Wednesday, October 17, 2007

South Africa revel in Pakistan’s haze!!!

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?

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!

Monday, October 8, 2007

Formula One and Hamilton – A Heady Affair!

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!

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 47th 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...

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!

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.

Monday, September 24, 2007

Sensational Victory for India and for Twenty20!!!

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!

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Tournament Favourites – Picky Finalists!

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…

Saturday, September 22, 2007

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

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!

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Pakistan: Breaking out of the Cocoon in Impressive Style!

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!

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!