the climax of the Twenty20 on track. For the sake of the tournament, one hopes Pakistan’s devious ways have blown away with the rain clouds. This is one case where the law of averages hopefully actually misses its mark, in the temperamental department at least!

SL : Another One bites the Dust!

2007-09-20T20:07:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Sri Lanka is perhaps the one team besides New Zealand who seemed to have a hang of the tournament. Dark horses perhaps, but decidedly Sri Lanka was showing the mature side if Pakistan could curb its temperamental ways. India was thrown in with England as two of the worst teams of the tournaments; harsh perhaps but there was too much deviation to predict. Sri Lanka though flopped at their worst moment. The result: it was not a pretty sight!

Australia were riding on a prayer and their final league match against Sri Lanka to make it to the final four. Men of cricketing acumen concurred: Sri Lanka deserved it more than Australia. Australia, one felt, never really tuned in to the tournament and paid a face losing price for their debacle against a zealous Zimbabwean squad. Sri Lanka were always brimming with confidence and seemed they could put no foot wrong.

Sri Lanka were on a high with Sanath Jayasuriya, the thirty-seven year old veteran of the bombastic bat, roaring like his hey days of the limited overs World Cup of 1996. It would then have to be said that Sri Lanka’s fall from grace had much to do with the luck of the charismatic all-rounder. Jaysuriya was taken to the cleaners by Pakistan and his lbw against Australia waylaid Sri Lanka beyond recovery point.

The hurdles grew and so did Sri Lanka’s woes. Against Australia, Sri Lanka failed to simply wind down. Their gung-ho attitude of the earlier games failed to sublimate as the Australian bowlers proved too hot to handle. But at least a couple of dismissals were soft, suggesting a greater subdued application at the crease could have seen better times for Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka were blown away by the speed of the game and by a man people are unfairly likening to Glen McGrath. Stuart Clark would like his own identity and certainly after the way he systematically decimated Sri Lanka’s pride and performance, he is not a man to take lightly.

One had to blink twice to see a side five down with virtually nothing on board. Even the minnows have not fallen as badly. Coming from Sri Lanka, it was a shocker. From being the favourites to put it past the world champions who failed to overcome Pakistan in their previous game, Sri Lanka put up a limp performance that every one would like to forget in a hurry.

Undoubtedly Sri Lanka’s worse day of the tournament and unfortunately at a stage of no comebacks. As well as Sri Lanka have performed, they simply did not have enough in the bank to overcome this horrendous performance. For the tournament, the timing of this clash could not have been any better. Not only was this a match between the so called favoruites and the so called fallen champions, it was also a knock out match that should have ideally brought out the best of both teams and made this a teething tussle.

But Sri Lanka put up their toothless side on show; the much hyped clash appeared never to have arrived. Now the much shell shocked Sri Lanka will find themselves on the flight back, their campaign to the inaugural Twenty20 cut short cruelly by their own inability at application as also, a resurgent performance from the slighted world champions.

Australia should consider themselves to have survived the vagaries of their shock and awe performances. Now they will in all likelihood without the resources of their skipper Ricky Ponting who was left shamefaced after their first loss to Zimbabwe. But Australia are finding their feet in this tournament and on their day, can blow away the opposition like they did to Sri Lanka. Australia will hope to capture that essence in the semi-final in order to reach the final pinnacle.

Australia have put their defeats past them and with this close to laying their hands on a second World Cup trophy in a year, will now go for crowning glory. Australia will be the team to beat, although that is not how all cricket fans would have liked it. Australia are the overwhelming favourites to be the least favourite side to win the tournament, if the fans were concerned. The green and gold have had it all too much for the fans to settle for more of the same. The tournament perhaps deserves a brand new champion. But this time it would be Sri Lanka who stands in Australia’s way!

NZ v SA: More Power to the Hosts!

2007-09-20T20:01:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

New Zealand have been the most amiable favourites to win the Twenty20 World Cup. Their performance over time has shown that they have a better sounding board on the game and the necessary artillery to deliver. One of the most prominent to show that spin by way of their skipper is not to be taken likely, they now face an uncertain future for the semi-final slot in the inaugural Twenty20 World Cup. South Africa have subdued the tournament favorites and ironically, are still their only refuge if New Zealand are to make it to the semi finals!

South Africa responded in style against a sloppy England and making it against New Zealand would virtually slot them in an invincible position in the lead up to the semi finals. Justin Kemp featured predominantly in leading South Africa courageously and majestically with the bat. The fall of the wickets at the other end failed to frazzle the tall all-rounder. Shaun Pollock and Mark Boucher had modest scores to show but their partnerships with Kemp was immensely substantial for the hosts to pull one over the ever-aspiring tournament favourites.

The defeat certainly hurt Daniel Vettori, whose pride would not have let him deflect from his primary objective as captain of New Zealand. Snide remarks were made in newspapers of New Zealand’s performance but they were harsh given their performance thus far. New Zealand begun well with the bat and threatened to take South Africa to the cleaners. Pollock seemed to come to grips with the game but threatened to lose it all once more in the face of the New Zealand assault.

Perhaps it would be better to say, it was South Africa’s bowling comeback that made a greater impact that New Zealand’s waywardness in batting. Once Morne Morkel (one of the two Morkel brothers who ominously stand to represent South Africa of the future.) came onto the scene, the entire scenario changed. Where Albie Morkel stuck in out at the sticky end of the previous game against England to subject the England bowlers to blistering blows, it was the turn of the other Morkel to steal the show and rightly so. He got South Africa back into the match when it seemed New Zealand had galloped out of the reach of the hosts.

The umpires are just going to face the brunt. Billy Doctrove denied a budding young bowler to right to fame. Morne Morkel, with four wickets already in the pocket, bowled out the batsman only to have to turn back and watch the umpire declare the ball a no ball. Resigned to it, he ended his spell. But the replays made for a horrific display as Morne seemed well within the bowling crease and his foot only half way over the line. Undoubtedly Morne will have many more moments to impact the game with the ball. Comparisons are already been made of Morne being the Shaun Pollock of the impending future.

But it a game where bombastic runs make heroes of batsmen overnight, this was a glaring oversight on the part of the umpire!

As Justin Kemp stated at the end of the game that South Africa still need to get a few more areas right in order to fully impact the Twenty20 game and their progress, South Africa have coped well in the absence of a spinner and in the constant presence of consistent criticism of their bowling appeared pedestrian and boasting of a sameness about them. However, if South Africa are to truly go the distance, one gets the feeling Graeme Smith will have to fire one significant innings at this final stage. AB de Villiers and Smith were on song in the warm up match where the hosts dealt the Australia a blow. But it is the top three that have to fire on all cylinders now and while Gibbs has only come back from injury, this is not the game that allows much time between recovery and achieving heart stopping glory. Perhaps Albie Morkel and Kemp would love to have a thunderous platform from which to shoot their cannon balls in the final important games.

A lot though will ride on the match between South Africa and India. India pulled one out of the hat against England although it took more than nerves to do it. Now India will have to attempt a Houdini act to help New Zealand pack their bags. The tournament would love a game of such proportions. Indian fans may just differ in their opinion. Daniel Vettori’s pride is at stake. He looked sheepish when he told the television commentator that New Zealand would support South Africa in the final game to go further. That was certainly not what New Zealand had in mind when they started out, and certainly not part of their original strategy. Who knew Twenty20 allowed time to switch to Plan B!

Ill Timing Precedes Speculation of Ill Will!

2007-09-20T18:17:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

It seems the big trio stayed away from the Twenty20 World Cup only to embrace the format in an unusual twist. If that does not throw dubious light on the politics of the sport in India, the skipper’s resignation and the apprehension of selection, all have once again taken the light out of the very version of the sport that has become the centre of turmoil for the money spinners of the game.

Controversy once again dogged the Indian campaign. News of Rahul Dravid’s resignation filtered ahead of the crucial Indo-Pak contest and speculation over Dhoni’s impending succession created a media frenzy that bordered on the inane and the disgusting. No one knows how to stay in the limelight that the BCCI and unfortunately once again the limelight seems notoriously intoxicated with the antics than with any serious breakthroughs.

For once, even the limelight shadow of Rahul Dravid appeared deviously mischievous. A captain that does not consciously court controversies was in the middle of the storm and if BCCI is to be believed, it was all by his design. A decision that would perhaps have been revealed to the media the day the Indian Premier League (IPL) was announced, postponing it by a day only meant the team would wake up in South Africa not thinking of their opposition of the day, Pakistan, but rather of what was brewing back home.

The media were once made to look sheepish as they flocked like a bunch of hungry wolves as if no Indian skipper has ever resigned before. So Dravid had resigned. It had to happen. At least in the one day game. Was he considered the skipper for the next World Cup? It would seem pretty obvious that any level headed sports body would have figured out a change of in order, now or later. When so much has been written about ‘the aging trio’, why did it create such turmoil? Or does India simply thrive on controversy?

While Dravid’s resignation should not have been surprising if logic was applied, what made matters murky was the fact that it seemed sinister for Dravid to make the announcement after a mixed affair that was the tour to England. That there seemed nothing innocuous that the trio shared the podium a day before, speculation surfaced that it was perhaps lobby groups that favoured Sachin Tendulkar or Sourav Ganguly that had finally got to the harrowed skipper.

Dravid always appeared a reluctant captain. But once thrust with responsibility, Dravid was not the type to back away. Considered the second wheel in Greg Chappell’s mayhem-like handling of the Indian cricket team, Dravid took it all on the chin. Defending himself was something he never felt necessary. Angered by the cheap talk, he refused to be unfazed in his ways on the field. Given the reputation of the sport, no doubt there is more than meets the eye. But knowing Dravid, perhaps even his best selling autobiography will not unravel a can of worms, just one man’s unsuccessful attempt to meet the captaincy role, off the field that is.

But it gave the news channels frenzied newsbytes and once again BCCI stopped short of making a bold announcement. Stretching themselves to only over just ten one dayers, they have given Mahendra Singh Dhoni an immature little stint at captaincy. Dhoni does not appear the kind of person to be affected by the duration of the stint or by the result of the short tenure. But that would be unfair even for the likes of him. One just hopes the BCCI take better care to nurture its young lot, because if players can stand the length of time, there is a decade of players to watch out for.

The team selection is another matter of consternation, not in its composition as much as its timing. The selection of the team for the one day internationals back home would have created considerable personal strife for a few members in the Twenty20 squad. Perhaps it is time it dawned on the selectors to let the current team perform without the threat of the future weighing, especially in a pertinent tournament such as this and a lot of hope hinging on this players to carry the flag further. Could not have the selection have waited until the team finished its Super Eights phase of the Twenty20, just a couple of days later?

It’s all in the timing, be it a shot, the team selection, or a potentially scenario changing decision. The BCCI has not resolved the coach mayhem created by the unceremonious exit of Greg Chappell. Now the team is without a Test captain and significant series against Australia and Pakistan looming. Chappell is back, albeit as Rajasthan Cricket Academy’s advisor and perhaps if his sarcasm and wit is still intact, chuckling at the status quo of affairs within the BCCI. There is still a case for handling matters deftly and with dignity, without deflecting attention from ongoing events.

Settling Tall Scores in Hair Raising Affair!

2007-09-20T18:15:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

England knew their fate even before the game against India got underway. The England team piled up like school boys (a few even chewing their brittle nails) as they watched Justin Kemp stealing the show and the match for South Africa against New Zealand. That also meant, South Africa’s victory left no room for comeback for the men of cricket origin.

On the other hand, India found plenty of time between matches for controversies, not necessarily slanderous, but deviating from the event nonetheless. Could Dhoni handle the heat, of the change of guard back home and the fluctuating fortunes of the team in South Africa in a do-or-die situation? Undoubtedly all eyes were on Dhoni, as India’s new captain in more than one sense. But stealing the thunder seemed order of the day for the openers and for one middle order south paw, Yuvraj Singh.

England were considered tournament favourites, no by virtue of any form, but by the fact that they had perhaps played more Twenty20 matches in the domestic scenario than any other Test playing nation. But if there is one thing about England, apart from their brief success under Michael Vaughan and the Ashes victory of 2005, they have had little cheer over the last decade. Even that was considered a flash in the pan. All the talk of finding their mark and their balance was quickly rendered redundant and their team composition continues to flummox most cricketing brains.

If an example were to be cited, in the match of little consequence for England except perhaps playing for pride (whatever that means), England chose to hold back Andrew Flintoff and Dmitri Mascarenhas in favour of Owais Shah and Luke Wright even as England were running out of overs. The difference is telling considering the fact that England were neck and neck with India’s tally until that penultimate over when Yuvraj turned it on. Dmitri should have at least been given an opportunity to silence Yuvraj’s claims of the former being the cause of his grievance.

It has been precisely matters like these that have become the watershed of England cricket and the stalemate that England are finding hard to break out of. Their fielding has been paltry, given their own modest standards but it has done little to help their bowlers salvage something back for the team. Even in the game against South Africa, crucial misses such as that of Albie Morkel, resulted in South Africa getting out of the clutches and into a league of their own.

The Indian openers started awkwardly, particularly Virender Sehwag who seemed to try very hard to get out but the balls proving too good for the best of batsmen. Eventually the self-destructive streak subsided and a more vintage Sehwag looked to break through the clouds. It spelt great start for India as Sehwag and Gautam Gambhir got into a zone of their own and left England gasping thereafter.

That Twenty20 is a game relished by all batsmen was no more proved when Yuvraj and Dhoni tossed around thoughts as to who should follow whom. Eventually Yuvraj prevailed on Dhoni and then, on England with a might of near unmatched proportions. Dhoni went in first, but Yuvraj’s feats lasted through the night. Stuart Broad had no clue what he was getting himself into when he acceded to bowl the penultimate over of the match. Yuvraj Singh did not know either than he would soon be joining the likes of Gary Sobers (and Malcolm Nash), Ravi Shastri (and Tilak Raj), and Herschelle Gibbs (and Daan van Bunge) as he strode his way into the constellation of stars.

Yuvraj claimed that hitting the first four sixes of that over did not seem out of the ordinary. It was only when he caught sight of Dmitri Mascarenhas lurking in the outfield that his stinging pain when the latter blasted him for five sixes not so long ago in the series in England came back to him. Himself scarred from the treatment meted out to him in the aftermath of that effort, Yuvraj chose to inflict a few of his own on the young English lad as Broad could only watch as Yuvraj played six out of six textbook shots to set the ball sailing over the boundary every single time.

A first for Twenty20, and England had just been hit all over the town!

While Dhoni spoke all the right notes at the post match conferences, when he roared off that his team has finally put out the all-round performance demanded of them and that the bowlers bowled professionally, there had to be a few guffaws. Admittedly, it would be unfair to judge Joginder Sharma on his first outing in the tournament. But one had only to look back on the South Africa-New Zealand match to see what ‘professional’ bowling truly entailed. India managed to keep things on par. The only consolation for England lay in the fact that despite knowing that they were out of depth to actually win the match, they managed to stretch India more than the latter would have liked, especially with back-to-back do-or-die encounters, the following night against a resurgent South African side!

Another Pietersen howler and the T20 'bowl out' farce

2007-09-18T20:40:00.000+05:30

Trevor Chesterfield

Not only did Kevin Pietersen get a good dollop of egg on his face at Newlands last week. So too did Pakistan's new coach, Geoff Lawson.

There are far too many, as with any number of betel chewing crooked politicians with their big mouths and bullying pals, who shoot from the lip before thinking of the mess they will step into.

Pietersen, with certain arrogance of the politicians, suggested Australia could easily end up being humiliated by England at the Cape Town venue in their Group B T20 outing. Like the politicos he found that (metaphorically speaking of course) chewing an excess amount of betel maybe led his thinking astray.

And Pietersen, by allowing his tongue to runaway with him, it was the England team that was embarrassed by the end of match remarks from Ricky Ponting with his careful but well aimed jibe. Or was it that Pietersen was also high on something else while offering braggadocio style sound bytes for the television?

Pietersen added to England's downfall by failing with a totally forgettable batting performance with an innings of 21 that was barely remembered among some of the gems that have been played before and since that Newlands innings. It really doesn't pay to act too smart, which he tried to do but fell out of the pram.

At least Ponting admitted that not only had they paid scant respect to Zimbabwe and less or the T20 format, but knew they were well 'underdone' when they lost to a side who won because they fielded well and a young batsman in Brendan Taylor who was prepared to take on the Australian bowlers.

Still only 21, Taylor is the type of thinking player who could do with more exposure of this style of combustive batting that in a sense suits his gameplan. Zimbabwe were always going to be found out in the long term. But they did have a series of slogs against South Africa to help them find some semblance of form after most countries decided it was sensible to bypass Mugabe's fiefdom run by corrupt politicians.

Peter Chingoka and his overblown government henchmen Ozias Bvute and Lovemore Banda would have been surprised at the support Zimbabwe had at Newlands in their two games. It was interesting, yet pleasing to see the multicultural mix (as in all venues) at the games. A decade a go it was decidedly pale, but since 2003 the demographic mix explains how the normalisation process has taken place.

Naturally Taylor's innings was headlined in some media as his 'coming of age'. Wow. If you really think about it, that is among the top five tired clichés in the written (and spoken too if you wish) English language. It sucks. It says precisely nothing that is really intelligent. Yet browsing the newspapers on the internet is enough to make you really wonder if the subeditor writing the headline knows why he slapped it on a story that says nothing of a sort.

Anyway, whoever within the International Cricket Council's playing affairs committee dreamed up the idiot clause in the playing conditions of deciding a tied match in such a farcical manner as a 'bowl out,' should be forced the walk the plank off Durban bay with a school of hungry great white sharks waiting.

Lawson, could of course be excused into thinking Pakistan had the bowlers to hit an unguarded set of stumps. But even then they were unprepared as no one it seems read the tournament's playing conditions fine print. After all, that is one of the jobs of the team manager and coaching staff.

Anyone with commonsense would agree with India's captain, Mahendra Singh Dhoni comments that he didn't want to see a game end in such fashion as they had played hard to get a result 'and it should always stay on the field'.

It was far too gimmicky and all for the sake of expediency and denies the spectator the enjoyment of having watched a tight, hard game between two hyped teams. Not all the glib and facile PR chatter is going to convince thousands otherwise. They had the net run rate to decide the final places in that group, why fuss about with a needless 'bowl out'.

In England, to get a result a match of T20 slogs they use a single stump, which would have made it tougher. But India in this case were a lot more streetwise than Pakistan, admitting they had practised for such an eventuality: in this case a matter of covering all eventualities.

It is how my dear late friend Bob Woolmer would have reacted. He was from the old fashioned school, and that meant careful study of the playing conditions and re-reading the laws, especially the new ones.

Indo-Pak Fireworks for Twenty20!!!

2007-09-15T01:23:00.001+05:30

Pak for India: Fizzle, Sizzle, Fizz!!!

India for India: Dravid and Media Frenzy

What else? A Tie!!!

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Is it mere coincidence that for a second time in one calendar year, two successive World Cup campaigns begin with controversies for Pakistan involving Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif? How much role Asif had to play is hard to tell before the truth is out (if it is let out). But if there one thing the crucial Twenty20 match between India and Pakistan should tell Asif he is better off staying away from Akhtar? (In the same vein, would someone tell Akhtar being the bad boy is only enticing to an extent! The image eventually wears down even on the easily enticed!) The only difference was : Pakistan and India never turned up for their scheduled clash. Barely six months later, the schedule has ensured there shall be escape this time round!

This was the second big billing match (with Sri Lanka and New Zealand postponing their encounter for a safer Saturday). Yet again, it seemed the overhype had killed it. England, the so called experienced men of Twenty20, took little time in showing they had changed little since their Ashes debacle not that many months ago. Someone should have told them, this was not Zimbabwe they were playing and even then, it was surprising they sleepwalked their way through the match. Australia though sported a different look: rugged, determined and merciless. A far cry from the jovial, innocuous faces from their drubbing at the hands of Zimbabwe. It seems too bad then that the one team that showed spunk in both matches consistently is packing bags. But Zimbabwe have done more than their fair bit to make this inaugural Twenty20 memorable, beyond the expectations of the organizers.

But it was the final match of the first Friday of the event that was made to appear larger-than-life. Mahendra Singh Dhoni exuded genial calm at the toss, suggesting the team was sufficiently relaxed. But all it takes in one emphatic blow from the opposition to take the smiles off India. Mohammad Asif bowled with an accuracy that even the feted Australian bowlers would envy. Four overs were all he was allowed and that was all he needed to break India’s bones. A wicket for every over, more ghosts exorcised between one World Cup and the next!

It cannot also be coincidence that three outstanding bowling performances have emanated from Durban. First it was Mark Gillespie’s four for seven against Kenya that sealed it for New Zealand. Shahid Africa came back with the ball with four for nineteen against lowly Scotland who tested Pakistan’s batting but collapsed when it was their turn. Now Asif has created sensation in a big game with four overs of four for eighteen! Perhaps a pointer to teams scheduled to play there in the next round!

Interestingly also, Danny Morrison was counting on an average of thirty-eight dot balls to win a bet with his fellow commentator colleagues but was shocked to inform the previous day’s match conceded eighty-eight! Will have to wait for the end of this match to count them, given India’s struggle. After Asif’s advice to play Twenty20 at Durban like a Test match, it would be worthwhile to count at the end of the match!

Robin Utthapa’s half-century was matched by Misbah ul Haq. But Pakistan had made a mess of the chase themselves with India bowling a good counterattack to build the pressure. It took Misbah’s ferocity to put Pakistan within touching distance. To have lived up the billing, it had to be close. So, Pakistan needed one off the final delivery, which they didn’t and the result was jubilation for India who escaped with a tie by the skin of their teeth.

What once seemed to have slipped away from India suddenly evened things out in the middle. The rarity of the shootout meant players and umpires had a merry time sorting out the nitty-gritty rules. It seemed more like a picnic as all the Indian players lined up for a practice hit at the stumps. The final Indian line up created much cause for concern, but it was still a matter of delivering for a more stable Pakistan line up. Some how the tenseness of the game seemed released already for the Indians who appeared to have taken the shootout more of an exercise than an integral part of the game that would decide the victor of the match.

But once it came down to it, even the smiling Sehwag delivered the first salvo. Yasir Arafat made a complete mess of his bowling and to make matters worse, Harbhajan came with glee and went back the same way! Pakistan missed a beat by not following the simple trick of bowling off their routine run up and paid a heavy price for their lack of rhythm. It seemed a mockery as Uthapa took a bow! India 3-0 up. Afridi failed miserably and India held their nerve, followed their routine and won the game.

While admittedly the nature of the shootout is unique in cricket, somehow the fact that it was played out for the first time at this level made it more of a comedy rather taken with the seriousness it should have. India got the job done and that is all that matters. For Pakistan, ironically their bowlers got the team into a winning position and the biggest let down came from their no show! India: out of jail tonight!

More on the Indian scene: Why is there such a stink being raised from within the BCCI shackles? Rahul Dravid’s decision to step down from the captaincy and the decision become news on the day when India actually begin their campaign in a virgin version of the game is despicable to say the least.

The endless tirade on the television channels travelling the length and breadth of the country asking people’s opinions (plausibly because no one official was telling them anything more) was annoying and exhausting. Not even for a brief moment was the focus brought back to the crucial game.

It’s time the media did not give in to every self-seeking publicity the BCCI chooses to procure. These decisions happen, especially in India, this should be expected. Controversy dogs the sub continent undermining their own stature and that too what all the world’s eyes are trained on them. Dravid has resigned. It’s happened. Move on with it. When more material filters, give the game its due and air the views. Why subject the nation to a day long barrage of former cricketers who are lapping up the sound bytes while also filling their pockets for more than a measly meal? Especially when they have nothing significant to know light on, or provide insight on the situation!

Worse still, are news stories of “BCCI tell sources…” Have we not been to this circus before? Admittedly last time it was about the coaches, but look where it got us? We are now a coach-less ( or is too many cooks? Either way…) team now without a captain! The BCCI kept feeding bluff about the appointment of the coach before bluff caught up with them. No, we will wait for the first twenty-hours after the BCCI states they have appointed a new skipper to check the veracity of their statement. (That’s how long it took for the Graham Ford announcement to go bust).

( And just to add on: If “BCCI tells sources…” do turn true, it would be nothing short of tragic. Sachin Tendulkar has just returned from a decently successful tour of England. We have seen his gruesome side as skipper not once but thrice. Let him play his own game! Why spoil a good thing? )

Pakistan’s new coach Geoff Lawson said his team was aware of the fact that they had never beaten India in a big match encounter, especially the World Cup. Could they break the jinx here in South Africa?

West Indies Ignite T20; Spontaneously Come-Bust!

2007-09-13T22:23:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Count on the West Indies to initiate the art of swashbuckling into a terrain that would make novices of veterans. Yet it would seem they do not know their own strengths and their entire body language lacks conviction. Their demise within three days of the inaugural Twenty20 World Cup is as much an upset as Australia being made to eat humble pie for dinner in their first outing!

Is it a mere coincidence that once again a World Cup lung opener in South Africa involves a duel between the West Indies and the hosts? West Indies threatened to do to South Africa what they did in 2003. But hold on. Somewhere there seemed an element of doubt, a slack in momentum but it was all that was needed for South Africa to come through the flames unscathed. In the end, it all seemed a breeze. Shouldn’t South Africa buy their counterparts a round of beers for their efforts? Not only did the West Indies undo the hard work for the first session, they went through the entire length to entirely humiliate themselves, even alienate themselves from being taken seriously, especially when they looked good for the taking.

It is always a sad affair listening to a disappointed Tony Cozier. It felt worse still for the West Indian commentators, who could do little but surmise with the rest of lot of the dismal antics of their home team. Having played and carried the pride of the nation on their shoulders, they seemed weighed heavier still to watch the present state of affairs. (A warning to Australia to never let their guard down. The fall from the perch is not only hard on the bones; it is heavier on the heart for those that carry the feelings of the nation long after they have served their duty.)

Tony Cozier could not have been more apt when he spoke of how West Indies showed the world how to play the game in the first half and how not to play in the session after the break. And that was all that there was to the West Indies on the inaugural night. Last time round, South Africa bowed out of the World Cup on the face of an onslaught from the struggling West Indies. The status for the West Indies did not change neither did the context in which they batted. But the result would not have been to any one’s liking, even neutrals watching the game.

It was not the defeat but rather the manner of defeat that was jaw dropping. Where Chris Gayle’s whirlwind innings, a record by the way for Twenty20 (what a start!), should have elevated the team, the errors in the field rose astoundingly and the bowling was a shamble. Not a few months ago, West Indies shared the two match Twenty20 series with England in England. But on this day, they played like they have never played cricket before!

Many hailed Gayle’s inspired captaincy for the turnaround of fortunes in England at the fag end of the tour. Gayle’s innings should have furthered that impetus. But with captaincy resting now with the recovered Ramnaresh Sarwan, perhaps all is not well after all. Gayle looked visibly perplexed by how the second session shaped up.

The only reason no one raised a whisper about match fixing is because (and this is a sad observation) that the West Indian ability to self-destruct is something the world is getting accustomed to. Having said that, it still seemed hard to fathom how any team could go so low as to actually concede a match after setting a terrific target to chase. The slipping bit is difficult to comprehend; however, that once the slide starts, the road can get awfully slippery as the West Indian found out to their disdain.

What hurt the West Indies can be capped off in three points: they lost the momentum after Gayle was dismissed; they dropped key catches; and they bowled with far too much indiscipline that cricket (and a punishing game like Twenty20) can tolerate.

While Gayle was in full throttle, no one could stop the force that seemed to be thriving on South Africa’s seemingly one paced attack. But with his dismissal, West Indies could not sustain a third of their momentum up to that point. They lost their way on the road to making history in Twenty20 in setting a mind boggling target. While the eventual target was still telling, they had lost the momentum and the drive and simply failed to finish on a high.

The point is: more matches have been won by teams that have finished on a flourish than those that have painstakingly gained momentum only to fizzle along the way. Initiative one handed back to the hosts! More importantly, a fair bit of fragrance of hope was sent along with the parcel.

There are times when even the most fanatical fan will empathize with the drop of a difficult catch. However, West Indies dropped sitters, well, sitters at this level any way. It was shocking to say it mildly that teams come to this level and yet players, even good players with established reputations, succumb at the first sign of pressure. How costly did these lapses prove? Herschelle Gibbs and Justin Kemp took South Africa home, against a daunting challenge. That was conceding what the West Indies could ill afford!

Twenty-seven wides may seem negligible. But besides those twenty-seven runs (a decent innings had it been scored by a batsman in a Twenty20 match), it was the down pour of rains that followed in consequence of West Indies having to bowl twenty-seven additional deliveries that sealed their fate. Scathing as it may seem to dissect a team for its obvious defects, innumerable are the times when teams have lost not because of another team’s flamboyance but for want of doing the simple things right, things they train repeatedly for and one that memory should make second nature to the player’s repertoire of skills.

And don’t forget the other factor. South Africa were in trouble straight away. West Indies must have had a cold because they did not smell blood. Guts were all that skipper Graeme Smith was willing to reveal. Grimacing with pain, he played with intuition and he played a strategic game. No drives, a slog at the slighted hint. Daren Powell and Fidel Edwards should have been fired up and enticed to inflict a few more blows. Instead the team turned blind, to add to their misery and to the opportunities that literally fell in their lap. Gibbs hobbled, Smith groaned. Yet South Africa rode home on a high! If it were a mathematical equation, that should never have happened!

It was not surprising to watch the West Indies go down to Bangladesh. Nothing surprising there. If an outstanding innings by one of their team members (correct that: not just one of their team members but a recent leader who led them to a famous and inspirational victory) fail to inspire the West Indies to lift their game and their convictions, nothing will!

Zimbabwe Topple Australia; Rattle England!!!

2007-09-13T22:20:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

This was more than the tournament organizers bargained for! Did they get their money’s worth? Who knows, judging by the many empty seats? Perhaps Ricky Ponting’s statement, “We should respect the game more,” should have applied to the local fans that missed out on an enterprising feast. It was a night where Australia’s nightmares began even before they went to bed. For the rest of the world, it was a day neither Zimbabwe nor the rest of the cricketing world would forget in a long time to come!

What a night! This is the kind of game the World Cup in the Caribbean would have needed to set it on fire. It certainly is burning hot, just check under Ponting’s collar. For the world champions to be trounced completely by the supposedly meekest Test cricket playing nation in the world would not have gone down well with any self-respecting Australian.

Only about three days, Australia made headlines, having lost the warm up to hosts South Africa. Apparently it did not concern them, not enough to think they could be upstaged by the long standing team who has not been able to shake off the minnows tag. If the first defeat did not wake them up, this will only push them into a realm, potentially dangerous for their forthcoming opponents.

But few in the rest of the world would have any empathy for the self-proclaimed connoisseurs of the game. Ruling the roost always attracts enemies and the sadist in every person bares his fangs at the prospect of the most glittering team in the world cowering into submission. But given Australian high handed cockiness, they derive even lesser sympathy than any other team around the world. Even the proud Ian Chappell had to make a scathing remark (this time not against a non-Australian team) that the team in red (Zimbabwe) looked and played like champions and the team in red (Australia) looked like minnows to an outsider. Well said.

This should be called a shock defeat. Instead the only people truly shocked (and defeated) are the Australians. The whole world is rejoicing Zimbabwe’s success. It is true, “Laugh and the world laughs with you. Cry and the other guy has an even better sob story.” Zimbabwe’s political turmoil sullied their sport, and the dirt on the hands have been hard to scrub off. Plunged into darkness, their Test status in limbo, and a team looking ever more vulnerable than at any other time in history, Zimbabwe were the last team to make a fist of the battles thrown their way.

Playing a tough draw at the very beginning of the tournament is not easy, even for the so called pros. But Zimbabwe approached it in a manner than is inspirational to all and sundry. Zimbabwe held an aura of fearlessness that saw them through even when they briefly appeared to lose their way. Standing tall took on a whole new meaning.

People fear Brett Lee not because of his speed, but because of the precedence in being known as a speed demon with the ball in hand. But the way Zimbabwe took on the challenge, Lee’s blade seemed blunt and the likes of Nathan Bracken and Mitchell Johnson, mere swords of paper and glue!

Zimbabwe did not come without a game plan. In fact theirs seemed a structured approach, ironically so when Twenty20 is being hailed as a game with no time to think. Vusimusi Sibanda went fro carnage while Brendan Taylor stayed put, determined not to leave the field until he had sealed the deal for his team. It took some rain, some drama, a potential miss by three runs if Messrs. Duckworth and Lewis had anything to do with it.

But it was Zimbabwe’s night. It had begun that way and even they needed half a dozen in the final over, they chose to remain undeterred. On the day fortune did favour the brave. But it also favoured men of steel, and also, hard working, indigenous men who refused to be intimidated by the reputation of their opponent.

Losing can become a mental trap, and one can easily forget that a door is all it takes to step out of it. Had Zimbabwe lost this game, no one would have held them responsible. To put it in a better way, had Zimbabwe fallen placidly, no one would stir, or even shed a tear. Being trampled upon had become a romp, at the sound of sounding highly euphemistic. Zimbabwe rose over their own obstacles, and it certainly took a lot out of them.

Like Kepler Wessels, former South African captain, said, it would be hard to repeat their triumph twice in successive days simply because the victory would have taken a lot from them, the realization of it even. To earn recognition as world beaters from becoming virtual nobodies was no small feat. If anything, it should spur them on not only in future victories but in future defeats as well. The comeback road is usually uphill. But the hike becomes a little easier recalling what led them this far in the first place.

Zimbabwe could not quiet relieve the magic from the previous match in the game against England. But they are on the road of redemption. There was plenty of gust and gumption, even as they went down to England. Make no mistake. Zimbabwe was not an easy opponent to negotiate for England in their first match in the tournament. Zimbabwe still have slim doors open for them to go through, but their have done more than stamp their attendance. They have made this journey counts and for the sake of cricket, one hopes their journey is less obstacle ridden and bears more their exuberance and fearless determination (courage in one word) on their road to recovery.

Australia are a different kettle of fish. Australia do not take kindly to defeat, any defeat. The fact that they went down so insipidly must have been a difficult night to sleep on but a more difficult morning to wake up to. But if there is anything we have learnt of the Australia is that they do not take defeat lying down. That only means England will need to play with more authority than they did against Australia if they are to shut the door on their Ashes nemesis. England would do well to play out of their skins, not just for themselves, for the survival for a feisty Zimbabwean team. Come what may, Zimbabwe celebrated like they had won the World Cup! The rest of the world joined them as if they had, if only for a day!

South Africa- More Questions than Answers

2007-08-09T23:15:00.000+05:30

by Trevor Chesterfield

If reading between the lines of the new deal between South Africa's players and their board, anyone thinking these days of signing a Kolpak deal with an English county might be asked about his views of loyalty to flag and country.

It's a little different, you gather, from the previous option. This was, despite having talent you are told by the selectors that as you don't fit into their plans (or the team's management) – long-term or even the short variety – you have no future in the game in the country. In other words 'get lost – we really don't want you'.

How this is likely to change with a new national selection panel now headed by Joubert Strydom, is a matter for conjecture. A respected former captain of a successful Free State side of the 1980s as well as Hansie Cronje's first provincial captain, Strydom, who also captained Northern Transvaal (later Northerns) in the early 1990s, comes from a family rich in cricket history (as well as other peripheral sports).

Then again, if you have a quality man as Johan Volsteedt as your coach at your alma mater, Grey College in Bloemfontein, it also helps. It was Volsteedt who also had a hand in shaping the playing careers of Kepler Wessels as well as Cronje and more recently Boeta Dippenaar.

Because of his family background, Strydom's cricket culture, as you would find in cities such as Bloemfontein, runs deeper than most Afrikaans-speaking youngsters. Because of this he can so easily identify with the depth the struggle Afrikaners had to establish the game during the years when an English-speaking elite dominated.

Yet in this struggle, as with the growth of the modern game and its 21^st Century image, the identity factor needs certain examination. Serious questions need to be asked also of South Africa's administrators and the role they plan to play in the transformation cause. Is it about revolution or evolution?

Is this why also there are about thirty or so South Africans playing within the English county as well as Irish and Scottish systems? And this is not counting those in the various leagues, or recently retired because they feel there is little to no chance of them being selected, if talented and good enough, from the system. There is a paradox here, but I shall return to that conundrum later.

Marginalisation of players

Now the new president of Cricket South Africa, Norman Arendse, a Cape Town advocate, in his acceptance address at last week's annual meeting, made great play on the historical past of the game and its former English roots. Then what followed was the feeling, and this is all it is, that Mr Arendse was quiet happy that the game now had fewer players, or administrators, who were English-speaking.

In fact, there was this impression in the late 1990s and early into the new century that there are those in Cricket South Africa who would quite happily see the demise of English schools cricket or those coming from similar backgrounds.

It was 'find a career elsewhere' syndrome with the sort of sophistry you can expect from administrators who having already happily screwed up the careers of twenty or more top players were looking for other victims. Now those in charge of affairs might even wonder why players are migrating to other countries to follow a career and maybe win a Test, or at even a limited overs cap.

If you do a rough count of the number of wicketkeepers who were born in South Africa , or have some form of umbilical links with South Africa, and have moved successfully on elsewhere, there is the impression that as with Kevin Pietersen apart, Cricket South Africa were quite happy to allow their talent to pack their tepee and move on..

Apart from totally crass provincial selection policies, and this involves more than several cases in point, the national administration doesn't seem to particularly worry about the long-term and dwindling talent pool. After all, how many new faces are there in the emergent squad Kepler Wessels took with him to Australia? They may have won the tournament, but apart from about four players, the remainder are not part of the mainstream Test squad.

Cape Cobra's JP Duminy has sat on the periphery for several years and now that Vaughan van Jaarsveld has opted for a Kolpak deal, he gets a nod.

Not that South Africa's media are critical of the way administrators, or provincial selectors, have handled touchy issues. Apart from a few, the media has been decidedly mute when it comes to decisions by players to immigrate or seek Kolpak contracts. They seem to focus more on self-indulgent matters with their narcissistic views of affairs than about the game and the genuine long-term affects. They have, to a point allowed a foreign element to write what the South Africa media need to present.

This is also noticeable with some websites where certain British-based writers act as though they are deep in the know of South African affairs and are on intimate terms with the players. There's also a certain jingoistic attitude that has crept into their on-line chatter that is unmistakeably cliquish in presentation and a turn off when trying to follow commentary of the Tests and slogs.

Marshmallow event

A glance at the South African Twenty/20 squad for this version of yet another World Cup event, contains Roger Telemachus. How much longer are the national selectors going to keep this guy in the mix? Sure it's a marshmallow event, but he's become such a washy bowler that there is the impression he's making up the numbers.

And Neil McKenzie's recall to national arms after so long in the wilderness suggests its some form of compensation for A: deciding not to opt for a Kolpak contract; B: there is no one else. Having told players such as Martin van Jaarsveld, that he didn't have a future; ditto Hylton Ackerman, Jacques Rudolph and Dale Benksnestein. Ryan McLaren, now with Kent is about to join this collection of pale males, while Riki Wessels (that's the 21-year-old son of Kepler Wessels), is playing for Northamptonshire. But, keeping a close eye on the South African media, nary has a query been asked of Cricket South Africa about the continued talent drain.

While Cricket South Africa's chief executive Gerald Majola complained recently about Vaughan van Jaarsveld (no relation to Martin) taking up the Kolpak option, nothing was said about classy wicketkeeper Kruger van Wyk's immigration a year ago to New Zealand in search of international honours. Now joining him is his close friend Johann Myburgh, Titans franchise player who feels New Zealand offers him a better opportunity to achieve some form of international recognition.

Naturally the Titans franchise chief Andy O'Connor couldn't care less. From reports, he didn't consult either Van Wyk or Myburgh. But as O'Connor is East Rand-based it doesn't say too much for the future of the franchise long-term goals of keeping quality players. The question of whether, with Myburgh, we have another Kevin Pietersen situation developing also looms.

But look at it this way, in the case of Van Wyk, the more wicketkeepers who quit for foreign contracts with migration in mind, the longer it allows Thami Tsolekile to retain his national squad place. When he made his Test debut in India at Kanpur and a week later Kolkata, his flawed performances were a decided liability to the side.

Apart from Van Wyk there is Nic Pothas (Hampshire) and Gerad Brophy (Yorkshire ) along with Wessels. Brophy, from Welkom joined the English county from Ireland by way of Free State.

It was interesting that Arendse, is his acceptance address didn't mention once concerns about a talent drain. Is this because none of the formerly disadvantaged have been affected? Or in fact that it helps them as it lessens the talent pool? Had someone such as Ashwell Prince or Herchelle Gibbs opted for a Kolpak contract and not made themselves available for South Africa, it would be interesting to hear the howls of protest and accusations as well as heated comments emanating from such a personal decision.

Let us then, examine, Arendse's statement and see what lies ahead for Cricket South Africa over the next year.

Sport of winners

'I see my role as president (of CSA) as being there to lead the team ethos of Cricket South Africa as set out in its vision: namely to make South African cricket a truly national sport of winners.

'There are two key elements to this vision:

'Firstly, to make cricket accessible and to be supported by the majority of South Africans. This is why we will continue to have development and transformation as the driving forces behind everything we do.

And secondly, to make cricket a sport of winners we have to pursue excellence at all times. And to achieve excellence, we have to build capacity across all levels of cricket.

'It is important that we remain constantly aware that our sport is played in the context of a democratic South Africa and that we are a nation of diverse peoples and cultures. This does not mean that we don't share the same goal; it simply means that we must use our diversity as our strength because this makes us different from other nations.'

What he says in a sense is that it is about developing an identity through the environs of the game as an entity, which is important as Law 1 is clear enough in that it is about players; not race, creed, colour or religion.

Yet, within a generation, what we could also see is a South African team without a white player as the West Indian process take over. It could be the reason why there is muted CSA comment about the number of white players lost to the system. It seems to be the aim of those in control, to marginalise not only a growing English minority. It is a real danger and allows for the historical background as well as legacy to be lost.

(Born and educated in New Zealand, Trevor Chesterfield began his career in journalism on April 18, 1955 and is the author of four cricket books. He lived and worked in South Africa for 32 years, based mainly in Pretoria and Centurion. He is now domiciled in Sri Lanka where he lives with his Ceylon-born wife).

Fascinating Race of Unequal Equals!!!

2007-08-09T23:11:00.000+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Parallels are not often drawn across different sporting arenas. Yet sport, especially cricket is considered a great leveler. That being the case, England are beginning to question why they find themselves trying to save face on home ground. Across the field, or should we say tarmac, Fernando Alonso is asking pretty much the same question. In danger of being dumped unceremoniously, will Alonso play the same scapegoat card that England are holding tight in their pocket in the event that India should pull off the unthinkable?

It must seem an unlikely idea to even compare banalities of cricket with a sport like Formula One. After all the only time the two sports even came together was for a photo op between Sachin Tendulkar and Michael Schumacher. However, the situations in both sports are not as remote as one thinks. The conundrum of equality amongst teams, amongst men must all be queried, deliberated upon, if not downright dissected.

India finds themselves in a unique position, but not that uncommon. Times in the past have shown the team on the rise only to hand the initiative back to the hosts. It has happened in Zimbabwe. There is no reason why it should happen in England. But cricket has a way of both, elevating and humbling human spirit, in manner few can fathom despite years of studying the game. Sometimes about India this time though wants every Indian to believe it could just happen. England could well slip up in the face of an Indian resurgence.

On the same note, it should be rightly remembered that India could very well have found themselves in the hole that England find themselves today ahead of the third and final Test at the Oval. It took a couple of desperate innings and a massive let off from the weather gods for India to get out of the hell hole at Lord’s. Now finding themselves in a situation where one innings could have a telling and decisive effect on the series as it stands, perhaps England wants everyone to remembers the circumstances at Lord’s that deprived them of what they consider a rightful victory.

The way the whole jelly beans issue was blown over the top worked brilliantly into India’s hands while opening up England’s edged behavior dramatically. Suddenly the rambunctious lot needs to be tamed and told to get down to the nitty-gritty of trying to win the final Test and square the series. And really the odds should look pretty even, or should we say, equal. India’s batting should have outshone England’s. England’s bowling should have shown the Indian line up a thing or two. But where England’s batting has failed to keep up, India’s bowling has tottered between temperamental and tenacious. The teams do look equal, even when they should not.

It is hard to tell how much the jelly beans actually affected the outcome of the Trent Bridge Test. It will perhaps be arduous research subject no doubt. But it showed India in the plaintiff’s position and a naïve victim of an unruly bunch of schoolboys. England had not only lost the Test but also, come out looking like sore losers. It was easy to label that England’s despicable behavior threatened to throw the fine line between friendly banter and rivalry to outright bullying, bustling tactics into a tedious tantrum. But subtle tactics are far more fascinating to read. If memory serves right, India dished out almost eye for eye. This was not about being the righteous one. This was about putting people in their place and showing hospitality and etiquette at a foreign table were both better left for the bestsellers. This was a cricket field and there would be nothing gentlemanly about it. But it would be equal, about using the same tactic, one against the other. Fair, wouldn’t you say?

Perhaps the only thing cricket can be grateful for is that at least the game is not being sullied by dissensions within its own ranks (mind it; this is only within the boundaries in which this article is being discussed. The perennial muddles of the cricket are best left out at the moment.) Look across to Formula One and the fiasco is threatening to throw apart the whole system like a pack of cards. Forget a rival competition, Formula One is embroiled in a massive mess of embittered egos that a solution only leads to new complications.

The best solution for the rest of the overshadowed Formula One competitors would be for McLaren and Ferrari to take each other and breathing in a complete new world order that would turn Formula One on its head. But neither is McLaren nor Ferrari going anywhere. But that may not be the case on their camps.

Kimi Raikkonen seems contented enough to wrest the early glory that Felipe Massa soaked in with the timely displacement of Michael Schumacher. But clearly the battle is not where we expected it to be. Lewis Hamilton’s spectacular rise may have given a huge fillip to Formula One in Schumacher’s absence, but it has been nothing short of nightmare of the McLaren bosses, and Fernando Alonso.

The heir apparent and two time world champion is fuming. Worse still, he is beginning to feel disowned. The king wanted to be treated like one, unaware that a commoner was threatening by way of natural talent. While it became obvious that the 2007 season would be a more perceptible battle between champion and challenger, the scale is getting deceptive equal. It is hard to make out who is the veteran and who is the rookie and their rambunctious behavior has meant more headaches than on Ron Dennis can handle.

Handling Mika Hakkinen and David Coulthard must feel like a piece of cake for Dennis and the crack in his otherwise austere career may come with the news that Alonso has been offered open doors to walk out in the midst of a typical dirty boy tricks that made the McLaren team eat not humble pie but also the laughing stock meal. Yet unclear who’s telling the truth in the principal’s office. But Alonso has been billed trouble maker, Hamilton the cause for trouble and McLaren the team to take the punishment.

For Alonso, to command respect as a two time world champion is considerate. But to expect the team to deprive another of the same level of development only because he happens to be a rookie is preposterous. At the end of the day, it is a team and it is a battle of equals, of talent that is; of that there can be no doubt.

Holier than thou or eat cow? It is hard to tell one from the other. It is, in very clichéd fashion, the pot calling the kettle black. If Sreesanth is being outlawed for bowling a beamer at England by all of England and Kevin Pietersen, where do England get off for their slighting behavior? How can England maintain that we-could-do-no-wrong face and put up (a seemingly naïve but deceptive) Monty Panesar as the poster boy of England’s pristine gamesmanship when not so long ago a certain England captain lay his greasy hands on a cricket ball? It’s all equal, fair and square, if turned the other way around. Now let’s get on with the game, gentleman, please!

Winds of Change Sweeping across the Globe?

2007-07-03T20:47:00.001+05:30

By Sreelata S. Yellamrazu

Turmoil and transfers. Retirements and relegations. Sacked or silenced. Sport across the globe has seen mindless methodologies and expeditious, not to mention exorbitant, endorsements and sponsorship deals. Questions keep a-begging: if football transfers can be money raisers and club saviors, why can’t money spin for cricketers? The world order constantly threatens to undergo a change. But will it? It just might.
It is only appropriate coming out of a weekend that Formula One comes prominently to the mind. Even more so when the wet start to the day in Ireland has ensured that there be plenty of time to deliberate on sporting events across the globe happening at the same time or thereabouts.
With Michael Schumacher finally hanging up his boots (or did I speak too soon?), boring was writ large all over Formula 1. There was only one heir apparent. How was Formula One to keep up the tempo in the absence of arguably its most rambunctious, furiously fast, and a ruthless inspiration in Michael Schumacher? Kimi Raikkonen did burst on to the scene a little earlier on the scene. But not much else has gone his way. Where the Ice man’s career has been frozen, a Spaniard’s has been ignited. All that seemed to be missing was the obvious coronation of ‘King’ Fernando Alonso.
But then there was the familiar case of “Was that a bird? Was it a plane?” Only in this case, it was a certain coloured (unheard of in Formula One, shocking so) young individual who stole Alonso’s thunder from right under his nose! Lewis Hamilton could not have timed his entry into Formula One any better. The exit of one champion has most certainly heralded the coming of another. To have finished at the top of the podium in all the races of the season thus far, Hamilton has stolen the (McLaren) team’s limelight, relegating the world champion to the backstage (Alonso certainly felt like it).
In all the Hamilton euphoria which could only have enhanced the fierce competitiveness of Formula One racing, another power struggle was brewing within the Ferrari camp. Raikonnen should have been the outright star induction in the Ferrari camp. Instead Felipe Massa has already shown in the earlier part of the season why he has been a worthy understudy to Schumacher. He had been waiting in the wings, unlike Reubens Barrichello who will go down in history as Schumacher’s most worthy team mate and an exemplary right hand man but a talent controversially unharnessed. Call it the price you pay for a seat in the Ferrari!
The personality of Schumacher may be hard to replicate. Formula One has plenty of characters at the moment to ensure that Formula One is not an endangered species any time soon. But there is no cutting in between with Michael Schumacher. It was either love him or hate him. Some things never do change.
But there is a third angle to another gentleman. You can love him, hate him or ignore him. Ignore him, except at Wimbledon. That though can be quite tricky. Agreed that Wimbledon takes a day off on a Sunday. However, how can this weekend in the year be left bereft without a thought for one of the most arguably lavish tennis tournaments anywhere in the world? Why this weekend becomes more important than most other Wimbledon weekends is the fact that week two of this year’s prestigious Grand Slam will not see Britain’s favourite (and perhaps only real hope at best) Tim Henman. For a decade now, all of Great Britain has attached romance to Wimbledon as their (only) knight in shining armour thrived on the surge of euphoria at home to put up a performance of a lifetime. Judging by Boris Becker’s apt comment that wild card entries should have been served out on a platter keeping the future of the nation in mind, Wimbledon will perhaps struggle a little bit harder his time in the years to come to draw the same deep emotions that have seen crowds throw their hearts behind their one realistic British hope.
The reason why this Wimbledon is going to feel more damp and cold than at any other time in over a decade is due to an impressive Feliciano Lopez showing the subtle nuances of a defeat handed swiftly, perhaps bringing home a few key points to bear of where the future of British tennis stands. To Henman’s credit, this will not have been an uneventful exit, having survived a marathon five setter to trounce Carlos Moya in the opening round. Sadly his ecstasy and that of the home ground will be a short lived affair, at least this year. Britain’s dry run continues.
Well by the time the idea for this article formulated, the rain decided to stay away after all and soon Ireland, or at least a little stadium down in Belfast, was abuzz with a decider that India so desperately needed to win and South Africa had no intention of losing. A slugfest would best describe the happenings back in Belfast. In the end, it was a case of the team who withstood the punches and actually had strength enough to dish out the final knockout punch.
The match after a six hour wait was well worth it as both teams showed triumph through toil. South Africa’s early debacle called on Herschelle Gibbs and Justin Kemp to pull out the final heroics for the series. It nearly proved the series clincher. But for Rahul Dravid and Yuvraj Singh, India found themselves in a similar hole that needed some serious digging to get out of. The match teetered to a nail biting finish, though it should never have given than India had six wickets in hand.
Mickey Arthur may not have found all the answers he was seeking on this tour. One of the few coaches to have survived a rocky World Cup, Arthur may well head back home with the same nagging, lingering worries about a bowling attack that can decimate the opposition on one day and look woefully pedestrian when the opposition determines to take it apart. India will have fewer worries for the moment, at least till they touch English shores. The boys may have just earned themselves a little more free rein in the absence of a coach. For the time being, it’s an age no bar party, led by none other than Sachin Tendulkar!

Time to Play that Forgotten Series

2007-07-03T20:38:00.001+05:30

By Trevor Chesterfield

Ten months ago, well . . . a little less now as we are nearing the end of June, there was mayhem and a lot of finger pointing going on in Colombo.
South Africa, led by Mark Boucher, were caught in the middle of what turned out to be an assassination attempt on the Pakistan High Commissioner, and decided enough was enough. Home, with its hijackings and daylight robberies, came the suggestion was felt to be a lot safer.
This was, of course, despite police suggesting armoured protection, wearing bullet vests, and other extreme safety precautions. Forgotten was that despite the deluge at the end of the monsoon season, a triangular series was about to be played.
No matter all the good intentions, dressing up players in garb designed to stop your every day chandiya (thugs) from causing disorder is going to be the first indication that while they are here to play Sri Lanka and India, cricket has become an incidental part of the visit.
Now, if you read the itinerary South Africa have agreed to on their tour of Pakistan in a couple of months to play in Karachi, where they riot over exorbitantly long power cuts and storm banks and wreck restaurants in the process. Pakistan is a nation where extremism leads to journalists being beheaded.
In fact, a quick check of failed states has Pakistan in the top 10 bracket and Karachi is not a city where tourists of any sort willingly tread. But typecasting cities and stereotyping its citizens as betel chewing terrorists is a generalising insult to the country, Karachi as a city, and its teeming population.
Even in Colombo, you won't find Chandiyas lurking at every street corner and trishaw jockeys are fair-minded types. They may try and wheedle the extra few rupees out of what tourists there are, but that is part of the fun in hiring a trishaw. Living in this part of the world, by choice, is what you make of it.
Even in New Zealand, an email from a relative suggests that in the city of my Alma Mater, Wanganui, they now have drive-by shootings. Yeah. Sure it gets scary.
The point here is that South Africa owe Sri Lanka a postponed limited overs series. If the Safs (the name Proteas, a spiky flower without any genuine scent, is one that has never sat comfortably in my thoughts), can go to Karachi in Pakistan, what is wrong with Colombo?
Oh, okay . . . If they insist on playing it in Dambulla, fine. Let's go to Dambulla and visit the Rock Temple on a day off. Even climb the world cultural heritage site of Sigiriya, if my legs can take it.
As part of the agreed future tours programme, and not something that has been sneaked as an extra (as the West Indies Cricket Board had the cheek to do), the Unitech Series is still an event that has to be played as part of the general programme.
No doubt, while they are at Lord's, in London, before sitting down to the annual dinner with its foie gras patê starter and chilled Chablis, with discredited types as Zimbabwe's Peter Chingoka and his chief executive side kick, Bvute, Sri Lanka Cricket's chairman and CEO, Jayantha Dharmadasa and Duleep Mendis might remind the South African delegation of their obligations.
Just a tap on the shoulder would do. They have, it is understood from sources in the Caribbean, already met and discussed the issue of the shelved series. Emirate sources also suggest that if the South Africans are still concerned about playing in Sri Lanka, there are alternative venues available.
Remember if you will that Australia went this route some years ago and borrowed P Saravanamuttu Oval for the first Test all because of the riots in Pakistan. At least Colombo is far safer than Karachi. They may hold demonstrations, and protest about certain aspects of life, but you don't get riots, even over power cuts.
There is nothing wrong with South Africa playing the series here this time of year; or any time of year as long as it doesn't coincide with the worst days of the monsoon. Security is pretty good. So, what's the beef? If it’s scheduling, the games can be played before the Pakistan tour as Sri Lanka, until the marshmallow twenty/20 event in South Africa in September, have a free period. So, what's wrong with an extra slog series being added to the programme?
The only complaint here is that hopefully visiting journalists won't be used to try and get in on the act and urged by others, tell me what I should and should not write, as happened last time.
Cricket South Africa have come out in support of the International Cricket Council's decision to ban officials who were involved in the World Cup final debacle, Rudi Koertzen among them.
The CSA chief executive, Majola, talking from London, said the decision to suspend the five officials from the World Twenty20 Championships in South Africa was to 'be applauded'. This was despite the suspension 'of South African cricket's favourite son, Rudi Koertzen, we feel that match officials need to be punished, like captains and players, for transgressions. We at CSA took a decision at our last meeting to request the ICC to adopt this approach after several major blunders by match officials. Captains are fined and face suspensions for relatively minor infringements of the regulations such as slow over rates, yet officials get away with errors that change the outcome of matches. We believe they, too, need to be held accountable for their actions.'
Ironically, Koertzen and match referee Jeff Crowe, in Sri Lanka for the Tests against Bangladesh, are two of the officials who have been banned for that tournament. Not that they'll miss it. Like rugby and football, Twenty/20 is about as palatable as sucking on an after dinner mint: tacky and forgettable.
While Crowe shouldered the blame for the World Cup final fiasco, the former New Zealand captain wasn't the only one at fault. No doubt when he's next back in South Africa, he will enjoy a bottle of one of the world's great wines, Warwick 'three ladies' from the small estate in the Mulder's Vlei (river) Valley. It has been ranked along with that of some of the best Medoc wines of which Chateau Margeaux comes at a much higher price.

Welcome to the Born Spectator - a S&T special!!!

2007-06-28T12:17:00.000+05:30

For the first time visitors to the blog, this is a treat to relish. An emerging sports columnist from India combines with a celebrated cricket expert who has traversed the world under the guise as a writer beyond genius in his field. Trevor Chesterfield lends his own eloquent slant on the game while the blog aims to encapsulate the most striking moments of the game and the sports arena of the globe.
If there was a way to describe the emergence of this blog, it can only be encapsulated in the following words. Thebornspectator.blogspot.com approaches the summit of a special relationship between a guru and his protégé. Admittedly this is a brainchild of partners in equal but in reality, there are no equalities. While both are credited cricket writers, it is not only his age but also, his expansive expertise in the game that makes Chesterfield a towering personality and one of the most sought after foreign entities in India and in Asia. The younger (although Chesterfield will no doubt debate it) writer hopes to break the shackles of being unfairly labeled solely a cricket writer and rebels to be appreciated also as an observer of other globally and equally fascinating sports.
I would not say I stumbled upon my calling as a sports writer/columnist. Rather I would say it was preordained, even beyond the predisposition to fantasizing of a life built around the world of sport. To one day share the same platform as a world renowned cricket writer-columnist-expert and to have him deeply entrenched in one’s life as friend-philosopher-guide is beyond awe-inspiring. (It can be downright overwhelming!) Today I am proud to say I have no qualms about it. I stand here (still not equal to him, how can anyone be?). But I stand here knowing that I am the bud that holds the promise of all he is today. My place in the world is the embodiment of it. But my dreams are precisely that, mine. That it is happenstance that they collide too closely with his, I believe, is no small coincidence.
‘The Born Spectator’ by Ogden Nash captured my imagination as a girl of thirteen (or fourteen). Introduced to the poem in standard eight, it has remained the summation of my philosophy towards sport. In true example of a typical school going adolescent in India whose primary focus remained academics while sports was confined to a single day celebrating it at school, watching sport avidly on television wrapped me in a cloak that I will never tire being grateful for. It made me bold when I had no Olympic gold to chase. It made me feel emotions that I would perhaps never understand the depth of had it not become my lifelong pursuit and absolute obsession.
In true unabashed form, I admit I feel no shame to openly admit I would not trade this spectator’s seat for a place in the middle. To have experienced myriad passions, to have dreams conquered and dreams dashed but to get up again, dust off the mud to chase glory again; for sport’s life lessons, I am still many miles away.
In the game of life, there must be a winner. But that does not mean there, essentially, be a loser. If that were the case, there would be no rallying and raucous, delirious celebration as the one witnessed when the three time Wimbledon finalist Goran Ivanisevic finally realized his dream of holding the trophy aloft in 2001 after years of painful disappointments. It is the triumph over turmoil that inspires the sportsman in us to stand tall. This is my rally.
For the benefit of those less fortunate to have never stumbled on Nash’s lines on the Born Spectator:
CONFESSIONS OF A BORN SPECTATOR
One infant grows up and becomes a jockey,
Another plays basketball or hockey,
This one the prize ring hates to enter
That one becomes a tackle or center,
I am just glad as glad can be
That I am not them, that they are not me.
With all my heart I do admire
Athletes who sweat for fun or hire,
Who take the field in gaudy pomp,
And maim each other as they romp.
My limp and bashful spirit feeds
On other people's heroic deeds.
Now A runs ninety yards to score,
B knocks the champion to the floor,
Crisking vertebrae and spins,
Lashes his steed across the line,
You'd think my ego it would please
To swap positions with one of these
Well, ego it might be pleased enough,
But zealous athletes play so rough,
They do not ever in their dealings
Consider one another's feelings,
I'm glad that when my struggle begins
"Twixt prudence and ego, prudence wins.
When swollen eye meets gnarled first
When snaps the knee,
and cracks the wrist
When officialdom demands,
Is there a doctor in the stands?
My soul in true thanksgiving speaks
For this modest of physiques:
"Athletes, I'll drink to you
Or eat with you,
Or anything except compete with you,
Buy tickets worth their radium,
To watch you gamble in the stadium,
And reassure myself anew,
That you are not me and I'm not you".