greyblazeragainblogging

What went wrong for India?

2012-01-01T09:27:00.003+04:00

After 65 years of agony and pain, many Indian fans would have likely dreamt that this time around, India will finally clinch a series win Down under. After all, even Australia's Trans-Tasman rivals had defeated them a few days ago. The bowling looked rather inexperienced, led by a greenhorn, who was taking his first baby steps towards international cricket in Pattinson, the batting looked worse, as their batting line-up seemed to tumble like nine pins, every-time they faced a decent attack. An Indian fan may have even thought on a drop in pitch at MCG, the Australian batsmen will drop in for a few minutes and get out. In-fact, Australia's misery in recent times made me think of predicting a 2-1 series win for India.

Alas! after four days of see-saw battle at MCG, it is back to square one for India, as in-spite of dominating some sessions, the famed Indian batting line-up surrendered meekly against a spirited, but inexperienced Australian attack. Indian fans, who came in big numbers for the first test to support their beloved team, must have trudged back to their hotel rooms grim-faced after watching India blow away yet another chance to tame the Aussies in their own den. This was a test match India should have won instead they gifted a nice Christmas present to Clarke by losing the test.

So what went wrong for a team that has a formidable batting line-up made up of players with tons of experience? How could have a captain supposedly with a midas touch Dhoni, lose the plot? Finally, can India stage a fight back in the series?

Without wasting anymore time, let us look at five key points that decided the outcome of the first test.

Not fully utilizing the chance to bowl first

In my last blog, I had said that if India win the toss, they should bowl first. Surprisingly, Clarke won the toss and elected to bat first in helpful conditions for the bowlers. It was like a gift for the Indian seamers from the opposition captain. In the truncated first session of the first day, Indian seamers bowled well, but for some reason, decided to bang it short to Punter and Cowan in the second session. Cowan and Punter took advantage of it and helped Australia to recover from being two down at lunch.

Not finishing off Australia's innings

Once Punter and Cowan got out, Australia were in a real spot of bother at 214 for 6, but just like what happened during the tours of Emerald Isle, South Africa and England, India let the lower-order batsmen to make merry as Australia finally finished with a healthy score of 333.

Collapse after a good start

At 214 for 2, it looked very rosy for India. The pitch had flattened out, the inexperienced Australian bowling attack looked short of ideas, legends of Indian batting line-up, Dravid and SRT were batting in the middle and a score of 500 looked possible. It took though, just one fine delivery from the never say die Siddle to throw a knock out punch at India, as SRT was cleaned up by Siddle. Once the great man was gone, the rest including Dravid crumbled like a pack of cards on the third day.

From nowhere, Hilfy suddenly became Australia's hero. Yes, Hilfy's lengths were a lot straighter than what we saw in the Ashes yet, the Indian batsmen have to be blamed for chasing almost every outswinger that was bowled. The likes of Kohli and Dhoni played like they were holding the bat for the first time. Sorry Kohli, cricket isn't just about opening your mouth to sledge someone, but it is also about doing well with a bat in hand in test cricket.

Dhoni's bizarre tactics

At 27 for 4, India had Australia bleeding, but instead of going in for the kill, they sat back to watch the veterans struggling for runs, Huss and Punter do well. When OZ were eight down, they again had a chance to comeback into the match, but for the zillionth time, we saw the tail wag against India. Now, if setting a negative field for a batsman like Huss looks defensive, then what can I say about setting defensive fields for tailenders like Hilfy and Pattinson? Dhoni has done this time and again yet, hasn't learnt from his past mistakes.

Yes, Dhoni comes across as a very good man manager, but some of his tactics leaves a lot to be desired. In-fact, nowadays I can compare him with only Vettori. Vettori was one of those captains, who seemed to believe that every-time a cricketer smashes a boundary, he should spread the field. We saw that in India in 10/11, when it took just one boundary from Harby for Vettori to spread the field. No wonder, India escaped from what seemed like a certain defeat. Coming back to Dhoni, if he continues to captain the Indian side in the same vein, in the near future, even Chris Martin may score a few!

The Indian bowlers too missed a trick against Pattinson as they lost their patience and tried to experiment with their lengths. Pattinson has a bit of batting ability, but is still a tailender. One could see that when he was shifting his weight onto the back-foot and was standing legside off the ball yet, was trying to play the drive. A clear indication to the Indian seamers that they should just keep angling it across him.

When tailenders come into bat, modern day bowlers seem to experiment too much. Bowl couple of short deliveries at their throats, or the occasional yorker to crush their toes, but don't forget the old fashioned line and length. Yes, they will play and miss a few times and slog a few, but they won't have the patience or the technique to survive for long.

Indian batting fails again

Of course, the final nail in the coffin was India's famed batting line-up again tumbling like nine pins, when up against consistent bowling from the Aussies. The fact though was, it wasn't like they were facing the relentless brutality from Younis, the metronomic McGrath, or the magician with a ball in hand Akram, but an inexperienced bunch of hard-working enthusiastic seamers.

If Sehwag again perished to one of those wafts outside the off-stump, Gambir looked like a rabbit in the headlights. These days, Gambir looks very tentative and continues to hang back which isn't a good sign at all. We all know that he is a gutsy player, but at present, India seem to be already one down before their innings starts.

Among the rest of the batsmen, Dravid was again bowled and what made it worse was, he left a gap between bat and pad. I can't remember Dravid doing that for a long-time, maybe I have to go as far back as the series in the Kiwiland in 02/03, when Bond castled him with Dravid leaving a slight gap between bat and pad. This time though, it seemed like the gap was good enough for a truck to go through it. I still expect Dravid to comeback to form. Dravid perhaps has to stop worrying too much about his technique, as when he does that, he invariably makes mistakes. In 99/00 in OZ, Dravid continuously struggled against McGrath, as he seemed to be worrying too much about where his off-stump was and was he moving his feet.

The little master looked good in both innings, but nowadays, he is a bit more vulnerable against the full swinging delivery. It has to be said though, that it would take a brave man to bet against SRT doing well in this series. I also see that there are questions marks over Very Very Special Laxman, but in his defence, it can be said that MCG isn't a track that suits his style of batting. On truer wickets of WACA, Sydney and Adelaide, I expect him to do well. Another fact to worry about for the Indian team is, their captain Dhoni isn't just tactically looking clueless, but he has gone downhill as a batsman too.

Can India stage a fightback in the series?

Now, the question on everyone's lips is, can India comeback in the series by winning at Sydney? Yes, of course they can do it, as they have the class and the experience to win at Sydney.The Indian players though, have to remember that test cricket is about doing well over five days and not just about dominating for some of the sessions like they did at MCG.

It wasn't like there were no positives to think of for India in the first test, as their bowling line-up did well. Before the series started, everyone thought that India's attack won't be penetrative enough to take twenty wickets, but at MCG, India showed that they have the firepower to take twenty wickets.

The spearhead of India's attack, Zaheer didn't look at his best, but with the old ball, he was again the king. From India's point of view, it was also great to see Zaheer bowling lots of overs in the first test.

Yadav may not be Bracewell in terms of control, but he surprised the batsmen for pace with the help of a quick arm action and got it to move the ball both ways, Sharma too bowled reasonably well in the first innings, though was a bit unlucky not to pick up a wicket. The spinner Ashwin may not have bowled with great control, but he has the variations to trouble the Aussies.

Let us now think about the next test at Sydney. When it comes to playing at Sydney, one of the factors to consider will be the pitch, as in recent times, it has been a bit of mystery. The last two tests played at Sydney were affected by rain and as a result, the quicker bowlers did well. Even if there isn't overcast conditions around, I do expect a decent pitch for the seamers, as in recent times, we have seen a bit more bounce for the seamers. I just don't think one will see the dry wickets that we witnessed in the late 90's and the early part of the last decade.

Finally, I just hope that we will see India make a comeback in the series, as you just don't want to see a big ticket series like India v Australia end up as a one way traffic with one team dominating all the time. For that to happen, the much vaunted Indian batting line-up has to fire. To be honest, as a cricket connoisseur, I still have almost a blind faith in India's batting might, but they just can't afford to have another batting collapse like at MCG, as they have already lost the first match.

India's chances down under Part 2

2011-12-25T19:35:00.000+04:00

In the second part of the article as promised, I would look at few other key factors that can play a major role in India winning the series down under.

India's much vaunted batting line-up

In the last decade or so, India's success away from home at places like Headingley, Trent Bridge, WACA, Adelaide has been due to its fantastic batting line-up finally fulfilling the promise it showed over the years. The big scores that India have been able to get away from home in the last decade has in turn helped their slightly weaker bowling attack to take 20 wickets.

Recently in England though, the ageing batting line-up came unstuck against a brilliant pace attack operating in home conditions. Was it just an aberration or was it a warning signal that the ageing batting line-up just doesn't have it in them anymore to do well away from home? In my humble opinion, the Indian batsmen failed as they didn't play enough warm up games to acclimatise to the alien conditions.

Even arguably the greatest batsman of his generation SRT, needs to play warm up games to succeed in England, as the pitches in England offer seam/swing bowlers more assistance than what is found in most other cricket playing countries. I see that India have learnt their lesson the hard way, as they have played few warm up games in Australia. It can also be said that Indian batsmen will enjoy the Australian conditions more as there won't be too much movement on offer for the bowlers.

The key to India's success in Australia will be Sehwag, as if he gets going on couple of batting friendly tracks, the inexperienced Australian attack may just panic. Pattinson may have looked great against the Kiwis, but up against a quality batting line-up, he may have to work a bit harder as Indian batsmen won't likely edge every outswinger he bowls. Another bowler who will be tested is Lyon. The Kiwis rarely used their feet against him, but the likes of S'wag, VVS and SRT will certainly look to take on the young spinner.

Of course, when we talk about the Indian batting line-up, one has to always think of the grand old man of world cricket SRT, who even at the ripe age of 38 looks like he has it in him to get more hundreds. The weight of getting his 100th international hundred seems to have affected even the great man yet, I expect him to do well in Australia.

Yes, Australia will look at finding chinks in master's armour which to be honest is very difficult to find as SRT has a watertight technique. SRT though, has to be a bit cautious against the full swinging delivery bowled on a off-stump line. Since the canny Fannie De Villiers found at least a way to dismiss SRT, it has always been an option against the master blaster, as he tends to play the straight drive without moving his feet early in his innings. Even the disgraced Saffer captain Cronje found success with that plan. In recent times, Anderson has repeatedly got him out by bowling full on a off-stump line. Having said that SRT's balance is so good that once he gets going, he rarely will miss playing a straight drive against the full swinging delivery.

A classic example of SRT looking to drive without moving his feet and being bowled by a superb delivery from the swing king Damien Fleming.

Now, how can I leave out Very Very Special Laxman as here is a batsman, who seems to do well every-time he plays Ozzies. In-fact, I am sure Clarke, Punter and co. must be calling him as Very Very Sick Laxman. The reason for his success in Australia basically stems from the fact that he is very strong on the back-foot. I reckon on the back-foot, he is slightly better than even SRT.

Finally, after discussing about VVS, Sehwag, SRT, I can't leave out the great wall of India, Dravid. A few years ago, Dravid looked completely out of sorts, but everyone knows that he is a gutsy batsman and this year, he has returned with a bang by getting about zillion runs in England. In tough conditions in England, it seemed like a contest between Dravid and England, rather than India and England.

As far as playing in Australia is concerned, Dravid did struggle in his first series against the metronomic McGrath, but since then, he has made his mark down under by showing his class especially, at Adelaide in 03/04, when he played a match winning knock to take India to a historic test victory.

From the above points, it is clear that for India to succeed in Australia, they need their strong batting line-up to again come to the party which in turn can give the slightly weaker bowling attack a chance to take 20 wickets.

How to tackle the Australian batsmen?

In the past, it would have been a herculean task for the opposition to come up with strategies against the Australian batsmen, as they had world class players.The present line-up though, looks vulnerable and prone to collapses. Yes, they still have the likes of Clarke, Punter and Huss, but someone like Punter looks a pale shadow of the player he was. In my opinion, Punter always had a couple of flaws, but his brilliant strokeplay and his mental toughness helped him to cover it up. With him being 37 now, those flaws are getting exposed.

I see the Indian think-tank employing the same tactic that others have employed against Punter, which is to bowl full early in his innings and get him out lbw with Punter falling across his off-stump. Once he gets set though, bowlers should look to bowl back of a length on a off-stump channel as Punter these days struggles to score runs bowled on a off-stump channel. Even Ashwin can come into play with his carom ball as Punter does push hard at the ball.

Among the senior batsmen, Clarke has been in better form, but he is another player, who can struggle against consistent back of a length bowling with the odd full delivery to tempt him to drive. England used that tactic well in the Ashes.

Clarke has a reputation of playing spin very well, but I am not fully convinced. Last year in the Ashes, when Clarke tried to come down the wicket there was too much premeditation involved. In-fact, Swann constantly troubled him by going around the wicket and cutting off his run scoring areas through the on-side. It is something that Ashwin can have a look at.

Australia also have a very inexperienced top-order with Cowan making his debut and their wicket-keeper batsman Haddin just doesn't seem to learn from his mistakes, as he keeps chasing everything that is just outside the off-stump. Basically, the present set of Australian batsmen just don't seem to have the toughness that was associated with past Australian sides. Every-time I see Australian batsmen play, they seem to be chasing deliveries outside the off-stump and getting out. It is again a clue to the Indian seamers like Sharma that they should pitch it up!

Series prediction

This is one of the toughest series to predict, as we are thinking of two flawed equally matched sides. On occasions, I have thought maybe Australia are slight favourites. Just before the series though, I am leaning more towards India, as I have a gut feeling that India may have a slight edge provided, their batsmen click and they get a bit of luck with the toss at places like MCG and WACA. Yes, cricket fans can argue that famed Indian batting line-up came a cropper in English conditions, but England have a very good pace attack and Australia don't. It can also be argued that playing in Australia should be easier for subcontinental batsmen as it won't swing/seam around that much in Australia.

I predict a 2-1 result in favour of India, though 1-1 will always be a safe bet, as we are thinking about two evenly matched sides.

India's chances Down Under

2011-12-25T10:25:00.002+04:00

It has been a longtime since India gained independence from its erstwhile masters Britain. In those 60 odd years, India has had its fair share of problems, but one fact that unites the entire nation from rich to poor and all religions is the game invented by British empire called cricket. Let it be on the streets of Mumbai, Delhi, Bangalore and all other places, Indian fans danced with joy, when the great hope of the entire nation, Indian cricket team won the WC in 2011. Now, at the end of the year, the question on every Indian cricket fan's lips is can the Indian team under Dhoni's able leadership do what has looked improbable for the last 65 years, which is to win a test series down under in Australia. If the Indian team is able to achieve the goal of beating Australia in their own backyard, about 1.2 billion cricket crazy fans will again dance with joy on the streets of India.

The Indian team is embarking on a trip to Australia, when on paper the opposition has an unsettled side. Compared to the great Aussie sides of the past, the present line-up has a callow bowling line-up, the top order batsmen too are inexperienced, the middle-order consisting of Punter, Clarke, Huss and Haddn have the experience, but it can be said that the likes of Punter and Huss are coming to the end of their illustrious careers. So from outside, it looks like it is India's best chance of winning in OZ, since coming close to a test series win against a Packer less Australian side in 77/78 and against a weak Australian team in 85/86. In 85/86, India were a bit unlucky not to win at MCG, as rain reportedly robbed them of a certain victory.

The signs of a side in decline was very much evident last year in the Ashes, as even after gaining a vital first innings lead at Gabba,we saw England raking up 517 for 1 which was followed by three innings defeats. In-fact, after the match got over at Gabba, even as a England fan for sometime I felt blank as I grew up watching Aussies ruthlessly dismantle every opponent they came across, but this Australian side is different as their body language seems to be of a defeatist team. If anything, the Australian team has got weaker since the thrashing they got at the hands of England last year and worse, they have been ravaged by injuries to key bowlers. Yes, they showed a bit of fighting spirit in the Safferland, when a Cummins inspired Australia beat Saffers at Wanderers, but a shock loss to the Kiwis at Hobart is something that I wouldn't have envisaged even in my wildest dreams.

So can India finally win a series in OZ after nine failed attempts? The problem for India is, just like Australia, they too have their own share of problems, especially in the bowling department. Last year, England won on the back of a very good pace attack, but if I look at the Indian team, I won't feel confident that a pace attack consisting of Zaheer, Ishant and Yadav will help them to win a test series down under. The batting line-up looks strong on paper, but even though veterans like SRT, Sehwag, VVS and Dravid have toured Australia innumerable times, it will always take a bit of time to adjust to the conditions in Australia. They all have the pedigree to do very well in Australia, but they have to acclimatise to the conditions quickly. The biggest worry for India though is, do they have the attack to take 20 wickets.

Without wasting anymore time, let us look at certain key factors like conditions in Australia, Indian pace attack, India's much vaunted batting line-up and what can be the strategies India can look at to defeat the Australian team

A bit of luck at MCG and WACA

I reckon India definitely need a bit of luck with the toss at MCG and WACA, as their pace attack just may lack the firepower to take 20 wickets. On the first day, MCG can assist the seam bowlers with a bit of movement off the pitch. If the cloud cover is there, it will be even better. The wicket does flatten out as the game progresses and helps bowlers to get reverse swing. First day though is the key for India, so bowling first can help. Last year, England led brilliantly by Anderson ripped through Australian batting line-up with incisive bowling in helpful conditions.

WACA too tends to help the seamers on the first couple of days, so toss can again help India massively at Perth. One key factor which is in India's favour is, there is no WACA specialist to bowl at them! Mitch can bowl rubbish at most places, but at WACA, he is a different kettle of fish as along with awkward bounce, he gets late swing. Last year against England, he was unplayable as he swung it so late that most of the batsmen couldn't even touch the ball!

India's bowling line-up

If I look at the pace attack it is crystal clear that India depend massively on their spearhead Zaheer. Zaheer has all the skills to trouble the inexperienced top-order and top of it, he has a terrific record against left-handed batsmen.

The question mark over Zaheer is, whether at the age of 34, will he be able to play all four tests on hard wickets of Australia. Australian wickets always test the fitness of any pace bowler which can be seen by the fact that even one of the fittest bowlers going around, Anderson looked dead tired after bowling on Aussie wickets last year. Even if he stays fit, it will be interesting to see whether Zaheer can bowl long spells with the older ball.

Zaheer's pace partner in crime will likely be Sharma. He is yet another bowler who is struggling with ankle problems. The tall lanky seamer showed a lot of promise, the last time India visited the shores of Australia. Having said that Sharma has regressed in recent times as he hasn't learnt from his mistakes. Even after playing in more than 40 tests, Sharma continues to bang it short. Yes, Sharma is well over 6 feet, but he is a bit skiddy through the air, so the length he should perhaps aim at is to bowl a touch fuller. In-fact, the more I see of Sharma, the more I remember Dizzy, who too tended to bowl short early in his career, but once he started bowling a fuller length, he got the rewards. Sharma just doesn't get the steepling bounce of Tremlett to bang it short.

Indian fans would be hoping that he bowls a fuller length. but as a neutral, I am still not sure whether Sharma will do it. There is always hope though, as if after 30 odd tests, Broad decided to pitch it up, maybe Sharma too will realize that he has to bowl fuller!

Among others, Yadav looks like a decent prospect, but he is still a greenhorn. Dhoni will be grateful, if he can do something similar like Bracewell did against the Ozzies recently. After his first spell at Gabba, Bracewell's consistency was phenomenal as he just kept hammering around the good length spot, got just enough movement either way and made the batsmen play most of the time. It was said that last year, Anderson bowled about 70% of his deliveries on a good length and I think Bracewell did something similar.

I'm not convinced that Yadav will be as good as DB, because he tends to waste the new ball by bowling it far too across the left-hander. Dhoni though will be happy even if he is half as good as Bracewell.

I understand almost every Indian cricket fan don't rate Kumar, but to me, he doesn't look as bad as what everyone makes him out to be. He has a repeatable action, bowls decent outswing and his success on barren tracks of India shows that he knows when to hold his length back. The problem with him is, he lacks an effective inswinger and his lack of pace may mean that when the wicket gets flat, Kumar can become predictable.

Yes, Kumar likely won't play in the test series, as he is well down in the pecking order, but if India again suffer injuries and they have to play Kumar, I back him to do a decent job. Yes, some may think, I am out of my mind, but I stand by what I have said that he just doesn't look like a bad bowler. The only caveat is, he has to be given the new ball as swing bowlers and that too someone who lacks pace will struggle as a first change bowler in OZ.

Among the spinners, I will opt for Ashwin as he has the variations and I see him troubling Punter with his carom ball. Even if either Ojha or Ashwin do what Swann did last year in the Ashes, Dhoni should be delighted. On Australian wickets, only wrist spinners can succeed as they impart more spin than a finger spinner and along with that they can use the extra bounce on offer to their advantage. As a finger spinner, either Ojha or Ashwin should offer Dhoni the control that is required with the old ball and take couple of wickets on the way.

In the second part of the article, I will look at India's much vaunted batting line-up, a few strategies against OZ batsmen and series prediction.

Saluting Tiger

2011-10-02T13:03:00.000+04:00

It is 23rd March of 1962, there are two captains walking out for the toss at the test match in Bridgetown. On one hand, there is the great Sir Frank Worrell, but Worrell would have been stumped to see a greenhorn all of 21 walking out with him to toss the coin. Just about ten years ago, the same cricketer at the tender age of 10 was travelling on a ship to England for studies and was the shipmate of Worrell, but ten years later, he was the leader of a national team! If you haven't guessed the great man yet, I was thinking about none other than the Republican prince Nawab of Pataudi, the cricketer who charmed everyone with his calm demeanour, his visionary captaincy, batting with full of flash and dash and his electrifying fielding at cover point. He could do all this with just one eye as he lost his right eye in a tragic car accident.

Tiger Pataudi came from a family of great cricketing lineage. His father Pataudi senior played for England in the famous bodyline series and interestingly fell out with Jardine's method of restricting the run machine Bradman from making about million runs with his bodyline tactic. Pataudi senior even went onto captain the Indian side in 1946. As he came from a rich cricketing background, it was on expected lines that at an young age, he was passionate about the game. Pataudi though, unfortunately lost his father when he was just about 10, but he took it in his stride and made his mark as a batsman for his school at Winchester. The young boy must have felt a bit awkward at his school in Winchester as that was the time when India had just gained independence from Britain, but here he was studying in a British school where he was the only Indian. Pataudi though, soon started to break all types of records in school cricket including the record for the highest individual score. Interestingly, the previous record was held by Douglas Jardine.

In a few years time, he was already playing for Oxford and seemed to be destined for greatness.In 1961 at the height of his prowess, the young man made more than 1000 runs at an average of well over 50. Pataudi also became the first Indian to be honoured with captaining Oxford University in 1961. Pataudi's attacking batsmanship made many experts and former players to sit up and take notice of this young prodigy. His captain at Oxford, AC Smith even went onto say that he is the best 19 year old batsman, he has seen. I reckon that he would still say the same. Just when it seemed like the young prodigy would blossom into the next great batsman, fate played a cruel joke as in a road accident, he tragically lost his right eye. Pataudi though, wasn't known as Tiger for nothing and in a few months time, he was back in his flannels and was playing domestic cricket in India. Most would have cursed their bad luck, but instead of getting into depression mode, Pataudi in-spite of his handicap went onto play test cricket for more than a decade!

At the end of 1961 season, he was even playing for India against England. He soon made his presence felt by getting 64 in his second test and a century in the final test of the series. Those were the days, when newly independent nations like Pakistan and India seemed to have a defeatist attitude and were always looking to escape with draws. Pataudi's batting though, was said to be like a breath of fresh air in a team seemed to be made up of dour batsman with a defeatist attitude written all over their face.

After the series against England, India soon set sails to the Caribbean Islands for a test series. I am sure the Indian cricketers would have loved every bit of the serene beauty of Caribbean beaches. Those beautiful Caribbean beaches though, can be a bit misleading, as when every test series starts, batsmen would have to face fast bowlers bowling deliveries that were as dangerous as the SS-N-25 Onyx missile. One such missile like beamer from Charlie Grifftih smashed into the then Indian captain Contractor's head and his test career was all over.The team was said to be in a complete mess as they had lost the test heavily and their captain was battling for life. In such trying circumstances, the charming prince Pataudi was appointed the captain and that too at a young age of just 21.

Pataudi passed the baptism by fire as even though India lost the series, everyone who played under him at that time thought of him as a positive influence on the team. It is always said, his visionary captaincy made sure that players who got picked to play for India were first of all said by Pataudi that they were no more playing for their state or province, but for the country. The morass defeatist attitude which was said to be in veins of every Indian cricketer was replaced by a new positive outlook of a team that would go all out for a win. It is not a mere co-incidence that India won their first test series away from home under Pataudi's captaincy in the land of Long White Clouds. Yes, the Kiwis were very much the lightweights of cricket world yet, any series victory would help to lift the morale of an upcoming team. In-fact, it can be said that Pataudi guided a generation of young cricketers including famed spinners like Bedi, Venkat, Pras and Chandra. Even little Vishy has always said that if it wasn't for Pataudi, he may have struggled to make an impact as a batsman.

As a captain, Pataudi always believed that he had to push the players from behind rather than pull them from the front. Due to his handicap, Pataudi wasn't always able to lead the team by getting big scores, so he had to push the players from behind. It would have been tough for captains like Brearley or Pataudi as they weren't great players themselves, but hats off to them, as they were able to motivate teams with moderate resources and help them to win matches.

Pataudi's strategy as a captain was very simple, play the best four bowlers and he didn't mind that his best four bowlers were spinners. I tend to agree with that theory, as there is no point in picking a medium pacer if he isn't good enough. On occasions, it came unstruck like on a greentop at Melbourne in 67/68, when Pataudi was forced to bat first as he didn't have a decent pace bowler to take advantage of the juice in the wicket, but more often than not his strategy worked for him. Pataudi was also said to be a very intuitive captain and with experience he just became better. In his last series as a player and captain in 1975, he straightaway introduced a freak bowler like Chandra against a newbie like Viv. I am sure he introduced Chandra into the attack because he was able to see that only a freak bowler like Chandra could trouble someone having a great hand-eye co-ordination like Viv. It was said that every-time Viv played Chandra, he had no clue of how to bat against him

As a batsman, Pataudi's handicap of playing with just one eye meant that he couldn't play to his potential yet, he was able to play a few top notch knocks. Cricket aficionados who saw Pataudi's knock at Leeds in 67 against Snow and co. won't forget it in a hurry. India were trailing England by million runs after the first innings, but Pataudi is said to have played a glorious knock and helped India to even gain a small lead. From the few clippings I have seen from that knock, I think of a batsman going for all out attack against a bowling line-up thirsting for blood.

Pataudi's greatest knock though, is said to be the 75 he made on a greentop at Melbourne against Mckenzie, Connelly and co. Pataudi had opted to bat first on a greentop, as he didn't have a decent pace bowler. On expected lines, McKenzie and co. went for the kill and in no time, India were smashed to smithereens with five wickets falling for next to nothing. In walked Pataudi and in-spite of having to play with one eye and a hamstring injury, he tore into the Aussie pact attack with grit and gumption. He is said to have hooked and pulled anything that was marginally short and that too with just one eye and on one leg! I just visualise a tragic war king with a bunch of dozen soldiers fighting a huge army and meeting fire with fire. Maybe it was the anger of not having a decent pace bowler in helpful conditions which made him play like the way he did, but to play like that with just one eye and on one leg is something that is hard to imagine.

After watching Pataudi's knock, the great Lindsay Hassett said,

"That's the way Bradman used to attack the bowling."

All good things though, have to come to an end which happened to Tiger as well, as he was unceremoniously dumped as the captain of the team after a closely fought series against Australia in 69/70. I don't know about Tiger, but if anyone else was in his position, he would have been a bit frustrated watching the very team that was built and nurtured by him, going onto create history by defeating heavyweights of cricket, West Indies and England, but that is fate for you. Pataudi did make a comeback in 1975 as a captain against the Windies, but observers who saw him play during that series opine that he was a pale shadow of his former self. It can be said that the newest missile from the Caribbean Islands, Andy Roberts had him for breakfast, dinner and supper. Even in that series though, Pataudi showed he was a brave captain, as he made sure that it was a closely fought series with his attacking captaincy. After the series was over, Pataudi realised that he no more had it in him to play test cricket and he announced his retirement from all forms of the game.

Yes, Pataudi wasn't a great batsman nor did he have a great record as a captain, but a man who fought a handicap and faced the best of bowlers like Lock, Snow, Arnold, McKenzie, Griffith, Sobers, Mallett and co. is worthy of being remembered.

I also won't do justice to Pataudi, if I don't bring out the fact that he came across as a honest man, who played the game in the right spirit. For instance, when India's former spinner Nadkarni stood his ground even after being given out by the umpire in a match, Pataudi is believed to have shouted; comeback to the pavilion. I also remember his honest and forthright answer, he gave in an interview on cricinfo. The question that was asked to him was, would he have done better, if he hadn't been thrust with the burden of captaining the national team at the age of just 21. I really liked the answer he gave, as he said that more than captaining the side, he was worried about playing with one eye and his personal safety.

I understand that in modern times, where every minute detail is analysed, there would be experts who will come and tell Oh! this Pataudi averaged just 34 as a batsman and under his captaincy, India didn't win too many tests. I though, will remember MAK as the vision behind India's success in cricket in the last few decades and as a mighty fine batsman, who played with just one eye against bowlers bowling at 90mph. May the man who played cricket with brio, elan, vigour, joie, de vivre and vitality RIP.

Tribute to Glen Chapple

2011-09-18T21:55:00.000+04:00

Over the years, many great players have represented and done yeoman service for Lancashire cricket Club. Let it be the highest wicket-taker in cricket history Murali, the man who seemed like could swing and seam even a orange and take wickets, Akram, the charismatic all-rounder Freddie Flintoff, domineering batsmen like Lloyd and Law, the elegance personified, Very Very Very Special Laxman, great accumulators like Atherton and Fairbrother, bowlers who bowled at the pace of lightning like Holding and Patterson, or the bowler, who made batsmen suffer from amnesia about where their off-stump was, Statham.

Now, one more cricketer can be counted among the pantheon of Lancashire cricket greats and that is Glen Chapple. Over 700 fc wickets, useful runs lower down the order and of course, leading a young team to a CC title after 77 years of near misses in itself is enough for a cricketer to be rated as one of the best to play for Lancashire. Just numbers though, don't tell the whole story of what a great servant Chapple has been for Lancashire cricket club. Let it be on the penultimate day of CC match against Somerset this year, when in-spite of a hamstring injury, he bowled with the heart of a lion and made crucial breakthroughs, or that flamboyant 97 against Hampshire which paved the way for a famous victory on the last day, shows that here is a cricketer, who has a never say die attitude. Chapple may not be a cricketer gift-wrapped with god-gifted natural talent, but if I want to take someone for a war in say World War 3 somewhere in 2021, Chapple would be my man!

If I think about Chapple's early days, I think about early 90's, when he along with the tearaway quick Henderson looked to target the throats and heads of batsmen. (Henderson played a few games in the early 90's, but due to persistent back problems left playing cricket) Those days, he used to come in as a first change bowler after Defraites and Akram yet, was able to sustain the pressure created by Akram. As time went by, there were already whispers in the County circuit of how good Chapple can be and him being a future England prospect.

When Chapple got his first big break to play for England A against India A many of us thought that it was just a matter of time before he would play for England. In-fact, he even troubled the likes of future greats like Dravid and VVS on barren tracks of India. During the ill-fated Ashes series of 94/95, England were ravaged by injuries and there were rumours that Chapple would be on the next plane to Australia, but it wasn't to be. At that time, no one could have even guessed that Chapple won't play a single test for England. If in 95, it was his teammate at Lancashire, Martin who got the chance to play for England against West Indies, then it was Kirtley who was picked ahead of Chapple for the test against the Saffers in 03. Kirtley went onto make a memorable debut against the Saffers in 03 at Trent Bridge by taking a 7-for. After that match, Chapple may have been left wondering, it could have been his moment of glory. In-fact, Chapple should have even played against the touring Indian team in 96, but for some reason he wasn't picked.

I just can't fathom how a bowler like Chapple could have played just one solitary one-day match and that too it was restricted to just four overs of bowling, as he picked up an injury during that match against Ireland. Here was a bowler, who had the stamina of a ox and the heart of a lion yet, the selectors didn't have a look at him. I can't think of too many bowlers, who had a repeatable action or the control of Chapple during those days. Every tom, dick and harry represented England in the 90's, but not Chapple. Even now I feel that Chapple can get a place in a few test sides. I am sure that he won't do worse than some of the Indian bowlers, who played against England this season. When Chapple retires from the game of cricket and looks at names like Simon Brown, Daren Pattinson and Mike Smith in the list of 600 odd players, who have played for England, he maybe left wondering what did he do wrong?

Lack of opportunities to play for England though, didn't deter him from performing for his county, as he kept taking loads of wickets and made useful runs lower down the order. Who can ever forget his match winning spell of 6 for 18 in the Natwest final in 96. In the Championship too Chapple would invariably make early inroads into the opposition ranks. At the dawn of the 20th century though, a few critics were already questioning about Chapple's future, as he had lost a yard of pace, but he more than made it up by bowling with better control.

As Chapple became older though, even I started to have a few doubts over whether he can continue to be successful in the County circuit, but he proved us all wrong by performing wonderfully well. In 2005, he took 47 wickets to help Lancashire make a comeback into the first division. In 07, at the ripe age of 34, Chapple took his career best figures by taking a 7-for against a formidable opponent like Durham. On the downside though, Lancs yet again missed out narrowly on winning the CC to Sussex. In 2008, if it wasn't for Chapple's 47 wickets at just 20.5, Lancs may have even got relegated. I won't forget in a hurry his heroic efforts against Kent during that season as he helped Lancs to skittle out Kent for just 92 by taking 6 for 40 and they were chasing a score of just 163. At the end of 2008 season, Chapple was also appointed as the captain as Law left the team. Chapple himself admitted that he wasn't a natural leader, but hey he hasn't done a bad job as he has led a young team to a County Championship title now!

At the start of this season though, I again had a few doubts over whether Chapple could continue to stay motivated as Lancs had off-field problems and were strapped for cash. The team too wasn't doing well and most of the players were young. Chapple though, like a true gladiator, led the team from front with invaluable contributions. Chapple even suffered a few injuries during the season, but that didn't deter him from taking more than 50 wickets at under 20, or doing well with the bat at crucial times. On the third day against Somerset, Lancs required something special as Warwickshire were closing in on winning the title. As Chapple came into bowl in the second innings, not many expected him to take wickets as he was suffering from a hamstring injury. Chapple though, made everyone's jaw drop, as in-spite of suffering from a injury, he bowled a fiery opening spell and Lancs against all odds went onto win CC.

To be honest, I thought that one-day Bangladesh may win a WC, but Lancs won't win CC. Chapple, the coach Moores and his band of young players though had other ideas. I'm sure most captains would have made an angst-ridden response at what critics kept saying about Lancs cricket team. Chapple and Moores just didn't respond to such criticism and believed they have the players as well as the team spirit to win the title.

So what next for Chapple? he has already confirmed that he would stay for one more season, but fans like me will hope that he can play for a little longer. Even if he retires now, he would be a legend for all Lancashire fans. I for one, surely won't forget Chapple's self accusatory disgust every-time he bowled short and wide, only for him to come roaring back the next delivery by hitting the good length spot and beating the bat. Chapple's contributions to the club is just in-measurable and without him I even feel that Lancs would have been languishing down in the second division by now. So, I take this opportunity to salute a Lancashire great for performing day after day, year after year and of course, he did what others couldn't do for 77 years, lead the Lancashire team to a County Championship title!!!!!

Twatto comes to the party again

2011-09-04T14:25:00.000+04:00

The day is July 13th of 2010, a cricketer by the name of Shane Robert Watson is having fun, as the batsmen in the Pakistan team seem to be thinking that they are still kids and as a result should bludgeon every ball that Watson bowls into the orbit. One by one, every batsman in the team loses his wicket to a bowler whose run-up borderlines on being lazy. It was surreal to see Shane Watson of all bowlers taking a five wicket haul and with a sense of bewilderment, I saw his name being mentioned on Lord's honours board.

The day is September 1st of 2011, the obdurate Paranavitana and the man who seems to bat till the cows come home on Lankan tracks, Samaraweera are straining every sinew in a bid to take Lanka out of troubled waters. What more, they both seem to have succeeded in their endavour of taking Lanka into a safer position, but again, the friendly pace of Watson destroys Lanka's middle-order and they are all out for just 105.

Looking at the above two instances, a casual cricket viewer may feel a bit jealous by thinking that God has bestowed Watson with divine luck, as here is a bowler, who seems to pick wickets with innocuous deliveries all the time. I though, don't think Watson's bowling is all about being lucky. So in this article, I would look at why Watson keeps surprising his critics by taking wickets at a crucial juncture in a match.

Watson doesn't have McGrath's zen like mind-set of hitting the top of off-stump every-time he bowled, neither is he Jimmy Anderson to swing it like a boomerang yet, when Australia desperately need a wicket, it is invariably Shane Watson who takes the wicket. So what is the secret behind Watson's success as a bowler in test cricket? In my opinion, the prime reason for his success is, Watson is a bowler, who unlike a few other present day Australian seamers has an excellent cricket brain. A few may laugh aloud, when I say that Watson has brains, as he is known as a knobhead, but the more I see of Watson as a bowler, the more convinced I am that Watson is a clever seamer.

To understand it, just compare the overrated Hilfy and Johnson with Watson. In the Ashes, it seemed like the famed Australian cricket academy had manufactured a robot by the name of Hilfenhaus, who was remote controlled to bowl every delivery with a mechanical action and that too well outside the off-stump. I even thought that Hilfy's monotonous bowling could be a good cure for insomnia. The fact is, a bowler who never uses the crease, bowls almost every delivery at the same spot and rarely makes the batsmen play, won't succeed. In the first test at Galle, Johnson's bowling wasn't much different to what Hilfy did in the Ashes either. Only when there is pace and bounce in the wicket, does Johnson look threatening in test cricket, unless of course it is something to do with his zodiac signs which may have helped Mitch to swing it late at WACA against England.

Now, compare those two bowlers with how Watson bowled at Galle. The one dismissal I can clearly remember is, Watson bowling a brute of a delivery in the second innings to remove the dangerman in the opposition ranks Sangakkara. Yes, he could bowl that brute of a delivery mainly due to the pitch which was playing tricks on the batsmen, but the way Watson went wide of the crease to create a bit of angle showed that here is a bowler, who puts his thinking cap on, to outsmart the best of batsmen. Watson also banged it into the pitch to create a bit more variable bounce which in turn, helped him to dismiss Sanga. In the first innings, before Watson came onto bowl, the Australian seamers were tending to bowl just outside the off-stump, but Watson just zeroed in on the stumps and reaped benefits on a wicket that was keeping low.

After the match got over, Srilankan batsmen were perhaps left wondering how on earth could they have got out to a Mickey mouse bowler like Watson? The fact is, it is high time the Lankan batsmen take Watson seriously as on dry tracks, he can be a threat.

He was good in the Ashes series against England as well. Yes, he didn't take too many wickets, but that didn't stop Watto from looking at ways to outsmart the batsmen. For instance, he was perhaps the only bowler who looked to bowl a good length and outside the off-stump to Ian Bell, as even now Bell has the habit of chasing a delivery that is bowled around the good length spot and just outside the off-stump. When everyone tried to attack KP's stumps by bringing it back into the right-hander, it was Watson who realised that KP was more vulnerable against the outswinger. Anyone remembers Aussie bowlers bowling wide of off-stump to Trott at Gabba, before Watson came into bowl and got a bit of cut back into the right-hander to uproot his stumps? Here, Trott has the habit of walking across his stumps, but before Watson came into bowl, a few robots were trying to bowl well outside the off-stump to him. On expected lines, Trott was leaving all those wasted deliveries to go by harmlessly into the keeper's gloves.

In the WC played in the subcontinent this year, Watson yet again showed his class by trying a short delivery at S'wag on a pitch that was very slow. Most medium pacers wouldn't have tried bowling short on that slow pitch. Watson though, took a gamble of banging it into the pitch, as S'wag can occasionally be vulnerable against the short delivery and was rewarded with S'wag's wicket.

Watson's success as a bowler is based on subtle changes in the way he uses the crease, the cutters he bowls on dry wickets like at Galle and how quickly, he is able to assess the slightest weakness that a batsman has. Watson can swing it conventionally and as we saw at Galle, he can also get a bit of reverse swing with the old ball. He though, takes crucial wickets mainly because, he is a clever bowler. Watson may come across as a annoying character on a cricket field, but with a ball in hand, he is a smart operator.

Finally, I may have showered praises on the way Watson bowled at Galle, but to be honest, I underestimated his prowess as a bowler by considering him as a batting all-rounder in my last article. In my defence though, on twitter, I did predict that Watson can be the surprise package at Galle after seeing a dry pitch lol.

Having a look at Australia's bowling attack

2011-08-29T21:43:00.001+04:00

As the Australian think-tank consisting of captain Clarke, the coach Nielsen and co. sit around on a table to discuss about the bowling combination for the upcoming test series against Lanka, they will have to think long and hard about what can be the best combination to play Lanka in their own den.

Gone are the days of Australian bowlers choosing themselves on the morning of a test match. When Australia had McGrath, Warne, Dizzy, Lee, Macgill and company, all an Australian captain needed to do was to think about whether anyone of them wasn't fit enough to play in the test match. Now though, Australia have a set of inexperienced fast bowlers, led by the enigmatic and unpredictable fast bowler Johnson. In the spin department, the Australian captain can't call upon a cricketer by the name of Shane Keith Warne to bamboozle the best of batsmen with his bag of tricks, instead he has to think of couple of hard-working, but journeymen spinners. Now, it doesn't mean that Australia have a weak attack as the likes of Johnson, Siddle, Harris and Copeland can still bowl out sides, but they no more have the aura of the great Australian sides of the past. So, it becomes important for the Australian think-tank to pick the right combination for the upcoming test series in Lanka.

If I look at present set of bowlers, first and foremost, I would say that they should play to their strengths which is in their fast bowling. Both spinners are greenhorns and the likes of Lyon and Beer are rarely going to trouble class batsmen against spinners. I would pick three seamers, one spinner, who in the side will have to take up the mantle of doing a holding job with Watson as the batting all-rounder.

A few may argue that Srilankan conditions offers nothing for the seam bowlers. I beg to differ with them, as over the years, most Lankan tracks have offered a bit of help for the quicker bowlers early in the morning. It is just that wickets are slow and whatever help is there for the quicker bowlers will disappear after the end of the first session. I just don't see anything wrong in a team picking three seam bowlers and one spinner for a test match to be played in Lankan conditions provided, the three seamers hunt as a pack and utilize the helpful conditions on offer in the first session.

So who are the bowlers Australia can play in the first test against Srilanka? can they pick a steady seamer, but someone who lacks pace in Copeland? In this article, I would just look at all the bowlers in the Australian squad and finally list out the bowlers, who in my opinion should play the first test.

Seam bowlers

Johnson- When the enigmatic Johnson gets it right, he is the most devastating bowler going around, but there is also another side to Johnson, as he can lose his control very easily and bowl like a club level bowler. In short, you never know what you will get with this unpredictable bowler, as he can occasionally be an out and out match winner, but can suddenly lose his control and bowl utter tripe.

Johnson also depends on pace and bounce as he can get awkward bounce. Johnson isn't a swinger of the ball, so he can struggle on wickets when it doesn't have pace and bounce. Yes, he swung it very late at WACA against England, but for me, I still can't fathom how he did it, as the seam was all over the place wobbling on a diagonal line yet, it swung very late. For me, it defied logic.

I am not sure about whether Johnson will bowl well on Srilankan wickets. He bowled well in the onedayers in Lanka, but Johnson usually does well in One-day cricket. Australia though, will need the unpredictable Johnson to fire on all cylinders in the test series.

Siddle- If I am the captain of a side and I have a bowler like Siddle, he would be one of the first names on my team sheet. As a bowler, Siddle doesn't do much with a ball in hand. So why do I rate him highly? The fact is, here is a bowler, who runs in all day and bowls at good pace. It seems like even if there is a brick wall in front of Siddle, he will still be ready to run into it and bowl! Siddle doesn't have the talent of Mitch or even Harris, but more than makes it up with his effort.

Copeland- I have to confess that I have seen Copeland only once and that too in a warm-up match against England before the Ashes. From whatever little I saw of Copeland in that One-day match, I was impressed by his bowling. England's batsmen took him apart in that One-day match, but I believe it was more due to the fact that Copeland comes across as a bowler, who can be predictable with what he does, so it wasn't surprising to see him leaking runs in that match. In the longer format though, Copeland is perhaps the bowler, who can just do what Australia needs the most, someone who bowls with good control. In that match against England, Copeland was bowling steady stuff and moving the ball just enough either way which is why I feel that he can do well in Lanka. Copeland bowls at just about medium pace, but on slow wickets of Lanka, Australia can select Copeland as he bowls line and length and would likely utilize whatever little bit of movement, the Lankan pitches may offer in the first session of the test match.

Actually, it is great to see that Copeland has done exactly what I thought of him by taking a five wicket haul in the warm-up game. It is now up-to the selectors to pick him and for Copeland to perform well not just in warm-up games, but also in test cricket. I would like to see more of Copeland, but he seems to be a bowler, who isn't over coached and that is why his brain isn't muddled with millions of theories. He just sticks to the basics of running up straight and hitting the top of off-stump. Now, it doesn't require rocket science to understand that if a bowler runs up straight and hits top of off-stump he will succeed.

Ryan Harris- Harris popularly known as Rhino is more talented than Siddle, as he can swing the ball and when cracks develop in the pitch, he has the ability to just sit on it all day yet, I may just go for Siddle over Harris. The only reason I am looking at Siddle is, because he is fitter and it requires a bowler to be really fit to bowl in those hot and humid conditions of Srilanka. I was also impressed by what I saw of Pattinson in the final onedayer against Lanka, as he was generating good pace and extracting a bit of bounce, but he is perhaps not yet ready to play test cricket.

Spinners

The two spinners Australian selectors have picked are Beer and Lyon. Among those two spinners, I have seen Beer bowl in a test match, but to be honest, he didn't impress me. The problem with Beer is, he seems to think that flighting the ball means to bowl as slow as you can which is just the wrong way to go about bowling spin. I have also not seen Beer bowling the arm ball and he struggles to make subtle changes in pace. He may have improved in the last six months or so, but from what I saw of him at Sydney against England, I would say that he isn't the spinner that Australia should play in test matches. The only left arm spinner who looks ok is Keefe, but Australia seem to pick everyone but Keefe.

I am surprised that Australia have shown faith in SLA in recent times, as they have picked both Doherty and Beer for test cricket. I have watched a lot of Australian cricket in the last twenty years and I can't remember a single SLA playing for Australia in test cricket. Australians usually look out for wrist spinners, but at present, they don't seem to have any decent wrist spinner in their ranks. In-fact, wrist spinners like Brad Hogg, Bob Holland, or even Peter McIntyre would have walked into the present Australian side. As far as the other spinner in the side is concerned, I have heard a few good things about the off-spinner in the side Lyon, but his first class record is poor and has played only five games.

If I was the selector, I would have gone for Hauritz as the main spinner, as he is a steady bowler and can occasionally get bounce. He is perhaps the right sort of bowler to bowl on Lankan tracks. As the selectors haven't picked Hauritz, I may look at Lyon, as I just wasn't impressed by what I saw of Beer at Sydney. From Australia's point of view, I fear that likes of Mahela and Sanga will milk Beer for runs. So, for the first test against Srilanka, my bowling attack would be Johnson, Copeland, Siddle and Lyon with Watson as the batting all-rounder. Australia though, may pick Harris and a second spinner in Beer.

The fact is, whoever bowls for Australia in the upcoming series against Lanka, they will have the daunting task of bowling on slow wickets and against batsmen, who are born and bred by playing on slow wickets in Lanka. The likes of Sanga, Jaya and Samaraweera are outstanding at converting their starts into big scores when they play in Srilanka. So, as a cricket connoisseur, I am waiting with bated breath to see how the new crop of Australian bowlers will bowl in Srilanka.

Well done England!

2011-08-14T17:16:00.015+04:00

Thirteenth of August 2011 is a red letter day for every fan, who supports England cricket team, as after years of watching the team trudge from one defeat to another, one can finally feel proud of a team that ruthlessly dismantles every side they play. Yes the opposition they faced during the English summer didn't seem worthy of being called the number one team, as every-time the England team put pressure on them, they crumbled like a house of cards.The simple fact though is, the present England team play a brand of aggressive cricket that usually makes the opposition look worse than they actually are.

Couple of years ago, on a sunny bright day at Kingston though, it looked all different as up against a bowler, who was just bowling fast and straight, England's batsmen crumbled without even a trace of fight. The critics were laughing at the team by calling them all sorts of names. For a cricket fan like me, it seemed like the side was divided and there was no unity among the players. At that time, I even thought that there was no light at the end of the tunnel, as it can't get much worse than losing to a weak side like West Indies and that too getting bowled out for just 51 runs. Two men though didn't give up on England; one was a former Zimbabwean cricketer, who seemed to have the spirit of Toledo steel when he played for Zimbabwe. The other one was a captain, who always comes across as a very good man manager. Both the coach Flower and the captain Strauss step by step have taken England to the number one position in test cricket.

The seeds of success were sown in the series in which England were bowled out for 51 itself. Flower and Strauss decided it was high time to build a team made up of players, who don't play for themselves, but play for the team. Players who looked disinterested when they toured, or were injury prone, were soon phased out. A set of new bowlers, who were hungry for wickets and success were given the chance to play test cricket. The backroom staff worked hard on fitness of the players and as a result, the cricketers became more athletic. It is unbelievable but true that in two years, from World Chumps, England have become World Champions of test cricket.

In this article, I would like to list out a few factors that have helped England to become a successful test side.

Attack leader- Any team needs a pace bowler to lead the attack. If I think about England's team, Jimmy Anderson is no doubt the leader of the attack. Even when he was down in the dumps, I had lots of faith in Anderson's ability as here was a bowler, who could swing it late and that too both ways with no discernible change in his action. Nowadays though, he bowls with good control as well, which makes him a real handful.

Yes last year, many were questioning about whether Anderson can succeed in Australia which looked rather funny, as it was mainly based on how he performed in the Ashes 06/07. Comparing Anderson of 06/07 and the present day Anderson is like comparing chalk and cheese. In 06/07, Anderson didn't have a repeatable action as the coaches kept tinkering with his action and at that time, he had just comeback from an injury. In 2010/11 though, Anderson was a thoroughbred swing bowler as he had developed a smooth action and he could bowl with good control. On expected lines, he kept taking wickets in Australia and his critics had to shut their mouths. These days, Anderson sometimes even reminds me of what I saw of Hadlee in a few highlights package. Yes, he still doesn't have the control, nor the patience of the great man Hadlee, but Anderson's great exhibition of swing bowling on the fourth day at Edgbaston reminded me of Hadlee at his peak. Anderson was moving the ball both ways at respectable pace, he kept guessing the batsmen with regards to which one will swing back into the righthander, he was using the crease to create subtle changes of angles and even used the bouncer well. The only thing that Anderson may have to improve is to show a bit more patience, when bowling to the lower-order batsmen.

Back up bowlers- We all now that cricket is a team game, so a single pace bowler can't do much if other bowlers in the side can't take wickets. With England though, it is different, as it hasn't just been Anderson who has looked a real threat against India, but Anderson along with Broad, Bresnan/Tremlett have hunted like a pack of hungry vultures about to pounce on a set of clueless batsmen.

To be honest, it was a pleasant surprise to see Broad bowling full in the series. I do hope he keeps bowling full and doesn't again try to test middle of the pitch by thinking that he is the reincarnation of Larwood. When Broad bowls full, he gets just enough movement and bounce to take wickets. As far as Bresnan is concerned, I have already said in one of my previous articles that he is the unsung hero of the side. Bres can run in all day, bowl line and length, get awkward bounce and more importantly, bowl at good pace. There are bowlers, who lack fitness and can't bowl reasonably quick throughout the day, but Bres is a different kettle of fish, as he can bowl at about 85-87 mph at 10 'O' clock in the morning as well as bowl at a similar pace during the last session of a day's play. CT just played in one test, but his ability to get awkward bounce from a good length would always make him a threat. If I think about the lone spinner in the side Swann, he has had a poor series, but I don't remember too many spinners doing well against the Indian team. I am sure he will do well against Pakistan in UAE as they can't play spin.

Settled batting line-up- In my twenty years of watching cricket, I have never seen England having such a settled look to the batting line-up. When I used to watch cricket in the 90's, I used to sometimes bite my nails as it looked like England's batsmen may get out at anytime. It changed a bit with the likes of Tres, Vaughan, Thorpe and later on Strauss, KP doing well, but the present batting line-up looks even better than the one that played in the Ashes 2005.

At top of the order, Cook has shown great prowess of concentration and has constantly got big hundreds. His knock of 294 in the third test at Edgbaston just proved that point again. Yes, I realise that Cook can get better, if he starts scoring more runs between mid off and cover region, but I feel that he doesn't need to do it. The fact is, he has great prowess of concentration which helps him in leaving deliveries that are full and just wide of off-stump. Strauss has struggled for form in recent times, but looked in decent touch at Edgbaston. The biggest plus for England though, has been the emergence of Trott. In the past, one of the major problems for England was the number 3 slot. To an extent, Butcher and Vaughan did well at that position, but Trott has taken it to another level by getting big hundreds. Trott with his batting brings a calmness to the side that wasn't seen before. My favourite batsman KP too has regained form which is great to see. Last year, it looked like KP was caught between whether he should continue with his old style of live by the sword, die by the sword attitude, or should he look to only defend which in the end, it didn't help him. In this series though, KP has mixed caution with aggression which is the right way to go as the conditions haven't exactly been batting friendly, but at the same-time, a player like KP should play his natural game. One more batsman, I would like to talk about is Bell. There was a time, when it seemed like he didn't believe that he belonged to the big stage, but nowadays, you look at Bell and you feel that here is a cricketer, who believes in his undoubted ability.

Lower-order grit- More than anything else, it has been a pleasure to watch how well the lower order batsmen have played for the last couple of years. There was a time when Mullaly, Tufnell and co. used to gift away their wickets, but if I look at the present batting line-up, it is completely different as Broad, Bresnan, Swann and even Anderson can score valuable runs lower down the order. One could notice that lower order batsmen were showing far batter application in the Ashes 09 itself, as Anderson and Monty helped England to escape from defeat with their gritty batting at Cardiff. Onions showed it yet again in the Safferland by playing couple of gritty knocks and helped England to draw both those matches. I have always maintained that when lower order batsmen show grit by hanging around with a bat in hand, it is a sure sign that there is unity in the team.

The two Andy's- Of course, how can I not talk about the two Andy's; Andy Flower and Strauss? When Flower was appointed as the coach, there were many people who were skeptical about his appointment as they thought that he neither had the experience to run a national team, nor he had succeeded as a batting coach of England. Flower though, has silenced his critics by helping England to become the number one side as well as helping the team to finally win a ICC tournament in the West Indies.

So what makes Flower tick as a coach of the side? First and foremost, he comes across as a honest man, who won't try to praise his team just to keep himself in good books of the players. He also keeps the cricketers grounded. For Andy Flower, every success is viewed as just another stepping stone in a bigger picture which is to dominate world cricket.

Flower's never say die attitude as a player has also rubbed on his players. Who can forget some of his epic knocks during his playing career? There was a series in India in 2000/01, when he scored more than 500 runs. In that series, in the first match Flower got a vital half century on the last day, but as expected, the weak Zimbabwe team still lost the test. Flower though, always looked for excellence and in the next test, he played even better as he played for couple of days, scored a double hundred and saved the game for Zimbabwe. England team too play in a similar fashion as each player keeps getting better and during a crisis situation, someone will perform well. Along with Flower, I also have to say a few good words about other coaches like Saker, Gooch, Mushie and company, as they too have played their part in helping England do well.

If Flower has been great for England, then what about Strauss? He too has played a major role as a captain to help England reach its goal. Strauss may not have the tactical nous of Taylor, or Brearley, but he is no doubt a very good man manager. It can be seen by the fact that Strauss has helped Anderson to fulfill his potential. Before Strauss, captains like Vaughan, KP, and to a lesser extent Freddie never believed that Anderson's brand of attacking swing bowling can help England to win matches. Strauss though, has shown great belief in Anderson which in turn has helped Anderson to grow as a bowler.

Now a question may arise about whether England can win overseas? So, in future can we see a famous test match victory at Colombo, or Nagpur? Only time will tell whether this team can do it or not, but at present, I can safely say that England deserve the number one position in test rankings and it is nice to be a fan of England cricket team at the moment!

On the other hand, what about India? In simple words, the much vaunted batting line-up crumbled like nine pins and the bowling hasn't been consistent enough. Less said the better about India's fielding. In-fact, there were times when it looked like men were playing boys. Let me make it clear that I am not trying to indulge in schadenfreude just because I don't like BCCI, but you expect a team consisting of players like SRT, VVS, Dravid and co. to at least show a bit of fight.

KP shines at home of cricket

2011-07-24T11:42:00.010+04:00

The man whose swagger and attacking batsmanship made the best of bowlers feel like they should wear a helmet while bowling to him was in a spot of bother going into the Lord's test against India. Yes, he had scored a double hundred at Adelaide in the Ashes and played very well in the T/20 WC in 2010, but other than that England's most flamboyant batsman of his era had struggled for consistency. There were question marks raised over whether his unorthodox technique has been found out by opposition bowlers, but like a true champion, KP made his critics eat humble pie by playing perhaps his most mature knock and for the umpteenth time in his test career took England to a strong position at Lord's.

As a microcosm of life, a sportsman's career will also have periods when they seem to be out of sorts, but true champions are the ones, who would be able to wade through all those swamps and marshes that come their way and attain the ultimate goal of having a successful career. During the last couple of years, KP had to wade through lots of marshes and swamps including serious injuries like the Achilles injury he suffered in 09, or the hernia problem during the 2011 WC, but you can't keep a gifted player down for too long and as expected, he made a big hundred at Lord's.

Pietersen's double hundred at Lord's was different from most of his other knocks. In tough conditions, the genius, who could play jaw dropping shots like pulling a 90mph bowler on the front-foot, the flamingo shot against the spinner, or that incredulous switch hit was playing like a mere mortal, who was just looking to survive with two meals for the entire day. KP though, showed to his critics that he could buckle down, when the conditions were tough and once the sun came out, he took the opposition bowlers to the cleaners by playing his natural aggressive game.

On the first day, KP respected the conditions by playing straight and waited for the Indian bowlers to bowl on his pads. Once he crossed 150 though, KP unleashed some breathtaking shots especially, the shot when KP came down the wicket and flicked Sharma like a spinner for a boundary was breathtaking to watch. At Lord's, he also played a clever knock, as he moved way outside the off-stump and took the LBW out of the equation. In-fact, I just thought that Indian bowlers tried to attack his leg-stump too much, as they believed that by going way outside the off-stump, KP was leaving his leg-stump open and they can get him out bowled by targeting his leg-stump. The simple fact is, for batsmen like Azhar, Junior, VVS, Trott, KP and company, a flick shot through the on-side is like a cover-drive and even if they leave the leg-stump open to be targeted by the bowlers, they rarely ever get out.

As expected, the critics are lapping up his double hundred at Lord's by saying that it has been a very mature knock and praising him to the skies. I am sure though, the same critics would be waiting for KP to fail in a few innings, so that they can again start cribbing about his lack of technique, whether he works hard on his game and him being a team-man or not.

Actually, it is laughable that people talk about him as being not a team-man. If he wasn't a team-man, why would he have got a hundred, when the score was 1 for 2 at Mohali, or again at Napier with England losing early wickets. The same can be said about his knocks at Oval in the Ashes 05, at Trent Bridge against the Kiwis in 08, against South Africa at Oval in 08, his hundreds against India at Lord's and Oval in 07, the battling hundred against a fiery Akthar in 05/06 at Faislabad, his breathtaking knock against Murali and co. on a sluggish wicket at Edgbaston in 06, the superlative knock at Brisbane against McGrath and Warne in the 06/07 Ashes and many more. All those knocks helped England to get out of a crisis and get the team into a position of strength. I just don't care about what he does in his private life, but on a cricket field, he has played numerous good knocks when the team was in dire straits.

The next question mark of course is, whether he has a technique to play in test cricket. First and foremost, a player without a good technique, won't score over 6000 runs at an average of just around 50. Secondly, for someone who has admired his game for the last 8-9 years, there is no doubt in my mind that he has improved his game. When KP first came onto the scene, he tended to play lots of shots in the air, but nowadays, he looks to play a lot more ground-shots. He has also worked hard on playing shots with a straight bat. Last year, when he was trying to play straight, he was getting out caught and bowled, but this year, he has shown better control when it comes to playing shots straight down the ground and as a result, he isn't hitting it in the air and getting out. Yes, he still plays across the line a lot, but one can't curb the natural instincts of a player, who has been successful by playing across the line.

I just don't care whether KP would become a great or not. For me when KP plays, he is a joy to watch and with his double hundred at Lord's, he has also shown that he isn't a one trick pony, who can just smash the bowlers. In-fact, long after he retires and reminisces about his test career by sitting on a armchair, he would likely look back at his knock at Lord's with great fondness as he had to work hard for it and strain his every sinew. I don't think there is anything better than tasting success after working very hard for it.

Indian batting line-up Part-3 and series prediction

2011-07-19T22:08:00.006+04:00

In the last part of the article, I will look at probable strategies against the remaining batsmen in the Indian line-up, which includes the captain marvel Dhoni, the young batsman Raina as well as the mercurial lower order batsman with a technique of his own Harbhajan. I will also come up with my prediction for the upcoming mouth watering contest between England and India.

Raina- For the last few years, Raina has been touted as the next big thing in Indian cricket. It is no doubt a fact that Raina is a powerful striker of the ball, who on his day can smash the opposition bowlers to smithereens. He is a typical modern day batsman, who relies on power rather than timing. If I look at some of Raina's strengths like him being a very powerful striker of the ball, it is crystal clear that he is perfectly suited to the shorter formats of the game. At the same-time, as he is young, he still has enough time on his hands to improve his defence which in turn can help him to become a better test batsman.

As far as Raina's test match batting credentials are concerned, he looked like a fish out of water on bouncy tracks in South Africa. Any batsman, who seems to have a premeditated forward press and looks to smash even back of a length deliveries on bouncy tracks in the Safferland over the mid-wicket region, will have his fair share of problems against the bouncing ball. It isn't just hit the deck bowlers, but spinners and swing bowlers too will fancy their chances against such a batsman.

So with Raina having major flaws in his technique, is there no future for him in test cricket? The good news for Raina's fans is that he seems to be working very hard on his defence hence, he is looking to play late as well as trying to improve on his non-existent back-foot play. In West Indies, Raina played a few decent pull shots, but against better bowlers in tougher conditions Raina has his task cut-out.

Yes, Raina has shown signs of improvement in his technique, but Tremlett with the bouncing ball and Anderson with his late swing will likely trouble Raina. Raina's tendency to sometimes go hard at the ball means that Swann too will fancy his chances against Raina.

Dhoni- At present, captain of the Indian team seems to have a golden touch as he has led the Indian side to so many glorious triumphs including the WC triumph which in turn sent a cricket mad country into a frenzy. Dhoni is a captain with a midas touch. So, can the golden boy of India do anything wrong?

Critics may point to the fact that Dhoni is lucky as he is captaining a good team yet, with so many victories under his belt as the captain, he is already up there with the pantheon of great captains, who have led the Indian side over the years. Dhoni though, isn't a God, but just a human-being, which can be seen by the fact that his batting average over his last 20 test innings is just around 30. So, have the opposition bowlers found a chink in Dhoni's technique, or just like the old slogan of form is temporary and class is permanent, Dhoni will comeback to form?

If I analyse Dhoni's technique, it is clear that he has a technique of his own, as he has an open-chested stance and plays shots which aren't written in the coaching manual. The helicopter shot is a good example of it. Dhoni though, in test cricket tries his best to play late and at least early in his innings, doesn't go hard at the ball. The fact though is, in helpful conditions for swing bowlers, a decent outswing bowler can open him up like a can of worms. So, by just looking at his stance itself, I will go for JA as my first attacking option, as with his outswinger, Anderson can trouble Dhoni and get the edge. As sometimes, Dhoni has a tendency to go hard at the ball, Swann can bowl at the other end. If Swann bowls, he can try the drifter as Dhoni has the tendency to favour the on-side.

Last but not the least, I will also discuss about the mercurial Harby. You like him or hate him, there is no doubt that any team should have plans for Harby as well. Here is a cricketer, who doesn't seem to have a defence, but with his pyrotechnics, Harby has the ability to occasionally take the game away from the opposition with some brutal hitting. So what makes Harby occasionally a dangerous proposition to bowl to? I think Harby has a great eye otherwise, how can anyone flat bat an 85+ mph short delivery for a six? He can be a very awkward customer to bowl at and as he hits in unusual areas, the captain may have to sometimes scratch his head as it is hard to set fields for such type of batsmen. Harby isn't a tail-ender, but as he has a high-back-lift, I still see the bouncer and the yorker as the best combination against him.

At the start of the article, I also promised that I will predict the scoreline for the upcoming series. My prediction for the series is, England will win the series 2-0. The safe bet would be 1-1, but I do believe that India needed to play couple of warm-up games as it would have helped the Indian team to acclimatise to alien conditions. Yes SRT and co. are great batsmen, but even if a player has played over 100 tests, it would still take maybe a week or so to get acclimatised to tough conditions like in England.

India's bowling attack too looks a bit suspect to me. The major worry is of course about India's pace spearhead Zaheer's fitness, as he doesn't seem to be match fit. He has hardly bowled in recent times and even in the match against Somerset, he only bowled a few overs. Unless a bowler is as well built as the great Ambrose, he needs miles in his legs and that can be done by bowling lots of overs. If I think from India's point of view, I worry that Zaheer may again suffer from an injury in middle of the series. Sree too seems to be lacking match fitness. So the bowling attack may depend on Sharma, as Harby can't be expected to run through a side in alien conditions. On the other hand, England don't seem to have any worries except for the fact that for some bizarre reason, the enforcer in the team would likely get yet another chance to play test cricket ahead of a more reliable bowler.

Finally, I just hope that the series between the number one ranked team and the challenger for that number one spot lives up-to the hype surrounding it and we get to see nail-biting edge of the seat contests. Let the series begin with both teams showing plenty of brio, elan, vigour, joie, de vivre and vitality.

Having a look at the Indian batting line-up Part-2

2011-07-17T19:42:00.013+04:00

In second part of the article, Having a look at the Indian batting line-up, I would look at batsmen occupying the key number three slot as well as the strong middle-order. In the 90's, when India travelled abroad their batting line-up was too heavily dependent on the great man Tendulkar and as a result they used to invariably lose, when playing away from home as after all, it is a team effort that helps any team to win the match. In the last decade though, the Indian batting line-up has become a lot more stronger and it can be even considered that it is India's batsmen, who have helped them to win matches in alien conditions by getting big scores. So, let us have a look into the legends of Indian cricket, who at present occupy key positions in the batting line-up.

Dravid- Dravid occupies the key number three position in India's batting order. Batsmen who play at the number three slot, carry a great responsibility on their shoulders, as they would likely come up against the new ball. The player occupying the number three slot becomes even more important in England, as the batsman who plays at that position would have to likely play in tough conditions with the ball doing a bit in the air, or off the pitch.

Over the years, Dravid at the number three slot has done a wonderful job of weathering the early storm of facing a newish ball. In-fact, he has done even better in England which shows his pedigree as playing in England is always tough for subcontinental batsmen because they aren't used to playing the moving ball. Dravid's ability to play the ball late and his eagerness to come forward at every given opportunity makes him a tough batsman to bowl to.

So what are the options a captain has when it comes to attacking the Great wall of India? In recent times, the Great wall has shown a few cracks and it looks like there are some options available for a captain to attack Dravid. One of the key factors to note in Dravid's technique nowadays is that his judgement outside the off-stump isn't as good as it used to be. It is on expected lines as Dravid is 38 now. I have especially seen left arm seamers getting Dravid out caught in the slips with deliveries that is angled across him. Dravid's bat speed for some reason has become faster because of which he has sometimes gone hard at the ball and has got caught in the slips. Dravid also favours the on-side. Yes, he has certainly developed his game through the off-side with sheer hard-work, but early in his innings, one always gets the feeling that he can play with a slightly closed face which in turn leaves him a bit vulnerable against the outswinger.

The two bowlers I would look at against Dravid are Anderson and Swann. Even at worst of times, Anderson's outswinger can trouble the batsmen as he has the ability to slant it slightly into the batsmen then shape it away from the batsmen. Dravid's tendency to close the face slightly may leave him vulnerable against Anderson's outswingers. In the past, Anderson has troubled Dravid a few times especially, when there is a bit of movement. I can surely remember Anderson getting Dravid out in the 07 series at Lord's with an outswinger that swung late and took the edge of Dravid's bat. Even in that innings Dravid played with a slightly closed face and it is something Anderson may look at and try to bowl a similar delivery this time around.

From the other end, I would look at Swann as my attacking option. Swann bowls a nice drifter and I have a feeling if he does bowl that delivery against Dravid, he may just produce the edge with Dravid looking to play Swann on the on-side.

Tendulkar-I must be kidding if I ever say that great Tendulkar has a weakness. He is the greatest batsman I have seen and would get into any list of great batsmen. So is there no option to get Tendulkar out? First and foremost, just like other batsmen in World cricket, one mistake can spell the doom for even the great man Tendulkar and make him take the long walk back to the pavilion. I also wrote a few lines on what a bowler can do when up against the great man in my article Tribute to Tendulkar. I would just like to reproduce a few points from that article.

In my humble opinion, if there is any weakness in his game, it is when he plays a straight drive. It is one of his favourite shots, but occasionally, he can play that shot from the crease which can leave him vulnerable against a swing bowler early in his innings. Jimmy Anderson has got him out five times by bowling a fuller length and Hoggy too has dismissed him. Couple of examples I can remember include Anderson bowling full at Oval and SRT getting bowled as he didn't move his feet. Hoggy too got him out at Lord's by bowling a similar delivery. The fact though is, both those dismissals came early in his innings and once he gets in, more often than not he doesn't miss out when playing the straight drive.

Seam bowlers have looked to get him out by bowling a short delivery which tends to leave SRT. McGrath got him out at Edgbaston in the 99 WC by hitting back of a length and getting awkward bounce to catch Tendulkar's edge, Flintoff did something similar at Mohali in 05/06, though when compared to McGrath's length, it was slightly shorter, I have seen Lewis troubling him with some decent bouncers and even Olonga is said to have got him out in a tournament in Sharjah. SRT is no more than a school ruler, so however good he maybe, sometimes it can become difficult to play a lifter. The fact though is, as Gavaskar once said, no one likes facing bouncers and every batsman has to look at ways to counter it. So, if a batsman gets out to a very good delivery once in a blue-moon, it can't be called as a weakness.

In the England team, it will be very difficult for even Tremlett to reproduce the delivery that McGrath bowled in the WC as he bowled a great length and it got big on SRT. Nowadays, SRT doesn't play the pull shot too many times yet, he is an expert in leaving the short delivery. Jimmy Anderson can be more of a threat against Tendulkar as he bowls a full length and gets swing. As I have said it above that early in his innings, Tendulkar sometimes doesn't move his feet while trying to play the straight drive which can leave him vulnerable against the full swinging delivery.

Laxman- Along with Dravid and SRT, Laxman has been the backbone of India's middle-order for the last decade. Laxman seems to be more of a wizard than a batsman, as he uses his wrists like magical wand to play delightful shots on either side of the wicket.I haven't seen a single batsman having better hands than Laxman. Even deliveries that are around the off-stump are sometimes flicked through the on-side for four by Very Very Special Laxman.

Yes, he is a great player to watch, but it is also a fact that VVS hasn't made a single century against England. One of the key reasons for that is, his technique is more suited to bouncy tracks as he stands tall and uses his wrists to play shots. At the same-time, he doesn't move his feet much which leaves him vulnerable against the moving ball in England.

When up against Laxman, I would look at Anderson as my first option, as he bowls full and gets it to swing late. Anderson though, has to attack the stumps rather than bowl just wide of off-stump to Laxman. As VVS has great hands, he has the ability to punish anything that is slightly wide of off-stump. Yes, a few may have a counter argument that with his lack of footwork, he may chase a slightly wide delivery and get caught behind, but he has such great hands that more often than not he is able to manoeuvre the field by finding the gap through the off-side. So, the best option is perhaps to attack the stumps as with Laxman staying on the back-foot, there is always a chance of the delivery going through his defenses. Yes, there is also a good chance of Very Very Special Laxman flicking a delivery that is slightly off-line which is drifting towards Laxman's pads for a boundary, but a bowler should be ready to get hit while bowling to class batsmen like Laxman.

Tremlett can be the second option against Laxman. He bowls a shorter length when compared to Anderson, but especially in the second innings of a test, there is a decent chance of Tremlett extracting variable bounce by hitting the pitch hard and a few deliveries can keep low. As VVS plays most of the times on the back-foot, Tremlett's variable bounce can cause problems provided, Tremlett attacks Laxman's stumps. Tremlett can very well remember Laxman playing a delightful cover-drive on the up in the second innings at Lord's in 07, but the next delivery Tremlett attacked the stumps and cleaned up Laxman with Laxman again hanging on the back-foot.

Tremlett can also just look to bowl the odd surprise bouncer as VVS has the habit of hitting it in the air. Anyone remember Corky trying a short delivery at VVS and VVS hitting it straight to the fielder in 2002 at Trent Bridge? He is a great puller but doesn't look to keep the pull shot down.

In the last part of this article, I will look at rest of the batsmen including the captain of the Indian team Dhoni. Finally, I will also predict the scoreline for the series!

Having a look at the Indian batting line-up

2011-07-17T11:17:00.008+04:00

A father and his young son are watching Indian maestros like Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman and co. grind down the opposition in a clinical fashion. The opposition seems to be in a rabble as none of the bowlers look like can trouble the legends of Indian cricket.The son asks to his father, are these batsmen from Mars as they don't seem to ever get out. Father replies, son, they are legends of Indian cricket and one of them, who isn't taller than a school ruler called Tendulkar seems to be playing cricket for about million years and scores centuries for fun.

Now, the above para includes a bit of exaggeration, but I don't think any player in the England set-up underestimates the enormity of the task that awaits them.The players know that they are up against a set of batsmen, who have the class, the temperament and the hunger for runs and that too at an age when most batsmen would have retired and taken up a job in the commentary box. Yes, the likes of SRT and Dravid may have failed in the ongoing match against Somerset, but unless you're a gambler, who is even ready to sell his own house, no one would bet against them of doing well in a four match series.

On expected lines, many questions would be oscillating in the minds of cricket fans as well as experts as to what can be the minute weakness one can find in players like SRT and Laxman. I already see lots of discussions and expert opinions on how to tackle the Indian batsmen. Let me make it clear that I am no expert, but just like I have done it before, I thought of writing an article on what are perhaps the options England's bowlers can look at when bowling to the Indian batsmen. This time around though, I would also look at what were the plans that England's bowlers tried after every test and analyse whether there are other options against the legends of Indian cricket.

So how can England's bowlers take up the gauntlet of bowling to batsmen of such high calibre? Of course, first and foremost any bowler should stick to the basics of bowling line and length and not lose heart when any of them look in ominous form, as just like any other batsmen in World cricket, one mistake may mean that SRT, or Laxman would have to take the long walk back to the pavilion.

Dissecting the technique of Indian batsmen and the options available to England's bowlers.

Just like in any cricket match, where the openers go into bat first up, I will look at the two openers for the first test at Lord's.

Mukund - My first impression of the young Mukund in West Indies was of a batsman, who lacked a defence to survive in test cricket. In-fact, he reminded me of all those openers cum tailenders, who played for India in the 90's. I looked at him as a typical front-foot bully who struggles to play in the V. The more I saw of him though, I started to believe that yes, he lacks the defence, but to an extent makes it up with his fighting spirit.

As Mukund has a tendency to go for a premeditated forward press and has a nonexistent back-foot play, it results in him favouring the cover region with lots of shots being hit on the up.The Windies bowlers though were shorter than England's bowlers, were still able to trouble him by just bowling it across Mukund. As he got more confident, Mukund started to play a bit better as he left more deliveries outside the off-stump and tried to drop his wrists against those short deliveries that were bowled at him. The fact though is, when a player has a premeditated forward press, it makes life difficult for the batsman, as he would likely struggle to play on top of the bounce on the front-foot.

Mukund's tendency to have a premeditated forward press and his inability to play straight means that England's bowlers have the options of either getting him caught behind, or there is also a chance of Mukund inside edging one of the deliveries onto the stumps.

I would look at Tremlett and Bresnan as my two options to bowl at Mukund. Tremlett gets natural lift even from a good length and should trouble Mukund big time by bowling it across him and getting him out caught in the slip cordon. Bresnan doesn't get the bounce of Tremlett, but he bowls a slightly fuller length and there is a decent chance that Mukund may get tempted to look for a few boundaries against Bressy as he doesn't get the lift, nor he bowls slightly short like Tremlett. In an attempt to hit on the up through the off-side, there is a good chance of him inside edging a delivery onto the stumps.

In West Indies in the final test, it looked like Mukund was getting used to the angle across him, but Edwards used his brain by shaping one of the deliveries back into Mukund and got him out LBW. It is something England's quicks can try as a surprise weapon because Mukund would be always expecting all the quicker bowlers to bowl across him. As he is a left-hander, Swann too can be a good option, as he is a very good bowler against the left-handers, but I see Tremlett and if selected, Bressy as the main options against Mukund.

Gambhir- When India were about to embark on a tough tour to the Safferland, most critics opined that Gambhir would be a failure on bouncy tracks in the Safferland. I though had no doubt about Gambhir succeeding in South Africa as whatever technical flaws he has, Gambhir more than makes it up with his sheer mental toughness. Yes, he may struggle in the first few tests in the Old Blighty, but you should be a brave man to bet against Ghambir doing well in at least one of the tests. Here is a cricketer, who is always looking at ways to improve his batting and is a battle hardened cricketer.

The question mark against Gambhir is his tendency to stay leg-side off the ball which in turn can leave him vulnerable against taller bowler, who can tuck him up for room. The tall quick from South Africa, Morkel tried every trick in the book which included going around the wicket and tucking him up for room. Gambhir though, came out of that series with flying colous as after getting out in the first innings of the first test against a lifter bowled by Morkel, he stood toe to toe with Morkel for rest of the series on bouncy tracks and chipped in with useful scores.

In England too Tremlett would try the same option of tucking up Gambir for room, but if he is ever selected, Bressy can again be the trump-card against Gambhir. With Bressy bowling slightly fuller than Tremlett, there is always a chance of Gambhir looking at more scoring options against Bressy and getting out. Gambhir also used to fail against bowlers, who could bowl full and across him as he used to struggle to get his weight forward into the drive, but nowadays he seems to have corrected that flaw.

As soon as the opposition have a left-hander in their ranks, people will invariably bring up the name of Swann as he is a fantastic bowler against left-handers. Ghambir though is already a great player against spin, as he is prepared to take the risk of coming down the wicket, is wristy and more importantly, is light on his feet which helps him to use the depth of the crease beautifully against any spinner.

Strauss and Swann can definitely look to do what Sanga tried against Ghambir in the 2011 WC final. Sanga packed the off-side field and left the on-side field almost open with the off-spinner Randiv bowling to Ghambir around the wicket. The ploy almost worked as Ghambir couldn't play one of his favourite shots against the off-spinner, which is to come down the wicket, make a bit of room for himself and look to smash the off-spinner over the long-off region. Ghambir tried his best to play the waiting game, but in the end lost his patience and tried to play against the turn through the on-side and was beaten by the flight and the turn imparted by Randiv. Luckily for him, he got a slight inside edge and Sanga couldn't effect the stumping. In the end, the simple fact is, there are lots of battles to look out for in the upcoming series and one of the battles can be between Swann and Ghambir. Can Swann outwit Ghambir, or will Ghambir continue to take any spinner he faces to the cleaners?

I will write rest of the article in part 2 of Having a look at the Indian batting line-up, as otherwise it can lead to paralysis by analysis!

Bresnan- Unsung Hero

2011-07-10T19:09:00.009+04:00

A year ago, he wasn’t considered good enough for England's test side. Everyone from cricket fans to experts opined that he should never play test cricket. A few fans like me even held the opinion that he isn't anything more than a club cricketer, but the tough cookie from Yorkshire has proved us all wrong with his splendid performances in the Ashes, in the WC as well as in the recently concluded One-Day series against Sri Lanka.

When Bresnan runs up and bowls, not many cricket fans would like to switch on their television sets, or in excitement run to the stadium to watch him bowl yet, he is a vital cog in the England set-up, as he has the hunger of a lion and the stamina of an ox. Bresnan will never be known as rolls royce of fast bowling, but he more than makes it up with his stamina and enthusiasm for cricket. In-fact, Bres's bowling can be compared to a woodcutter as he does all the hard-work by bowling long spells and keeps it tight with others benefiting from it by taking wickets.

So what made one of his biggest critics like me change my perception about Tim Bresnan? For a minute, let us rewind back to Ashes 2011 in Australia. Everyone from commentators, journalists in the press box, or the fans are debating on why the success story of the Ashes, Finn has been dropped and the unheralded Bresnan has been selected to play the third test at Melbourne. On expected lines, Andy Flower and co. are getting criticised heavily for taking such a decision, but in the end, Flower and co. got it bang on right with their selection as Bres in that series didn't just provide the wicket-taking option that the greenhorn Finn did in the first two tests, but also bowled long spells and gave England the much needed control in the middle overs by bowling line and length. Bres also got reverse swing which completely flummoxed the Aussies at Melbourne.

With England winning at Melbourne, the team was able to retain the Ashes, but there was still the unfinished business of winning a 50 over cricket World Cup. The hard grind of playing the Ashes and seven meaningless Onedayers down under took heavy toll on England's players as one by one got injured. Rest of the players looked like they had just fought in the Towton war and had no more energy to play cricket. Bresnan though, like a true gladiator came up with a splendid performance at Bangalore against India in the WC. The pitch at Bangalore was so flat that it looked like an expressway. In-fact, those groundsmen who prepared that pitch can be used to prepare the upcoming Indian Grand Prix track! Bres like a typical Yorkie didn't lose heart as he kept hitting the good length and during the death overs bowled a sensational spell to rip through India's batting line-up and give England a semblance of chance of winning the match. If India had scored another 20-30 runs, the match could have been over after the first innings itself. England team flopped miserably in the WC, but Bres showed that he is a true fighter. Bresnan though, wasn't lucky with injuries as at the start of the English summer, he got injured yet, in the recently concluded series against Lanka, he made a fine comeback by picking up crucial wickets.

What makes Bres tick as a bowler? He is neither lightning quick nor can he swing it like a banana, but it is his ability to bowl old fashioned line and length and get just enough movement off the seam either way that helps him to get wickets. Bres hits the bat hard, has now got a yard quicker and can bowl reverse swing, but let it be on those flat wickets in Bangladesh, in the Ashes, or in the WC, it was his ability to bowl line and length and the stamina to bowl long spells which helped him to succeed. At present, he is no doubt the unsung member of the side, who bowls with good control and keeps it tight. I haven't even talked about the fact that he is a decent bat, as he is a powerful striker of the ball and for a lower order batsman, has a decent technique. I do hope Bresnan gets selected ahead of Broad against India, as in the few chances he has got in Bangladesh, Australia, or in the WC, he has shown that he is a very reliable player, who can come up with consistent performances.

To be honest, I see him as a key member in the team that will take up the gauntlet of playing the number one side India. Jimmy Anderson with his late swing is always a threat and the same can be said about Tremlett as he gets awkward bounce from a good length. England though, require Bres as he bowls long spells and keeps it tight which in turn will help Anderson and Tremlett to remain fresh and go for the kill. I also do believe that Indian batsmen won't like to face his bowling as he hits a good length and brings it back into the batsmen sharply. Leaving Laxman, none of the Indian batsmen like to pull but love to cut (Tendulkar has almost cut out the pull shot from his armoury due to injury problems). Bresnan's length can just tuck them up for room as he shapes it back into the batsmen sharply. One of the key reasons for South Africa's success story in the 90's against the Indian team was, because most of the bowlers leaving Donald and the tearaway Schultz, tended to do what Bres is doing at present, bowl a good length and give no room for the Indian batsmen to cut.

Having said all that do the selectors have the courage to drop the so called enforcer, who has a nasty streak from the side and pick Bres? We as cricket fans can just think of wishing the wholehearted cricketer from Yorkshire all the best and hope against hope that selectors have the brains to pick him for the mouth watering clash against the Indian team.

Lottie the great

2011-06-26T12:27:00.008+04:00

On seventeenth November of 2010 all the hype in World cricket was about whether Strauss and his band of boys can defeat Australia in their own den. The hype was on expected lines, as England hadn't defeated Australia in Australia for more than two decades. The month of November though, wasn't just about the Ashes as on seventeenth of that month, the well respected, talented and a lady, who seemed to be made of Toledo steel Charlette Edwards became the most capped player in women's cricket. Unfortunately, the great landmark achieved by her almost went unnoticed on that day, though thankfully, she was felicitated with an engraved sliver bat during the second test at Lord's in 2011. So, this is an article written to salute the achievements of a cricketer, who doesn't get the recognition she deserves.

The Huntingdon born Edwards always looked like she was made for cricket, as it is said that even at an young age, she lived and breathed cricket. Interest for cricket came naturally in her blood as she grew up watching her dad play cricket for Ramsey cricket club. In-fact, as she grew up, she even played for boys team and went onto captain the under 16 boys team! If I am right county players like Scott Newmann and Will Jefferson played with her. There are even stories about opposition fast bowlers in an attempt to prove a point bowled beamers at her. Interestingly she even dreamt of representing the men's national team when she was young. So, it is no wonder that at the age of just 12, she was selected to play for women's under 19 team and at the tender age of 16, she played her first test for England against New Zealand. It must have been a proud moment for the girl from Huntingdon to represent England team at such an young age. What a great experience it would have been, as here was a 16 year old girl walking with one of the greats of the game Brittin to open the batting.

At the tender age of 16 most would struggle to do well in internationals, but not Edwards, as she took to international cricket like a duck to water. Edwards smashed 12 hundreds in 1997, scored the then record ODI score of 173 not out in a WC match against Ireland and in 99, made a splendid hundred against the touring Indian team. At that time, it didn't look like anything would go wrong in Edwards's career as she was scoring runs for fun. The fact though is, to earn success everyone has to work extremely hard and have to overcome major setbacks. From playing against boys at an young age, playing for national team with her own kit, or when she suffered a horrible ligament injury, just like a true champion, Edwards has shown that she can overcome any hurdle, especially when she suffered that horrible injury in 2000, there were speculations that she may never be the same player again . Edwards though, rose from the ashes like Phoenix and took her game to the next level by doing even better than what she did before.

In 2005 the moment that everyone was waiting for came, as Edwards became England's women's captain. It was yet another achievement in Edwards's glittering career. In the beginning, she seemed to be frustrated too easily, but soon she learnt the tricks of the trade and captained England to a historic Ashes triumph in 2005. 2005 was also the year when the men's team finally beat Australia in the Ashes, but unlike the men's team, England's women's team under stewardship of Edwards made sure that victory against the Ozzies was just a stepping stone to success as between 2005-2009, they retained the Ashes twice, won the 50 overs as well as T/20 WC in 2009. In-fact, the T/20 WC victory in England has raised the profile of women's cricket in England as there is more interest in women's cricket now.

The greatest challenge for any captain though, comes when the team is in dire straits and that is the time when everyone expects the captain to raise like a true gladiator and lead the team from the front. Edwards did just that in 2010/11 Ashes, when in-spite of leading an injury ravaged side which kept losing most of the matches, Edwards scored a fantastic hundred under pressure in the one off test and was ultra consistent in most of the One-day matches as well as T/20's.

Present head of England's women's cricket and former player Connor on Edwards's success during the tour of Australia,

"This has been, unarguably, her best tour with the bat,"

Connor's views about that disastrous tour down under,

It was awful," says Connor. "The meetings off the pitch were dire. Here we were in Australia for a massive tour, after so much hard work and preparation and all our best-laid plans were falling apart. Four or five days in, it looked like being a tour from hell. We were sending players home to have shoulder surgery and looking at our possible replacements, other players were picking up niggles being driven all over Perth for specialist appointments and MRI scans."

Edwards's teammate Claire Taylor on her captaincy,

"She is a great captain, And there are a couple of reasons why. Firstly she is so involved in the game, she thinks about cricket all the time. It is just part of who she is. She is always watching the game on TV – she calls it research – it doesn't matter who is playing, whether it is an Australian State side or anybody else, she'll be watching. Just to see what is happening, how other people are playing the game and what other captains are doing."

Connor on Edwards's work ethic,

"You have to almost drag her physically out of the nets and unbuckle her pads to get her to stop practicing,"

The above lines just reiterates what I said at beginning of the article that here is a lady, who is made of toeldo steel! Now just because I have kept praising about Lottie's grit, it doesn't mean that she doesn't have the talent as a batswoman. Her ability to find gaps and hit boundaries at will, especially square off the wicket on either side has always been great to watch. I have also left out on the fact that Lottie can bowl handy leg-spin.

Final words

As Lottie is fit as a fiddle and still in prime form, she can definitely play for few more years at the top level. More importantly, she is the key when it comes to guiding the next generation of England's women cricketers. So, we salute this once in a generation cricketer, who with her deeds on the field has raised the profile of the game. She is no doubt a great ambassador for the women's game.

Why is Tremlett special?

2011-06-19T13:43:00.002+04:00

About 18 years ago, a tall, dark and handsome fast bowler with a stare that would make the best of batsmen feel that he is going to murder them the next ball blitzed Australia's top-order by taking 7 for 25 on a trampoline wicket at WACA. It seemed like the Australian batsmen consisting of players like Waugh twins, Boon, Taylor, Border and co. were lilliputs facing up-to a giant, who was hurling hand grenades at them. Fast forward to present time, another very tall fast bowler built like a bulldozer was killing Lankan batsmen of the calibre of Jayawerdena and co. like flies in the first innings at Rose Bowl. He also made fans like me a bit nostalgic and think about those great spells by the tall, dark and handsome man from the Caribbean.

You all must have guessed it by now that I was thinking about the great Antiguan fast bowler Ambrose and the other bowler is of course, the quiet and shy man from Southampton, Tremlett. The Lankan batsmen though won't agree as when Tremlett is playing cricket, he is perhaps the meanest and the most intimidating fast bowler going around at present. Now, for not even one minute I am comparing Tremlett to Amby, as Amby was in a class of his own, but it was a pleasure to watch a fast bowler intimidate the batsmen in an era made up of big bats and flat pitches.

Looking at the way Tremlett has been bowling since his return to test cricket in the Ashes, a casual cricket fan may think Oh! what is the big deal as he is built like a giant and has the natural attributes to bowl fast and frighten the batsmen. The fact though is, it isn't all about having the talent, as to succeed in any field, mental toughness and a bit of luck is a must. In his younger days, Tremlett seemed to be a cricketer, who didn't believe that he had the talent to bowl fast and suffered from ill-fated injuries. Michael Vaughan's comments about him not being mentally tough didn't help either, but thankfully, he has comeback stronger and a better bowler.

Turnaround in Tremlett's career

So, how could a bowler who was down in dumps transform himself from an injury prone, shy fast bowler to a fitter, stronger and a bowler, whofrightens the batsmen to death with awkward bounce and a big stare? Around the same-time last year, Tremlett was released by Hampshire County and there were even whispers in County circles that his days as a cricketer in County cricket was numbered as no one would like to gamble on a player, who seemed to be made of glass. Surrey though, took the gamble and picked him in their squad for the 2010 season. The move by Tremlett to Surrey can be said as the turning point in his career, as it has helped him to become a better fast bowler. By bowling lots of overs on flat wickets at Oval, Tremlett has definitely got stronger and has learnt the art of bowling on flat wickets. In-fact, when he bowls, it looks like a bulldozer has been ordered to crush the opposition team's batsmen. Surrey's coach Chris Adams may have failed as a batsman in test cricket, but he is always renowned as a tough guy and the association with him at Surrey surely has helped Tremlett to become better.

Tremlett with experience has learnt that bowling in test cricket isn't just about bowling short and intimidating the batsmen. It looks great when a tall fast bowler bowls a bouncer and the batsman tries to duck under it, or sway away from the line, but to get wickets, the key is to use the short ball as a surprise weapon. It was evident when Tremlett first made his debut against India in 2007 that he got carried away with bowling short. Yes, Tremlett did get few wickets in that series by bowling short, but at Oval the experienced Indian batsmen decided that instead of playing at those short deliveries, it is better to leave it and as a result, Tremlett came a cropper in that test. Even during his comeback trail in the practice games before the Ashes, I again thought that Tremlett bowled a touch short. For instance, in the first innings at Hobart against Australia A, he bowled a touch short, but it was in the second innings, he finally showed his class on a wicket that had become considerably flatter by constantly hitting the good length spot, making the batsmen play and using the bouncer only as a surprise weapon. Since that game, he has hardly put a foot wrong. In-fact he has got better as one could see in the first innings at Rose Bowl, as after somewhat of an indifferent start, he pinged the batsmen in the crease with awkward bounce and forced the batsmen to edge it behind to the keeper. He also used the bouncer and the full delivery as a surprise weapon to keep the batsmen on tenterhooks.

Final Words

Here is a bowler, belonging to the bygone era of tall fast bowlers, who kept coming hard at the batsmen and made cricket a joy to watch as back then it was an equal contest between bat and ball. So, in a nutshell Tremlett belongs to the rare species of tall fast bowlers whose very existence is cricket is threatened due to big bats, too much cricket and flat wickets. In near future, we may not find a single fast bowler, who would make the batsmen think twice about coming onto the front-foot, but at least at present, let us all enjoy the the tall fast bowler from Southampton built like a Coast Redwood tree of California frighten the batsmen to death with his bounce and a big stare. I just wish that Tremlett can play for a few more years without too many injury problems and continue to bowl like he has done at Perth, Cardiff and Rose Bowl.

Katich's axing and and the backing of Phil Hughes

2011-06-12T11:47:00.023+04:00

Few months back, a cricketer by the name Simon Katich or more popularly known as Krab was winning the best Australian test player award, but fast forward to the present world, he now isn't even worthy of being one of the 25 centrally contracted players. Here was a cricketer, who had comeback into the side after he was dropped from the test team in 05 by working hard on his game with the help of Bob Simpson and did well over the last few years. Suddenly though, from nowhere the Australian selectors have decided that he isn't good enough by not giving him a contract. It seems like age factor and injuries were considered as the reasons for the dropping of Katich, yet poor Katich must be feeling that the Australian selectors have stabbed him on the back.

Let me make it crystal clear that I am all for youth policy, but at present, Australian selectors in a bid to select young players are picking cricketers, who don't seem to be good enough to play test cricket.

Yes, I realise that selecting an national side is a thankless job as whatever list a selection panel comes up with, some sections in the media or the fans won't be happy with it. The fact though is, Australian selectors seem to be confused and are gambling by picking players, who just aren't ready to play test cricket. There was no way a player like the X man or whatever he was, would have been selected before. The same can be said about Smith as at present, he isn't good enough to bat at 6 or bowl about 15-20 overs of leg spin. I also see that they have not dropped the blind man against spin David Hussey as well as someone, who never seems to use his brains Hilfenhaus from the contract list but Katich gets dropped!

Katich was never going to be a batsman fans would pay to watch as with his exaggerated shuffle across the stumps and him being a batsman, who seemed to belong more to the bygone Tavare, Boycott era, he would likely drive away fans from the ground, but there is no doubt that with his hard-work, he has earned the respect of other cricketers as well as fans. Anyway, Katich may feel happy now that he doesn't have to keep playing for a side that seems to be in a decline, but rather spend some time with his children on some beach in Gold Coast of Australia.

It was also interesting to note that Australian selectors have backed Hughes to the hilt and it looks likely he is going to be given a good run in the side. Actually, it is good to see that Aussie selectors have decided to give Hughes a run in the side, but there are serious question marks regarding whether Hugues's technique to succeed in test cricket is good enough. To succeed in the highest form of the game, which is test cricket, a batsman needs to have a decent defence, but unfortunately Hughes doesn't have a decent defence. Just like what I said when I saw him for the first time in South Africa in 08/09, I would continue to say that he has loads of talent but lacks a defence.

The general consensus is, Hughes is troubled by the bouncer, but in my opinion, more than a bouncer, it is back of a length bowling which troubles Hughes. Hughes's inability to cover the line of the ball and as he gets squared up means that if a bowler consistently bowls back of a length and shapes it slightly away from Hughes, he would likely nick it to the slip cordon. A bowler can also look at bowling from around the wicket and tuck him up for room and get his wicket. Even a decent spinner would fancy his chances of getting him out as he goes very hard at the ball, but unfortunately the spinners tribe haven't been able to get much of a chance to bowl at him as in test cricket, he has consistently got out cheaply to seamers! At present, he is an one dimensional player, as he looks good only when a bowler bowls short and wide. Hughes needs to look at scoring more runs through the on-side otherwise his scoring options would be limited. Having said that Hughes to his credit did well in the Sheffield Shield final and is still young, so he can improve.

I just end this rant of mine by saying that this is the time when we would come to know about whether the depth in Australian cricket is as great as what is made out to be or is just a myth. When you see youngsters like Hughes, Smith, Warner and to a lesser extant even Khawaja not knowing where their off-stump is, it doesn't seem so.

French open final preview

2011-06-05T12:35:00.013+04:00

Two weeks ago when the second Grand Slam of the year French Open started, the only word on everyone's lips was can Djokovic again beat Nadal on his favourite surface clay and that too at Roland Garros, but after two weeks of matches worth of thrills and spills, the two men standing at the end are familiar faces about whom we have admired over the years. Yes, I am thinking about Rafa and Roger, who are yet again going to meet in a Grand Slam final.

The big question before any match between Roger and Rafa is of course, who will win the contest. If I see the stats, it is crystal clear that there can be only one winner and that is Rafa as he has won 16 out of 24 encounters against Roger which includes 11 victories on clay. Rafa has also defeated Roger on all 4 occasions they have met at Roland Garros and has an 5-2 advantage in Grand Slam finals. The records are very much staked against Fed, but it doesn't count for anything when both great champions meet in the final as who will win the match isn't decided by past records, but on the basis of who plays better on the day.

If I think about the upcoming match between the two greats, I am sure already about a billion previews have been written by experts as well as fans. Added to those billion previews here is one more preview by me lol.

One one side, Federer must be feeling very confident as he played great tennis especially in the first two sets to send the pre-tournament favourite Djokovic packing out of the tournament. When Federer starts to hit winners from his slightly weaker backhand wing and serves at over 200 Kph you know that he is in great form. Here is a player, who is definitely a different man to the one who lost at both Miami and Madrid to Rafa. Fed though, himself knows he may have to play a different game against Rafa. Unlike Djokovic, Rafa isn't the one who would look to play with all out aggression, but more often than not he has succeeded in hurting Fed's backhand with heavy top-spin from his forehand. So, Rafa will definitely look to grind down Fed on clay with his top-spin before he goes for his big forehand winner. It is very important for Fed to get his serve right today, especially on the deuce court as Rafa stands way back on the baseline. If Fed gets his serve right, he can keep the points short and not allow Rafa to dictate points from the baseline with his heavy top-spin.

Secondly, Fed would also look to come to net which in turn will force Rafa to hit more passing shots, but it is easier said than done, as Rafa has definitely improved his backhand and can hit winners with his cross-court back-hand.

On the other side, Rafa would look to do what he has done before on clay against Fed and that is to hurt Fed's backhand with his heavy top-spin. Rafa hasn't served anywhere near as well as he did at the US open yet, he has mixed up his serve well with clever changes of pace in the tournament. It definitely helped him against Murray to save few break points. One of the major worries for Rafa though in this tournament is, a few big hitters have been able to find a bit of weakness when they have got Rafa on the run as unlike before, Rafa hasn't been able to hit those unbelievable winners from his forehand wing when he is on the run, instead the opposite player is making use of the short ball from Rafa's forehand wing to hit the winner. Rafa has shown signs of improvement in his game against Soderling and Murray, but he still isn't playing at his best on clay. When he plays at his best, he is just invincible on clay.

Prediction

It is very tough to predict a winner in this match as both are great champions and this time around, Fed looks a lot more confident than he did say three years ago when Rafa completely walloped him at the famous court Philippe Chatrier. I would still give a slight edge to Rafa as I expect him to again make holes in Fed's backhand with his heavy top-spin and likely win the French open.

Whatever maybe the result, it is always great to watch these two champions battle it out in Grand Slam finals as on one side, there is the king of orthodoxy Fed, who plays with finesse and is a connoisseur's delight. On the other side there is Rafa, who is the king of unorthodoxy, but in his own way he too is a delight to watch as he covers the court beautifully, gets so much top-spin on his shots and when in form, can hit breathtaking winners on the run. Yes, there are so called purists who hate Rafa's play, but I don't have anytime for people with blinkers on.

Finally, I would again hope that my favourite player Rafa wins yet another French open, but just like most Rafa fans, I won't mind the great champion Fed winning another Grand Slam either!

Captain Cool

2011-04-04T14:38:00.007+04:00

About 1.2 billion fans are celebrating on the streets of Mumbai, Kolkota, Bangalore and rest of the country. Rest of the world may or may not care, but that won't bother the Indian cricket fans as Dhoni and his boys have done what Indian fans have been waiting for 28 long years. The agonizing wait for the fans to see another Indian captain lift the coveted Word Cup trophy was over on April 2nd of 2011 as the golden boy of Indian cricket MS Dhoni showed once for all that he is Captain cool by playing one of the best knocks ever seen in World Cup history. Let it be toss fiasco at start of the match, Mahela's silken strokes, Parera's lusty hitting at end of the innings, Malinga's booming yorkers, Murali's doosra didn't bother captain cool and his teammates.

I have never been known to use the word great easily, but I just take my hat off and salute Dhoni as he has proved beyond doubt that he is a great captain. In a short span of time Dhoni has been able to lift the World T/20, CL, IPL, helped India to be the number one team in test cricket and now has led India to a 50 over WC victory. Yes, it was in the end a team effort that helped the Indian side to win the trophy, but his knock under immense pressure in the final showed that here is a captain, who can lead the team from front and that too at the biggest stage which is the World Cup.

It was about 5 years ago that I first saw Dhoni on a cricket field. Here was a man with long hairs and played weird shots. I thought of him as a powerful, wristy, but a flashy batsman who lacks the technique to succeed for a long-time. When he played a few of those weird wristy shots, it even looked like he wasn't playing a cricketing shot but was piloting a helicopter. How wrong was I as within no time he became an integral part of the side and now has helped India to win the World Cup!

If I look back at Dhoni's career, his first big test perhaps came in England in 2007. India had already bowed out of the 2007 WC in a embarrassing fashion by losing to Bangladesh in the first round itself and question marks were raised over the places of senior players like SRT, Dravid and Ganguly. There were even question marks over whether flashy players like Dhoni, Yuvraj and co. would mature and of course one could even say that critics were keeping an keen eye on how would Dhoni perform as a keeper as well as a batsman in tough conditions in that upcoming tour of England.

To be honest, I thought that Dhoni would be found out in English conditions both as a keeper and as a batsman. Yes, during the tour of England in 07, he may not have come out of that stern test with flying colours, but he did score a vital half century in the first test at Lord's. It can be surely said that rain came to the rescue of the Indian team during that match as the final session on the final day was washed out yet, some credit has to go to Dhoni as his aggressive half century meant that India could keep England's bowlers at bay until the rain came to their rescue. The knock at Lord's showed that Dhoni has got a very good temperament. Since then, Dhoni has gone from strength to strength both as a batsman and as a captain. In 07 itself, he led an young side to a great victory at T/20 championship, under his captaincy, India were able to defeat Australia, England even draw a series away from home in South Africa. Of course, who can forget him leading CSK to victories in IPL and CL and now the biggest prize in one-day cricket, the World Cup.

What makes Dhoni tick?

I have always firmly believed that any captain should have the ability to lead from front. There have been captains who were great tacticians, but in my opinion, a captain can be rated as a good captain not only if he is a good tactician, but he should also lead from the front by doing well as a cricketer. In his career, Dhoni has shown on numerous occasions that he can come good under pressure with a bat in hand or even as a wicket-keeper. His knock in the World Cup final gave ample proof of what a good player Dhoni is under pressure. Early in his innings, Dhoni didn't look at his best against Murali's doosra, but Dhoni wasn't flustered by it as he kept rotating the strike and when the time came, he played the big shots to help India to a famous win. Dhoni's batting technique may look awkward, but there is no doubt that he has the technique to survive, he has got a wide range of shots and more importantly, he has got a very cool head on his shoulders. It can't get better when the wall of India Dravid showers praises on a player by saying that when Dhoni bats, there is always calmness in the dressing room!

There are critics who may point out that in test cricket sometimes Dhoni can get defensive. We saw that in Srilanka last year when there were times Dhoni's captaincy looked negative, but with so many flat wickets being prepared, it can be argued that nowadays hands of a captain are tied and as a result they have to be defensive. India's bowling attack isn't very good either.

What I really like about Dhoni's captaincy is, he backs his instincts. The way he backed a newbie like Joginder Sharma in the final of the T/20 tournament in South Africa was just amazing to watch and of course Sharma won the match for India by taking the last wicket of Misbah. Yes, there have been times when it didn't work like in the match against South Africa in the WC. With Robin Peterson eying to slog it over the mid-wicket region and Nehra mainly looking to bowl into Peterson, it was almost a foregone conclusion that Peterson would smash a six of Nehra. Yes that move backfired yet Dhoni continues to back his instincts which is great to see. His move of selecting Sreesanth for the final didn't work either, though the pitch did suit Sreesanth's style of bowling, but unfortunately for Dhoni, Sree thought that he is the next Jeff Thomson and bowled short.

I really liked it when he moved up the order in the final against Lanka. With Lanka having three off-spinners in the side they would loved to have bowled to Yuvraj and Ghambir as off-spinners prefer to bowl to lefthanders at both ends. The reason being when an off-spinner bowls from around the wicket, the ball will leave a lefthander which makes it difficult for a lefthander to score runs as the opposition captain can block the off-side and force the lefthander to play across the line through the on-side. Yes, unlike Randiv or Dilshan, Murali is unorthodox and has struggled against lefties like Lara, Flower and co. in the past, but both Dilshan and Randiv would loved to have bowled to lefthanders at both ends. By coming in at 5, Dhoni also showed that in a big final he was ready to lead from the front and won't hide behind Yuvraj or Raina. Here is a captain, who has the self belief in his ability and backs his players to the hilt, who in turn respond to it by coming up with match winning performances.

So what next for Dhoni? if not anything else, he would surely like to win more matches away from home, especially couple of tough tours coming up in the Old Blighty and one in Australia. I am sure Dhoni isn't a man, who will like to rest on his laurels, but would look at winning more matches for India with his batting, keeping and of course his captaincy.

Can Srilanka upset the apple-cart?

2011-04-02T11:07:00.002+04:00

For the last two months, I haven't been able to follow cricket as much as I would have liked to as I have been extremely busy.With passions running high what with about 1.2 billion Indian fans cheering Indian team as well as about 20 million Lankan fans cheering the Lankan Lions I surely can't miss out on action. So, just in time before the final, I decided to write an article on the match.

If I have to think of the big final between India and Srilanka, it is obvious to any cricket fan that India are the favourites going into the match as they have a balanced team and they are playing in their own den. Srilanka are a tough unit to beat in subcontinent, but thankfully for India, the match isn't played in Srilanka as for me with the demise of Australian team, there is nothing tougher than beating Srilanka in Srilanka.

So what are the chances of Srilanka upsetting the applecart and holding the World Cup trophy for the second time around? There is no denying the fact that Lankan Lions have a good side, but somehow if I look at the side I get the feeling that they lack the depth, especially in their batting to challenge the might of the Indian team.

On the basis of whatever little action I have been able to catch, it is crystal clear that Srilanka have depended heavily on Tharanga and Dilshan at top of the order. Sanga has been on expected lines consistent throughout this World Cup, but the stylish batsman from Emerald Isle Jayawerdena has been short of runs. The injury to Mathews is obviously a big blow to the Lankan side as under pressure he is as cool as a cucumber. I just love the way he plays cricket, especially when he bats as he is a effortless striker of the ball.

If I think about Lanka's opening pair of Tharanga and Dilshan from Srilanka's point of view I do hope that Tharanga would be a bit more cautious and not look at throwing his bat at anything that is outside the off-stump against Zaheer. Zaheer is easily one of the best in the business against lefties as unlike say Nehra, he can swing it both ways and can bowl clever changes of pace. It is applicable to Dilshan as well as he too loves to just have a crack at anything that is slightly outside the off-stump. Here I firmly believe that it isn't just Nehra, but even Munaf is the man that Lanka should look to target. Yes, I realise that Munaf has bowled reasonably well in this WC and the slower delivery he bowled to Razzaq showed that he isn't an one trick pony, but I still feel that he is a bit predictable and if Lanka can go after him, it can put pressure on the spinners. Of course, there is a good chance of Dhoni going for the extra spinner and open the bowling with the off-spinner Ashwin. The option of opening the bowling with Ashwin though may backfire on Dhoni, as both Tharanga and Dilshan are very good against spinners.

Lanka's biggest worry has obviously been Mahela's lack of form. A cricket connoiseur would love to watch a graceful player like Mahela bat for a long-time. The key point to consider here though is, the track at Bombay tends to help spinners and Mahela is extremely good against spin bowling. Of course, Sanga is always key to Lanka's chances in the middle-order, but on spinning tracks I also rate Mahela very highly. Samaraweera can be another vital cog in Lanka's middle order as he bats very low and plays late which helps S'weera to counter spin effectively. Thilan is also good under pressure as we saw in the match against the Kiwis, when he was able to help Lanka overhaul the target set by the Kiwis by playing well under pressure.

With Mathews out of the side, Lanka would likely select the reserve batsman Kapugudera. Sorry, I have never been a fan of Kapu because even after playing for more than five years, he hasn't been able to kick on in his career and seems to have a frail temperament.

If I am the captain, I would likely go for Parera. Yes, it is a gamble as it can weaken the batting, but the counter argument can be Kapugudera isn't a good enough batsman. The reason I feel Parera can do well is because from little bit of knowledge I have about the wicket at Wankhade Mumbai, it tends to stop on the batsmen. Parera is a skiddy bowler who can surpise the batsmen for a bit of pace and has got clever changes of pace up his sleeve. My gut feeling is, he is the right sort of bowler for a wicket like Wankhade Mumbai. As a batsman Parera has limited range of shots, but if it is in his zone Parera can tonk the ball over the mid-wicket for huge sixes. Just think of the huge six he hit at Perth last year in a T/20 game against Australia. Sanga shouldn't even mind using Parera as a floater and send him up the order, especially if Lanka are chasing a sizeable total.

Srilanka's bowling is suited to a track like Mumbai as they have plenty of slow bowlers, but Sanga perhaps would have liked a bounce bowler in his team. The fact is, when the pitch tends to be a bit up and down and stops on the batsmen a bounce bowler can get more unpredictable bounce. Now, it doesn't mean that Lanka should pick a bounce bowler like say Fernando as he is just not good enough to play at this level. Sanga can even look at opening the bowling with Mendis as that can surprise the Indian openers. Having said that in recent times Indian batsmen have dominated Mendis and because of that fact he may not even play in the match. It would also be the last game the legend Murali will play and hopefully a champion bowler like him can do well, though his injury would surely hamper him.

A team like Srilanka is expected to field well as they are a good fielding side. If not anything else, I am sure that Lankan Lions won't field as bad as they did against England in the Quarter Final.

Pitch Conditions

As I have already said that I haven't been able to catch much of the World Cup action, but from past experience of watching games at Bombay, I can definitely say that pitch will have something in it for all types of bowlers. Due to humidity factor, swing bowlers can get some help. Here one can remember Damien Fleming's match winning spell in the 96 WC or Anderson's six wicket haul in a test match in 06. As the wicket can be a bit up and down, the seamers who hit the deck can get more uneven bounce.The spinners will definitely come into play as the wicket has never come across as a hard wicket and the colour of soil is usually red. So, spinners can get grip on the ball and uneven bounce. Any team that bats first would feel that they have the advantage as later on in the match it would likely help the spinners.

Final Words

Being a cricket connoisseur, I do hope that the great man SRT can get his 100th hundred in international cricket, but somehow I just love it when the favourites before the match lose and the underdogs cause an upset. Now, Lankan Lions aren't exactly underdogs a they have a fine team, but going into the match they are definitely not the favourites.

For inspiration Sanga can look no further than the amazing victory Lanka achieved under the astute leadership of Ranatunga at home of Indian cricket Kolkota and for struggling Mahela, he can think of his great knock in the World Cup Semifinal against the Kiwis in the 07 WC.

I just hope that it would be a edge of the seat nail biting contest and may the best team win!!!

Is the standard of women's cricket appalling?

2011-01-17T20:47:00.009+04:00

Karen Rolton

Today, on twitter I saw a few interesting comments by the sun cricket correspondent John Etheridge. He said that standard of women's cricket is a joke and most cricket pundits think the same, but aren't ready to say that on air. Finally, he tried to clarify by saying that what he meant was, compared to standards in other sports women play like tennis, golf, swimming and co. it is low. The most interesting comment though he made was, people who patronise women's cricket are the worst.It made me think about women's cricket and finally I even thought of writing an article on the subject.

Before writing the article, I would like to make it clear that I am not trying to criticise anyone, who has a low opinion on women's cricket, but I would just like to share my views on women's cricket.

I don't think I have to research the history and talk about women in sports as everyone knows that there was a time, when women weren't allowed in sports. Gradually with time, they started taking part in most sports. Perhaps the most significant moment for women's sport came in 1973 when Bobby Riggs deliberately played the male chauvinism card by saying that female players are inferior and even at his age of 55, he can defeat them. BJ. King took up the gauntlet thrown at her and beat Riggs.

In the last few decades, we have also seen women participate in events that were said to be not meant for them. We can think of 10000m. event being introduced in 88 summer Olympics with Bondarenko winning that event and with time, Ma Junren's army took long distance running to another level. Marathon was also soon introduced into Olympics and if I am right, even women's boxing would be introduced in the London Olympics.

So, after looking at women in other sports, let us comeback to the topic on hand, women's cricket. The gut feeling is, it isn't just about women's cricket being of lower standard when compared to men's cricket, but even if someone compares it to other sports that women play like golf and tennis, one can see that women's cricket is of very low standard.

How much of it is true and if it is true, why women's cricket is of very low standard?

If I have to think of women's cricket, I would like to look at what the most talented fast bowler I have seen Akram say on women's cricket,

"They're not sharp, but they can become sharp if they play a longer version of the game - at least two-day cricket where they can bowl a lot more overs and, by doing that, their bowling muscles will get strengthened and their pace will increase. If you've got to play one tournament in two years or five one-day internationals, you're not going to improve your pace."

I see a element of truth in it as the only country I know, who used to play at least two day domestic cricket Australia don't play it anymore. If I leave Australia, I can only think of three teams, who can be called as a major force in women's cricket which are the Kiwis, England and India. Among those three teams, the Kiwis haven't played test cricket for sometime now. So, how can anyone expect women cricketers to bowl at decent pace, or even bat for long periods?

The best batswoman I have seen Belinda Clark agreed with Akram and said,

"I agree with him that [longer cricket] plays a very important role in developing not only bowling skills but the ability to bat for long periods and actually learn the game is done in the longer form of the game. The harsh commercial realities are that that's going to be difficult to do going forward."

The counter argument put forward by those who see women's cricket as a joke is, top teams like England have a coach, analyst, physio, strength and conditioning coach and maybe more. I don't care even if a team has the best physio, or a strength conditioning expert around, as a cricketer can only improve by bowling lots of overs, or by batting for long periods on a cricket field, but the sad part is, as Clark said because of the commercial realities, it is difficult to organise even two day cricket matches.

The next question that can arise is, whether women's cricket has ever produced cricketers at least of decent standard? I am not a cricket pundit, but from whatever little bit of women's cricket I have seen, I would stand by what I have said before that there have been more than a few cricketers, who were good. Let us look at few of the cricketers that I have been able to watch.

Janette Brittin

Janette Brittin- I can confidently say that she was a great batswoman as just like any other great player, she could play for long periods and get big scores. She was also a fine stroke-maker as she had a good range of shots. The Surrey and England great still holds the record for the highest aggregate of runs scored in test cricket. If not anything else, watching her bat didn't make me feel that standard of women's cricket is a joke.

Belinda Clark- In my humble opinion, Clark was slightly better than even Brittin, though purists would likely prefer Brittin. Clark's great moment came when she scored a double hundred against Denmark in the 97 WC. So, it isn't SRT who was the first one to score a double hundred in one-day cricket. Yes, it came against a weak opponent, but by scoring a double hundred, she showed that women cricketers too can get big scores. If Denmark was a weak opponent, what about her knock against the Kiwis in the 01 WC final? A WC final always means players from both teams taking part in the event feeling the heat as the winner will be crowned the champions. Belinda Clark though showed delightful footwork against the spinners and got 90 odd runs. In-spite of wickets falling at the other end, she kept playing her shots and with just a bit more support she would have taken Aus. to a fine victory. It was one of the few times, I was lucky enough to watch her bat and I am not afraid in saying that she was a great ambassador for women's cricket. She deservedly was appointed as a member of Order of Australia a few years ago. Anyway, if she was bad, why would Australia appoint her as one of the coaches in centre of excellence? She must have been of decent standard to be appointed as a coach.

Karen Rolton- If I have to describe Rolton, I have to think of the game between South Africa and Australia in the WC in 2001. The big hitting lefthander scored 107 of just 67 balls and made everyone sit up and take notice of the talented lass from Australia. It made even Rupert Murdoch think of getting television rights for the final of that WC. In the 05 WC final against India, Clark didn't do well, but her deputy Rolton smashed a hundred in quick time to help Australia to yet another WC victory. Rolton wasn't just a great batswoman, but could bowl medium pace as well. If I am right, she even held the record for highest individual score in test cricket. Her class can be seen by the fact that as per just stats, she is even better than Clark.

Claire Taylor- In recent times, the wicket-keeper batswoman Claire Taylor has been the backbone of England's batting. I have always thought of her as a gutsy batswoman, who can bat for long periods. Her best knock was perhaps the 156 she scored against India at Lord's in 06. She was also declared as the player of the tournament in the t/20 WC in 09.

Mithali Raj- How can I leave out the Indian lass Mithali Raj? Her game is all about timing and grace. I have never seen her play a slog. Sometimes won't it be better to watch a graceful player than a slogger like Pollard or Yusuf Pathan lol? Just like Rolton, she too held the record for the highest individual score in test cricket for a while. Edwards, Hockley, Keightley, Stahlekar, Chopra, Sarah Taylor and few others can also be thought of as fine players.

Cathryn Fitzpatrick- At the beginning of the article, I did mention Akram's point about lack of quicker bowlers in women's cricket, but Fitzpatrick was one cricketer, who could consistently bowl 80mph. Among the bowlers, I also like England's off-spinner Laura Marsh.

Of course, none of the above mentioned cricketers can be compared to men and I find that comparison ridiculous. Even the comparison with other women's sports doesn't seem right to me. For instance, in tennis Williams sisters, Henin, Clijsters, Wozniacki, Azarenka, the Ovas from Eastern and Central Europe, or even slightly lower ranked players like Kvitova, Peer and co. play tennis day in and day out. They also have the backing of sponsors. Leave alone those, who are in the top 100, but even those languishing well below the top 100 in rankings like Groenfeld, Rodionova, or O'Brien play challenger tournaments and qualify for the odd grand slam.

The same can't be said about women's cricketers as even the top countries like Aus, Eng, Ind, or NZ don't play fc cricket. They occasionally take part in bilateral series, but in women's cricket, it is mainly about playing in the WC. Think about the plight of teams like Lanka, South Africa, West Indies, Holland, Ireland, Pakistan and few other countries as for them, it is just about the WC. A few of those teams have to take part in the qualifying round and may not even participate in the WC.

Let us also think about the 93 WC held in England. The tournament almost didn't happen because of the lack of funding, but at the last minute, £90,000 grant was got from the foundation of sports and arts and the organisers also got some high profile individual gifts which meant that tournament went ahead as scheduled.

Leaving the final, the matches were played at relatively unknown grounds like Collingham, Beckenham, Roehampton, Warrington, Finchampstead, Slough and Ealing.The players encountered problems like England's players were made to roll the pitch at Ealing for the game against Netherlands which was a disgrace!

Yes, the situation has got better now as the top-ranked teams have got a sponsor yet, it can never be compared to tennis, or golf. In-spite of so many difficulties faced by cricketers, we have seen Hey Ho Flint, Brittin, Clark, C.Taylor, Hockley, Rolton, Raj, Fitzpatrick show that even women's cricket can produce fine players.

Belinda Clark

Final words

Just like in the past, it is going to be tough for women's cricket as there aren't many takers for the sport, but having watched a bit of women's cricket, I can safely say that the standard of cricket isn't as bad as what some make it out to be and they have every right to play cricket at the highest level.

James Anderson-The king of swing

2011-01-14T14:07:00.025+04:00

The king of swing

A typical preview before the Ashes 2010/11 in Australia.

Once the anchor finishes all the formalities of welcoming the viewers to the programme, the topic of discussion would veer towards the main course and that is the Ashes series.

One of the obvious questions that the anchor of the programme asks to the expert would be,

What do you think about the question marks hanging over England's leader of the pace attack?

The standard answer by the expert of course to it is, our leader of the attack is the best when it swings in England, but with kookaburra ball being used in Australia and when it stops swinging, he can be rendered ineffective. Oh yeah I forgot that on his last tour he took his wickets at 82.6 in Australia.

Yes, I am thinking about the leading wicket-taker in the just concluded Ashes and England's gun swing bowler Jimmy Anderson. Now, let me make it clear that I am not trying to take potshots at anyone, but I was no doubt astounded by how many people wrote off Anderson even before the series commenced and that too on the basis of what happened in the last Ashes series. The tendency to say that Anderson can't do well when there is no swing on offer is a cliche as Anderson also gets wickets by bowling seam. Comparing Anderson of 06/07 Ashes series to what he is now, is like comparing chalk and cheese.

As a cricket aficionado it has been a pleasure to watch Jimmy Anderson display his craft of swing bowling in Australian conditions. When it comes to Ashes heroes, the Burnley Bullet is no Harold Larwood, or Frank Typhoon Tyson to blast the batsmen out of a cricket pitch with sheer pace. He isn't even John Snow to bowl those wicked bouncers. In-fact those who watched either Larwood, or Tyson bowl must have thought that if batsmen didn't voluntarily make his way back to the pavilion, he will be engulfed by a storm as strong as the great storm that hit UK in 87 which in turn would tear the batsmen into pieces.

Now, JA or Burnley Bullet is different, as in the Ashes his bowling looked like a predator, who preys on his prey stealthily without the knowledge of the batsmen. He always seemed to have a plan for every batsman and he would keep working on it. Finally, he would do the finishing touches by luring the batsman into making the fatal mistake. There was a time when the Burnley Bullet would beat the batsman repeatedly in a over, but would get frustrated and lose the plot. Nowadays, he doesn't just beat the bat and trouble the batsman, but also can do the act of coup de grace by taking the wicket and finishing the job on hand.

As we all know that it wasn't always like this, especially when England lost the Ashes 5-0 to Australia. The same Anderson was getting belted all around the park under the hot sun by a bull called Hayden and his partner Langer in the second innings at Gabba in 06/07. A few of his critics even thought that his test career has come to a dead end. In-fact, his body language after being carted around by Aussies seemed to be of a person, who would rather play darts, but not cricket again in his life. I felt sick as it looked like yet another talented cricketer who has played for England was getting messed up thanks to the backroom staff and the selectors.

So, in this article I am going to pay a tribute to the man, who resurrected his career and from an Ashes zero in 06/07 became an Ashes hero in 2010/11.

Anderson's early career

At the dawn of the new millennium, there seemed to be a slew of hit the deck bowlers, who could make a cricket aficionado think whether is it worth paying to watch a cricket match. I am not trying to have a go at the great Glenn McGrath as watching him bowl was a joy to watch, but not all those clones who tried to imitate him. So, it was a breath of fresh when a swing bowler by the name James Anderson came onto the scene in 2002 and made everyone sit up and take notice of his ability to swing the ball like a banana.

I first noticed the Burnley Bullet in a televised game between Hampshire and Lancashire at Rose Bowl in 2002. It was a match in which the future of England's attack seemed to be playing as Lancs had Anderson and Mahmood where as Hampshire had Tremlett and Tomlinson(the other young promising medium pacer at that time Kyle Hogg was playing against Srilanka in a under 19 match) Anyway, what impressed me most during that match about Anderson was his ability to swing it late. He would slant into the batsman and when the batsman got ready to play the inswinger he would swing it late away from the batsman. Even more astounding was the fact that in-spite of his head falling away at the point of delivering the ball, he could still ask questions to the batsmen by bowling in the right areas. I thought wow England have found a gun swing bowler, but then I became cautious as since the start of 90's, more than a few talented cricketers have been messed up by the selectors and the backroom staff.

Anderson makes his debut for England

Fast forward to Ashes 02/03, England are again hit by a injury crisis which is hard to believe. It wasn't just the key players like Gough, Freddie, Vaughan who got injured, but even the likes of White, Tudor, Hoggy and Giles suffered injuries on that trip. It got so bad that Yorkshire quick Chris Silverwood, who came in as a replacement player got injured after bowling mere five overs at Perth!

So, just like the previous ill-fated tours to Australia, England was hit by a injury crisis which wasn't short of being catastrophic. Suddenly Fletcher and Nass were groping for replacements. At that time it was the then vice captain Trezza, who came up with the name of a young bowler called Jimmy Anderson. Interestingly, neither Fletch nor Nass knew much about him, but as Trezza had played JA in a county match in 2002, he was able to assess his potential. Going by the word of England's trusted lieutenant Trezza, Anderson was drafted into the one-day squad that would go onto play against Australia and Srilanka in a tri-series. It also shows that sometimes that senior players should take part in county circuit as it can help them to keep in touch with county cricket. Journalists though, thought that the wrong Lancs player was picked as they were thinking of Kyle Hogg.

The Burnley bullet straightaway didn't get a chance as Fletch and Nass went for the slightly more experienced Sussex seamer in Kirtley. Soon one could notice that in-spite of being successful at the county level, Kirtley was short of pace to succeed at the international level. So, in the next match at Melbourne, our man Burnley Bullet got his first one-day cap against Australia. It was in his second match against Srilanka at Gabba that he showed his class. Srilanka was chasing down a rather stiff target, but with the likes of Jayasuriya in the side, there was always a good chance of them chasing down even a stiff target. Sanath even started well by coming out aggressively against Anderson. Anderson though, tricked him by bowling a very good slower ball to get Jayasuriya caught at mid-on. Hmm! a 20 year old bowls a very good slower delivery, though he was up against the marauder from the seashores of Galle and that too with field restrictions in place yet in the years to come, some would label Anderson as a softie.

Anderson's performance at Brisbane wasn't just a one off performance either as he continued to give the cutting edge to a bowling attack that was clearly missing its lead bowler Gough. He ended the tri-series with 13 wickets at just 26.69. I would never forget his performance at Adelaide against Australia when on a flat deck, he gave just 12 runs in 10 overs.

Anderson makes his mark in the World cup

The tri-series in Australia was followed by the biggest prize in one-day cricket, the World cup. Anderson started the World cup campaign in good form as he took a four wicket haul in his first match, though it came against the minnows Netherlands. His best performance at the World cup till date came at the picturesque ground Capetown. England made a decent score first up with Vaughan getting a fine half century, but it was Anderson, who was the star of the show for England as he scythed through Pakistan's batting line-up. Pakistan's batsmen were at sea against the late swing of Anderson. Anyone who saw that dismissal of Yousuf won't forget it in a hurry as it swung late and Yousuf was yorked for a duck. In a sense, it was a perfect delivery to a batsman with a high back-lift like Yousuf.

Yes, in England's final match against Australia, he was taken for runs still he bowled a brave slower delivery in the penultimate over of Australia's innings, but unfortunately for him, this time around Bichel was able to pick it and smash it for a six. It cost England the match as Australia went onto win the match by just two wickets. In reality though, it was Hussain's mistake of not bowling either Caddick, or Freddie that cost England the match and the chance to progress to the next round as that pitch at Port Elizabeth suited bowlers like Freddie and Caddick more than a young swing bowler like Anderson.

Anderson makes his debut in test cricket

On expected lines, Anderson soon made his debut albeit against the whipping boys of test cricket Zimbabwe. He straightaway made an impact at the home of cricket Lord's by taking a five wicket haul. Yes, some of the shots played by Zimbabwe's batsmen were nothing better than what we can see in club cricket, but there was no doubt that 20 year old Anderson had enormous potential.

Anderson's struggles in test cricket

When the Burnley Bullet scythed through South Africa's batting line-up at Lord's in a tri-series final, it seemed like nothing can go wrong for Anderson. In this world though, no one can predict the future as we maybe smiling one minute, but who knows what may happen next? Jimmy Anderson seemed to be all over South Africa's captain Smith in that tri-series final as even after Smith played a couple of good shots, Anderson came back by sending his stumps for a nice morning walk. The same Anderson though, was struggling next week in a test match at Edgbaston as he kept bowling on Smith's pads and Smith isn't someone, who is going to leave deliveries that are bowled on his pads go unpunished. The misery continued for Anderson as Smith continued to make merry against JA and co. at Lord's as he got his second double century of the tour. Anderson came back well by taking a five wicket haul at Trent Bridge and finished the series with an average just below 40 which looked a lot better than what it did after Anderson played the first couple of tests. The series showed that here was a bowler, who may have the potential to succeed in test cricket, but was a greenhorn, who needs guidance from England's management.

The nightmare for Anderson continued in Srilanka as he got injured while playing a game of squash and when he returned back into the side, he couldn't bowl well in the last test which England lost. It got worse when in the Windies, the swing bowler from the White roses county Hoggard was preferred to him. It was clear to anyone that compared to his efforts down under in 02/03, Hoggard had improved beyond recognition and deserved to play for England.

Harmison, SIJO, Freddie and Hoggy now were clearly ahead of Anderson in the pecking order as all four of them played most of the tests during the English summer against the Kiwis and the Windies in 04. Anderson did get to play the odd test against the Kiwis as well as against the Windies, but he was no more an integral part of the test side. What made it worse was in the years to come, he became more of a drinks waiter which in turn resulted in poor performances when he got the chance to play for England. In-fact, before he got a good run in the side in 08, Anderson was a drinks waiter in 24 of England's games! If a coach doesn't want a particular player in the side, why pick him and make him a drinks waiter? can't he play more fc games?

In 2004, Anderson's action looked a bit different. It was perhaps the first time, when they changed his action as they reportedly wanted him to avoid stress fractures and maybe look at making sure that his head doesn't fall away at the point of delivering the ball. Anderson's action was again tinkered and that too during the middle of a one-day tour to Zimbabwe in 04/05. Were they obsessed with Anderson's action all the time?

Finally, Anderson again got the chance to play test cricket in South Africa. The fact though was, in-spite of not having played a single first class game for five months, he straightaway had the daunting task of replacing the in-form seamer Jones in the third test at Wanderers. Mind you, Fletch could have played him in a warm up match against South Africa A as on a long tour, there was always a chance of a injury prone bowler like SIJO getting injured, but that wasn't the case. Now, everyone who saw the game at Wanderers would accuse Anderson of capriciousness as he repeatedly lost his line and length and cut a forlorn figure. It wasn't amusing to see a young bowler getting smashed around the park yet, not getting too many words of encouragement. If a bowler can't even bowl decent line and length, he should get critcised, but can a bowler bowl well if he doesn't even bowl a single delivery in a first class game for five months? Even the great McGrath when he didn't bowl too many overs struggled.

By 2005, it was crystal clear that Anderson had become a bit part one-day player and even in one-day cricket, he wasn't getting a regular place in the side. When the historic Ashes series was held in 2005, Anderson missed out on the action as the four pronged pace attack of Harmison, SJO, Freddie and Hoggy did the job. Even when SIJO was injured for the crucial last test at Oval, Fletch and co. went for an extra batsman in Collingwood rather than Anderson. At that time, it was perhaps the right decision as Anderson's confidence seemed to have taken a beating.

During England's tour of Pakistan later that year even a greenhorn like Plunkett was preferred ahead of Anderson. Fletch was looking for a bowler, who bats a bit and Plunkett fitted that bill. As far as JA's non-selection for the last test against Pakistan, I would just say that Anderson surely didn't tour Pakistan to visit dargahs and mosques and nor do I believe he was a part of M16 intelligence squad. I am perhaps over critical about him being dropped, but how can a greenhorn like Plunkett who had hardly played fc games at that time be ahead of Anderson just because he has a bit better batting ability? So, Anderson had to wait for the onedayers to get his chance, but on barren tracks of Pakistan, he was carted around in a few matches before he came back in the last match, when he took a four wicket haul to help England get a consolation win.

The false dawn at Mumbai

In 2006, the Burnley Bullet got another chance to play a test match at Mumbai. The spearhead of the attack at that time Harmison was ruled out of the final test due to a injury and with the poor performance by Plunkett, it opened the door for Anderson to make a comeback into test cricket.

Anderson didn't disappoint the selectors, who showed faith in him as he got six wickets in the match which in turn helped England to come out with a rare drawn series in India. The way he tormented an all time great player like SRT by bowling his beautiful outswinger was a treat to watch. No doubt, Tendulkar once said the day Anderson knows to control the swing, he can become the best swing bowler in test cricket.

To be frank, JA's spell at Mumbai was the best I had seen Anderson bowl since his success in one-day cricket early in his career. Unfortunately for Anderson, it was a false dawn as soon he was diagnosed with a stress fracture on his back. Any stress fracture is bad news for a fast bowler, especially if it is a stress fracture on his back. England's management were sweating as the injury prone SIJO was already ruled out well before the all important tour of Australia and adding to their woes was the fact that even Freddie got injured, Harmison was looking more like Harmless-on and youngsters like Plunkett and Mahmood just weren't ready to play test cricket. The Burnley Bullet recovered just in time to be fit for the tour of Australia, but was it right to take a bowler who had played just a single first class game for about six months to Australia?

Anderson's struggles in Australia

In the previous para I had already asked whether it was right to take a bowler, who wasn't match fit to Australia? Just think of it again, here was a bowler who was out of test cricket for six months due to a stress fracture on his back and had bowled a mere 53.1 overs during those six months. Anderson was neither a bowler, who was at the peak of his prowess and as expected he flopped in Australia.

It was obvious that Fletch and Freddie looked at Burnley Bullet as a first change bowler, who could fill the void left by SIJO by reversing the old ball. Burnley Bullet though, was still learning the tricks of the trade and wasn't good enough to bowl as a first change bowler. A young swing bowler can either open the bowling, or he shouldn't be in the side on flat wickets. As at that time Hoggy was the senior swing bowler and as England preferred the out of form Harmy, or the injury prone Freddie to open the bowling, I am afraid the decision to pick Anderson was a wrong one. Anderson though, with more overs under his belt made his mark by bowling ok in the final test at Sydney.

Let me make it clear to everyone that I have nothing against Fletch as he was the man, who laid the foundation for England to succeed, but at the end of his tenure as the coach of England, he came across as someone, who has a closed mind. He would only think of picking certain players and just won't accept that a few of his ideas like only 90mph bowlers are good enough, or bowlers who can bat a bit should be picked can go wrong.

New regime, new lease of life.

With the World cup debacle in the Caribbean, it signaled the end of Fletcher's tenure as a coach. In came Peter Moores, a man who under his coaching tenure saw Sussex county win many trophies, but at the same-time, he never had the experience of playing international cricket. I was never a fan of some of his tactics, but under his tenure some of the players, who were ignored during Fletch's time were given a new lease of life. Players like Swann, Anderson, Shah, Siders and co. came back into the reckoning during Moores's time.

Going into the series against India in 07, Anderson's career was at the crossroads, but the Burnley Bullet used the chance that was given to him by taking a five wicket haul at Lord's. One of the wickets included that of Tendulkar. It is interesting to note that Anderson has got Tendulkar's wicket five times in test cricket which in itself shows Anderson's calibre as it is never easy to get the little master out and that too cheaply. The Burnley Bullet though, had a tough time on his next tour in Lanka as the man from Galle, Jayasuriya tore into Anderson's bowling in the first test at Kandy. In just a single over, Anderson was smashed for six fours. It wasn't surprising that Sanath was able to do that as JA had hardly played on flat tracks and just kept either bowling short, or too full. Mind you Sanath was dropped of Anderson's bowling during that over, but the fact was Anderson was still a greenhorn. Throughout that match, JA was bowling just what everyone expected him to, as he would bowl a couple of booming inswingers that would cut a class player like Mahela into half, but unfortunately the follow up ball will be a half volley or a half-tracker. A bowler though can learn to bowl in different conditions only by playing more matches.

After his failure in the Emerald Isle, Anderson's career looked to be back to square one, but Moores gave him yet another chance in the Land of long white clouds. Yet again Harmison looked well short of his best on a away tour and to be frank his performance at Hamilton was nothing short of a disaster. Hoggy didn't bowl much better either, though in his defence it can be said that unlike Harmison, Hoggy was still bowling well and his failure at Hamilton was a one off. In hindsight though, I can say that it was the right time to bring young blood like Broad and Anderson as even Hoggy can't bowl forever. JA did the trick at Wellington by taking a five wicket haul, though those were the days when JA would be inconsistent and as expected he flopped in the very next test at Napier. Former players and journalists started shouting about the management's decision to drop both Harmison and Hoggy, but Moores had made up his mind that Burnley Bullet will get a good run in the side.

Anderson had a good time during the English summer against the Kiwis and the Saffers. Who can forget his magical spell at Trent Bridge albeit in helpful conditions? Even now I do remember the deliveries he bowled to McCullum and Redmond as it swung late and uprooted the stumps of both McCullum and Redmond respectively.

It was also the time when there was a change in the leadership as KP took over the mantle of captaining the side from Vaughan. I have to admit that it never looked like KP believed a swing bowler could do much damage. Every-time I watched England play in a one-day match, the Burnley Bullet would get couple of overs to bowl, but if he failed, he rarely used to get too many overs in his second spell. The short stint of KP as a captain ended with England losing 1-0 in India as after that series got over KP had a bitter fight with the then coach Moores which in turn meant that both lost their jobs. If I have to talk about that Indian tour, I just remember the loss at Madras when S'wag scored a quickfire 80 odd and England tried to bounce him out. It wasn't amusing to watch all of England's pace bowlers including the swing bowler Anderson testing the middle of Indian wickets by bowling short.

Anderson blossoms under Flower and Strauss

By the end of February when England got ready to tour the Caribbean a new captain Strauss was in charge there was a new coach too in Andy Flower. The two Andys weren't the favourites with either the fans or former players, but the duo seemed to be a lot more pragmatic than both KP and Moores. Flower's extensive experience as a player and as a captain was always going to come in handy and though Strauss had a lot to learn tactically, he still was a better man manager than KP.

It was the worst possible start for the duo of Flower and Strauss as England got hammered at Jamaica with the lowest point being England getting all out for 51. Ironically, in some ways it may have helped the team to get better as it was clear that England needed a complete overhaul. Deadwoods like Siders and Harmless-on were pensioned off and newer players were tried. It was obvious that our man, the Burnley Bullet was going to get a good run in the side as for the first time not just the coach, but the captain too seemed to believe that Anderson can lead the attack. Anderson didn't get much success on those barren tracks in the West Indies, but he tried manfully and finally got his reward when he bowled well at Trinidad to almost help England comeback from behind and draw the series, though just like before, the tailenders thwarted England's bowlers with resolute batting. I have seen many think that Anderson's turning point was the just completed Ashes series, but for me the turning point in his test career happened in the Caribbean as by bowling on Caribbean wickets, he learnt to bowl on flat wickets. It was the time when I thought that Anderson has finally arrived as a test match bowler.

The series against the West Indies may have ended in a disappointment, but England's team had no time to take stock of the situation as the all important Ashes series was looming around in the horizon. Before that series against Australia though, England had to play a Windies side who looked rather disinterested as to play in England they had to forgo the big bucks of the IPL. Anderson came good in that series by taking a 9 wicket haul in the final test. I would remember the test match at Chester Le Street just for the delivery that Anderson bowled to Taylor as it swung late and uprooted Taylor's stumps, though it can be said that he wasted the delivery on a tailender like Taylor. Sometimes I wonder, how can the Burnley Bullet swing it late and uproot the stumps of the batsmen about million times.

Next up on the cards for Anderson and co. was of course the big one, the Ashes. Going into the series, there were again murmurs about how would the Burnley Bullet perform against a fine team like Australia. The murmurs got louder when Anderson struggled on a flat wicket like Cardiff. Anderson though, seemed to have taken the confidence of saving a match with a bat in hand at Cardiff to his bowling as at Lord's, he ripped through Australia's top-order by taking a four wicket haul. He followed it up with a five wicket haul at Edgbaston with the wicket-keeper batsman Manou suffering the fate of seeing his stumps being uprooted by yet another delivery that swung late.

Yes, both at Headingley and Oval, Anderson was below par as he couldn't even take a wicket. His critics, who are always waiting to pounce on him as expected again started asking questions. Any bowler can go through a few bad matches and it also has to be said that he was suffering from a hamstring injury during the last couple of tests. Anderson's average may have been as high as 45 during that series, but he did play a key role in England's Ashes victory by doing well at Lord's and Edgbaston.

During England's next tour to the Safferland, JA bowled some fine spells in the first three tests. He took eight wickets at Cape town, though the batsmen flopped and England could only escape with a draw in that match. In the last test at Wanderers, he looked below par, but JA was troubled by a troublesome knee problem. The tour to South Africa also showed that Anderson still has something to offer to England's one-day team as he took a five wicket haul in the onedayer at Port Elizabeth to help England win a historic one-day series in the Safferland.

The management perhaps got a bit concerned about Anderson's troublesome knee and with the important tour to Australia looming on the horizon, they decided to rest him for the tour of Bangladesh. It was also the time, when a new bowling coach Saker was appointed in place of Gibson. Unlike others, I do feel that Gibson played his part in helping the seamers in the team to improve, but the Victorian Saker has taken them to another level as not just Anderson, but others too have improved beyond recognition. Anyway, coming back to our man Anderson he was left out of the England's side that played in the T/20 WC in the Caribbean and JA was as expected disappointed with the snub, but he continued to be an integral part of the test as well as the one-day side.

Anderson makes his critics eat their words

The 2010/11 season was always going to be an important one for Anderson as England were about to embark on another tour to Australia and another failure for JA in Australia would have meant critics baying for his blood.

Before going to Australia though, England had to play the minnows Bangladesh and the unpredictable Pakistan. Actually, going into the series against Pakistan, there were a few who were even ready to drop him from the test side as his performances in the shorter formats of the game wasn't up-to mark, but against Pakistan, JA was outstanding as he took 22 wickets at just 12! The pitches did help JA, but one could see that he was a different bowler as unlike before, he wasn't losing his patience after beating the bat a few times. The appointment of Saker seemed to have done the trick.

Finally, after waiting for a few months the much anticipated Ashes series began at Brisbane. England got bowled out for just 260 in the first innings and suddenly all eyes were on Burnley Bullet, but Burnley Bullet didn't disappoint as he bowled superbly in the match a Brisbane and took 24 wickets in the series. He may have got only couple of wickets at Gabba, but for me JA was at his best in the first test. On the first day when he bowled a couple of overs at the fag end of the day I was a bit apprehensive about whether JA may do the trick as he tended to bowl a touch short. On the second day though, he was a different kettle of fish as he asked questions of all the Australian batsmen throughout the day. He was even better on the third day with a brand new ball as he kept bowling some unplayable deliveries and should have even got Huss out lbw. If it was the old Anderson, he would have thrown himself into the towel, but in-spite of Huss being given not out, he kept asking questions. His spell at Gabba sent a message to the Aussies that they shouldn't underestimate him. In rest of the matches, he consistently got wickets and ended up with a rich haul of 24 wickets. Nowadays, it is funny to see the same people who criticised him praising JA to the skies.

How from Daisy Anderson became the king of swing?

So how could have a bowler who was called Daisy a few years back become the king of swing? It doesn't take rocket science to understand that nowadays he bowls with better control which has helped him to succeed, but when it comes to Anderson, there are a few key factors one can look at.

A) JA bowls with better control- There was a time, when he would beat the bat a few times and lose his patience. Now though, he keeps asking questions from the batsmen as he doesn't lose the plot when a batsman hits him for a few boundaries. Just think of his inswinger as there was a time, when he would bowl the inswinger and likely send a prayer to the god that it won't hopefully go down the leg-side. Nowadays, he can bowl it with good control which in turn has helped him to keep the batsmen guessing.

B)The ability to plot a batsman's downfall- In the past, he rarely used to bowl to a plan, but in the Ashes, he showed that he was good at plotting the downfall of a batsman.

I can think of a few examples, when he showed how good he has become at plotting the downfall of a batsman.

At Sydney, he kept angling it away from Khawaja as he could see that Ussy wasn't moving his back-foot into the line of the ball and and was getting squared up. In the first innings, he couldn't get the reward but JA's persistence paid off as in the second innings as Ussy chased a delivery that left him and lost his wicket. Poor Ussy, as after facing the short ball that Anderson bowled in the second innings, he must have thought that JA has forgotten how he bowled to him in the first innings, but it wasn't to be.

Again in the Sydney test. Michael Clarke was looking solid in his technique, but he always has the tendency to play away from the body. With Anderson getting it to reverse, he thought of shaping it away from Clarke with the odd delivery that comes back into the batsman to keep him guessing. The plan worked as Clarke chased a delivery that was bowled a touch wide of off-stump to tempt Clarke into the drive.

At Melbourne too he showed his class when he bowled to Steve Smith. Just by having a look at Smith's technique one can be convinced that he is a good t/20 player, but for test cricket he is perhaps not yet good enough. Anderson set up his dismissal by bowling couple of booming inswingers which almost took out his off-stump. JA was clearly all over Smith and that was when he went for the kill by bowling the outswinger that was a touch wide of off-stump and Smith obliged by chasing it and getting out. Smith doesn't get his front-foot to the pitch of the ball, but stands still on leg-stump and tries to smash the cover off the ball which is a bad technique to have on pitches that do a bit. The fact is, Anderson didn't lose his patience, but kept probing on and around off-stump and got his reward.

C)Learning from other bowlers- Anderson has already stated that he learnt from Zaheer how to hide the ball from a batsman's view when it is reversing and from Asif, he learnt how Asif hit the seam, got it to wobble and was still getting a bit of swing. I also saw him bowl a few deliveries with split fingers in Ashes. In the past, he used it as a slower delivery, but I didn't notice a dramatic change in pace when he bowled that delivery in the Ashes. Maybe he has learnt it from Asif as he bowls a similar delivery. It shows that Anderson is always willing to learn from others.

Anderson can also reverse it both ways which is always an asset on flat tracks. He was a class above the rest of the bowlers in the Ashes and was the only bowler who could swing it. I don't rate Hilfy highly as he swings it from his hand and I still can't explain how could Mitch get it to swing so late at WACA. I can only say if Pakistan had done it, they would have been accused of ball tampering.

Can Anderson get better?

No swing bowler in this world can say that he is a finished article. Swing bowling is a pleasure to watch, but just like wrist spin, difficult to master. Thankfully, Anderson doesn't seem to be a bowler, who thinks that he has nothing more to learn.

A)Anderson can get more lbw's- It is great that Anderson has now got a fine inswinger, but it would be better if he bowls it a touch fuller. At present, when he bowls the inswinger, it is a touch short and it tends to slide down the leg side or doesn't hit the stumps. It isn't any surprise that only 11% of his wickets have been lbw's. Even in the Ashes, he got just one lbw appeal in his favour and that was mainly because Harris didn't play a shot. He should look at the Saffer Steyn, who bowls his inswinger a lot fuller.

B)The away swinger to the lefthander- The sky commentators usually have suggested that as he is a outswing bowler, he should look at bowling the inswinger to the lefthander. Anderson though, seems to be better at bowling the away swinger to a leftie which is perhaps because he doesn't bowl from very close to the stumps like say Botham did. Whatever it is, if a bowler gets about 40% of his wickets under Flower's regime as lefthanders then I can't fathom why do commentators keep bringing up that point. Before the match at Melbourne, there was a hue and cry for the inclusion of Shahzad as he is said to be better at bowling to the lefthanders, but even he has got just 24% of his wickets as lefthanders in fc cricket.

It would also be great if Anderson develops a fine bouncer. In the past he used to bowl a fine bouncer, but somewhere down the line he lost it.

Final words

Just like any other Burnley Bullet fan, I was waiting for the Ashes as there was too much rubbish written on Anderson before the series and that too on the basis of how he did in 06/07 Ashes. Nowadays, I just have a chuckle when I think about what former cricketers like Stuart Clark said about Anderson. Clark said JA would be ineffective and he even gave him just 4 marks out of 10! Australian opening batsman Watson too thought of him as a green top bully.

From a bowler who didn't know how to swing when he came into Lancs set up and the Lancs coach Mike Watkinson had to teach him the art of swinging a red ball, he has now become the king of swing. He may not be a king Bruce when it comes to making comebacks, but there is no doubt that he had to overcome many hurdles throughout his career, especially the fact that his action was reportedly tinkered by coaches thrice.

Last but not the least, there was a time when the all conquering Aussie team reportedly used to laugh every-time they saw Anderson in England's team sheet, but I am sure Aussies won't do it know!

(Read the long article at your own risk as it is written by one of Anderson's biggest fans lol)

How to tame the Saffers in their own den?

2010-12-14T14:51:00.010+04:00

In a few days time, the number one side in test cricket India would lock horns with the number two side South Africa for test supremacy. It promises to be a mouth watering contest between the top two teams in the rankings. I do expect a closely fought series, though it would have been better, if it was a four match series instead of it being a three match series.

I am sure that already about 1000's of previews must have been written on the upcoming series South Africa. To be frank, I am bored of writing previews, so this time around, I will look at why South Africa is known as a fortress for visiting teams and how can a visiting team upset the applecart and defeat South Africa in their own den?

South Africa is a fortress

India are ranked the number one side as per the ICC rankings, but they have a task on their hands as for most teams playing the Saffers in their own den is like being confronted by a fortress. Since their re-introduction to test cricket in 91/92, the only team which has consistently defeated the Saffers is Australia. Australia haven't just defeated them, but I would rather say that they have been able to dominate South Africa as since 93/94, they have only lost three dead rubber matches in South Africa. Even in 93/94, South Africa were able to just draw a series against Australia. The only other team to succeed in South Africa was England in 04/05. England had a good side at that time as after beating South Africa, the same team went onto do the unthinkable and that was to beat the all conquering Aussies in 05.

For rest of the teams though, it has been a different story as none of them have been able to win a series in South Africa. Especially the subcontinent teams have really struggled in South Africa. Pakistan have won a couple of matches and India won their first match in South Africa in 06/07, but neither of them could win a series in South Africa. There is hope, as in recent times South Africa have looked a bit more vulnerable at home. Even when India were struggling in 06/07, they won a match at Wanderers, Pakistan too won a match in 06/07, the struggling Windies side won a match at Port Elizabeth in 07/08, the Aussies weren't at their best when they defeated South Africa in 08/09 and last year, England could have won the series, but the Saffers came back strongly by winning the last test at Wanderers to draw the series 1-1. When it comes to subcontinental teams, a combination of not just extra pace and bounce, but also a touch of sideways movement is a hurdle which they have struggled to overcome.

Blueprint of South Africa's success at home

So what is the secret behind South Africa's success at home? It doesn't take rocket science to understand that they have played better cricket than most teams at home, but there are a few key factors which perhaps makes them a better unit than most other sides at home.

I do believe one of the major factors for South Africa's success at home is, over the years, they have consistently produced a battery of hit the deck bowlers, who seem to be manufactured in a factory in Capetown or Durban. Let it be the metronomic Mathews, Macmillan, Nel, Hayward or even the likes of Elworthy, they all tended to bowl back of a length and just wide of off-stump. None of them would give the opposition a chance to play the cut shot as they rarely ever bowled short and wide. In the end, the batsmen would get frustrated and lose his wicket. Actually, I may also include Shaun Pollock as only early in his career was he nippy and had a dangerous bouncer, but as the years went by, he sacrificed pace to become another of those robotic hit the deck medium pacer. Make no mistake that Saffers have also produced a few genuine strike bowlers like Donald, Schultz,(for a very brief period) Pollock,(early in his career) Steyn and to a lesser extent Ntini, but their ability to produce back up seamers, who specialise in bowling back of a length has surely helped them to do well.

The Saffers have usually treated the spinners as second class citizens. Even if they pick a spinner, he would likely play the role of a defensive bowler, someone who can do the holding job by restricting the batsmen from scoring runs. Paul Harris is a very good example of a bowler, who mainly bowls from over the wicket and looks to do a holding job.Even when they picked a spinner, who is slightly more attacking like "Frog in the blender" Paul Adams, they used him in a defensive mode. I do remember well respected former crcketers like Simpson and Benaud being critical of the then captain Cronje for forcing the chinaman bowler Adams to bowl from around the wicket with negative fields in the series in Australia in 97/98.

South Africa have tended to pack their batting line-up with all-rounders. Unlike most sides, South Africa in the past have gone in with couple or sometimes even three all-rounders in a game. Now, neither Klusner nor say Boje may have great records as all-rounders, but players like Klusner were a vital cog in the Saffer side, especially at home. In the past, the opposing captain knew that even if his main bowler takes the wicket of say Boucher and Pollock, there would be either Klusner or Boje waiting in the wings. In the end, the visiting team's key fast bowler would just get dead tired as it isn't a child's play to bowl for a long-time on those hard wickets of South Africa as it can hurt a fast bowler's ankle and knee. A player like Klusner would take advantage of it and flog the tiring attack to all corners of the ground. So, even if a visiting team made early inroads into the Saffer batting line-up, they always knew that battery of all-rounders may just take the game away from them with their power-hitting. Of course, they have always tried to show, who is the boss in the field, especially against subcontinental teams with their fielding.

1)a) Australia's success in South Africa

The general feeling among fans and experts is that Australia's success in South Africa was due to them having a great side in the past, but there is no doubt in my mind that they carefully studied that tactics of South Africa and out-thought them.

Top-order-One of the key reasons for Australia's success is, their top-order batsmen have been able to counter the strategy of the Saffer quicks by taking calculated risks which in turn has left the Saffer captains pressing the panic button.

South African captains, let it be Wessels, Cronje, Pollock, or for that matter Smith love to have control over a match by squeezing the opposition with their battery of seamers, but against Australia, it has flopped miserably. The best example I can think of would be the 01/02 series when the likes of Haydos, Langer and Punter consistently ripped apart the Saffer seam attack with their aggressive batting. In the series played in 01/02, Haydos averaged 61.8 and his S/R was 65.88, Langer averaged just 30 yet his S/R was 93.82 and finally, Punter averaged 77.25 with a S/R of 76.48. The calculated risks taken by the top-order paved the way for the likes of Gilly and Martyn to feast on a demoralised opposition. Once the Saffers are attacked upfront, I have rarely seen a Saffer captain come up with a Plan B.

If I scratch the surface and look deeper into it, I can see how important the assault by the top-order was. In the first test at Wanderers, Haydos scored 122 at a S/R of 64.55, Langer though scored only 28, he did it in just 31 balls and Punter got his 40 only in 56 balls. The result was, the likes of Gilly, Martyn and even Junior, who was coming to the end of his career came up against a confused team as their highly successful tactic of bowling back of a length wasn't successful. On expected lines, both Gilly and Martyn made a mincemeat of the opposition attack with Gilly even getting the fastest double hundred at that time. Yes, it is always great to have a player like Gilly at seven, but it was the top-order which paved the way for the likes of Martyn and Gilly to attack a confused bowling line-up by scoring at a fair clip.

In the second test again the top-order came to the party and that too with Australia chasing a rather stiff target of 331. Langer got his 58 runs in 74 balls, Haydos got 96 in 141 balls and Punter got a century in 160 balls. The Aussies won that match by five wickets and wrapped up the series even before the final match of the series.

Australia followed a similar pattern in 08/09 as both the young Phil Hughes and Punter played aggressive cricket by taking on the Saffer quick bowlers. Phil Hughes was brutal as he got couple of centuries and ended up with 415 runs at an average 69.16 with a S/R of almost 60. Punter couldn't do as well as Hughes, but he too got his runs at a good S/R of 62.87. I still remember Punter's knock of 83 in the first test at Wanderers, when in-spite of Australia losing a few early wickets, he didn't slow down, but made a fine half century. For the umpteenth time, when a few top-order batsmen took the attack to the Saffer camp their captain seemed to be bereft for ideas. It was clear that when Hughes got both those centuries, the Saffer quicks Morkel and Steyn were out of sorts as instead of following Hughes and bowling short, both were feeding to Hughes's strength by bowling short and wide. Smith could have tried plan B of introducing a spinner in the first test at Wanderers, but the stubborn Smith kept giving the seamers the ball. He finally gave Harris the chance to bowl and guess what? it took mere fourteen deliveries for Harris to dismiss Hughes. Incidentally in the final test, the lone spinner in the Saffer camp Harris got the wicket of Hughes in both the first and the second innings.

The only time the Australian top-order struggled to come to grips against the disciplined Saffer attack was in 96/97. The reason for it was, their captain Taylor was out of touch and Haydos was confronted by a quick bowler called Donald, but the middle-order of Waugh twins and Blewett rallied around the top-order by playing crucial knocks. The older Waugh and Blewett came up with what turned out to be a match winning partnership at Wanderers and Junior played a special knock on a dicey track at PE.

b) England's triumph in 04/05

The only other team to beat South Africa in their own backyard since their re-introduction to test cricket was England in 04/05. Yet again the openers were the key to success as Strauss amassed 656 runs with three hundreds to his name. His partner Trezza made 448 runs with two hundreds to his name.Yes, neither of them scored as quickly as the Aussie batsmen, but strike-rates of over 50 in South African conditions isn't bad either. I still remember that mammoth partnership of 282 between the two for the first wicket at Durban.The Saffers had got a seizable first innings lead, but Trezza and Strauss turned the match on its head with that huge partnership as suddenly England were able to score well in excess of 500 and South Africa had to bat on the last day. In the game at Wanderers, Trezza perhaps decided it is time to smash the disciplined bowling attack to smithereens as he got 180 at a S/R in excess of 70.The Saffers including their captain Smith yet again looked lost as the seamers Pollock, Ntini and Kallis kept bowling back of a length and Trezza continued to make merry.

Actually, even in the shorter formats of the game Smith has come across as a rigid captain. Can anyone remember him using Steyn in the middle overs, though he is a strike bowler in the T/20 WC in West Indies? I wonder, whether Saffer captains write all the tactics in a piece of paper before coming to the ground and continue to follow it as the holy bible.

2) Wrist spinners

Mark Taylor took a huge gamble in 96/97 by using Bevan as a frontline spinner as he thought that Saffers are good against finger spinners, but can struggle against wrist spinners.He was heavily criticised for picking Bevan, but his hunch worked as Bevan was deadly, especially against the lower order batsmen of South Africa. The all-rounders in the Saffer camp were a menace for opposition teams, but Taylor's gamble of picking Bevan did the trick as none of them could get going against him. In-fact, during the first test at Wanderers, Cronje seemed very confident of avoiding defeat as they had a very long batting line-up and the track was flat. Unfortunately for him, Bevan got the last four wickets within four or five overs as Australia crushed Saffers by an innings and 196 runs!! Ponting tried the same tactic in 08/09 at Capetown as they selected a leg spinner in McGain, but if a spinner can't land too many deliveries and continues to bowl full-tosses, a captain can't be blamed. It maybe first test nerves for Mcgain, but he was very poor at Capetown in 08/09.

So, what can India do to win in South Africa?

I don't think anyone can deny that just like other subcontinental teams, India have an abysmal record in the Rainbow nation as they have won only one out of the twelve tests they have played. So, what are the reasons for India's poor performance in the Safferland? A few may point out that India have rarely been able to muster a decent bowling attack to take twenty wickets away from home, but if I see the records, it is clear that India's much vaunted batting line-up has flopped miserably in South Africa.

To be fair to the Indian batsmen most of their recent success away from home has been built on back of huge scores made by the likes of Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman and co. which in turn has given the slightly inferior bowling attack, the chance to attack the opposition, but that hasn't been the case in South Africa. It is obvious that top-order of India has been blown away in the past by the disciplined Saffer pace attack.

If I look at the past averages of some of the top-order batsmen, it doesn't make for good reading. Let it be in 92/93, 96/97, 01/02, or in 06/07, the Saffers have been able to do what they love the most, to squeeze the opposition batsmen into making mistakes by bowling back of a length. For a cricket connoisseur, it isn't great to watch, but there is no denying the fact that they have mastered the art of hitting the deck to near perfection.

In 92/93, the pace trio of Srinath, Kapil and Prabakar as well as the lone spinner at that time Kumble were able to bowl out the Saffers for reasonably low scores, but just look at the averages of the top-order batsmen.

Ajay Jadeja

Average- 24.75
S/R-32.56

Shastri

Average -11.8
S/R-14.32

Manjrekar

Average-23.2
S/R-24.42

The Saffers must have really loved bowling to batsmen as negative as Shastri and Manjrekar. The top-order clearly played into South Africa's hands with their negative approach. The only Indian batsmen, who perhaps took up the challenge was Kapil Dev as he averaged over 40 and made a stunning hundred at Port Elizabeth, but the top-order just wasn't good enough as India lost the series.

A similar pattern followed in 96/97 with India picking couple of openers, who perhaps weren't test standard in Raman and Rathore. More than a few would pick Rathore in their worst X1 of all time. Again the likes of Srinath and Prasad did well with a ball in hand, but they lacked a third seamer and of course, the top-order was again poor. In 06/07, Sehwag tried to do something about it as he scored his runs at a S/R of 66.48, but he could average only 26.44. Yes, it is great that he tried to break the shackles of the disciplined Saffer attack by going after the bowling, but that isn't enough as in test matches, 20's and 30's aren't good enough. There is no doubt that India's chances of winning the series this time around hinges on whether S'wag can not just score quickly, but can he get big scores like Haydos, Trezza and Strauss. The one advantage he has got is, at last India seem to have found a partner for him in Ghambir. Ghambir is a competent batsman, but sometimes in an attempt to match Sehwag, he has thrown his wicket away.

It isn't just Sehwag though, who has struggled as rest of the batsmen too haven't been at their best in South Africa. Dravid averages just 33.6 and his S/R is in 30's. The only time he really did well was when he scored a 100 at Wanderers in 96/97, but that came in a dead rubber. The Saffers won't mind bowling to Dravid as it suits them well. Even the great Tendulkar hasn't been at his best in SA as he averages just around 40 in the Safferland. He made a magnificent hundred at Capetown in 96/97, when he perhaps got fed up by the failure of the top-order batsmen and decided to go after the bowling. SRT also got a 100 at Bloemfontein in 01/02, but other than that he has been disappointing. The one man I haven't talked about is Very Very Special Laxman. In-spite of batting against the older ball he averages 41.11. To be fair to Laxman, he looks much better when the ball comes onto the bat on hard wickets of South Africa and Australia. If I am the captain, I would take the gamble of batting Laxman at three and Dravid at six as the Saffers won't be able to control the game, but I don't see that happening. Anyway, it is perhaps the last chance for the golden generation of Indian batting line-up consisting of stalwarts like Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman and maybe even Sehwag to prove their worth in the Rainbow nation.

In cricketing circles, there is a lot of talk about how can India take twenty wickets, but assuming that Zaheer would be fit, I see them doing reasonably well. Both Sharma and Sreesnath can blow hot and cold, but the major worry is Harbhajan. On South African pitches, it is difficult for a spinner to take wickets. Either a spinner should be a decent wrist spinner, or should be able to beat the batsman in the air like Swann did on a good batting track at Durban in 09/10. In the past, the hard-working Kumble kept India in the game by taking crucial wickets in South Africa. In 92/93, he took 18 wickets at 25.94 and in 06/07, he 14 wickets at just 24.71. In-fact, he played a key role in India's first ever win at Wanderers in 06/07 by taking five wickets for just 56 runs. The only other way to take twenty wickets is perhaps by having a four pronged pace attack, but the caveat is, all four bowlers should be good. England won the series in 04/05 as the bowling attack consisted of four fine quick bowlers.

If I look at the opposition, India would be happy that unlike before, Saffers don't seem to have good back up seamers and neither do they have the likes of Pollock, Klusner and Macmillan to come down the order and destroy opposition pace attacks. Neither Tsotsobe nor Parnell are traditional hit the deck bowlers, especially Tsotsobe looks to swing the ball and I don't think he would worry the Indian batsmen. Ryan McLeran can do better as his bowling is better suited to Saffer wickets. Actually, I am not even convinced of Morne Morkel as he can blow hot and cold.

The Saffers have also come across as a team which seems to have a fear of losing as even when they need to go for the kill, they rarely do it. I can instantly think of couple of examples. In 04/05, England were 2-1 up going into the last match at Centurion, but the tactics employed by the Saffers were weird as Kallis took a long-time before he got going. In the end, South Africa declared, but England were left with just 44 overs to bat and yet they lost four wickets in those 44 overs. The key point to look at is, it was South Africa who were 2-1 down in the series. Just recently against Pakistan, the Saffers were already ahead by 150 runs after the completion of the first innings, but in the second innings instead of going for a win, the batsmen seemed to be intent on getting some batting practice. How else can you explain Prince getting 47 of 97 balls, Kallis 10 of 37 balls and Boucher 15 of 40 balls? It seemed like a team that was thinking of de-accelerating as the likes of Amla and De Villiers were aggressive at the start of the innings. In the end, they only got 67 overs to bowl at Pakistan and even the likes of Roberts, Marshall, Holding and Garner may have struggled to take ten wickets on that flat pitch at Dubai in just 67 overs.

Finally, in simple words, it can be called as the final frontier for India as South Africa is one place India have struggled big time. For India to win, they need their much vaunted batting line-up to fire. If the batsmen, especially the one and only Sehwag gets struck into the Saffer camp, they have a chance as India can get big scores and in the past Saffers have crumbled under pressure. You don't need to look any further than the game at Durban or Calcutta, when the Saffer batting line-up crumbled.

(Caution-A Saffer fan may not like the article but maybe it can be sent to Gary Kirsten? only if he is thinking of helping his former team)

My views on Australian bowling attack

2010-12-11T22:41:00.011+04:00

Can Australia find another Merv Hughes?

Since Australia's debacle at Adelaide, I have kept reading Sky commentators like Hussain, Atherton and co. or even other experts stressing on the fact that as Australia don't have McGrath and Warne in their ranks, they are now a second rate side. Having watched Australia's domination for the past two decades, I wonder whether that statement is true? Throughout the late 80's and early 90's when they were a good side, or during the later part of the 90's and in the last decade when Aus were a great side, I always believed that strength of Australian bowling attack was whenever the main bowlers like McDermott, McGrath, Warne and co. got injured, or were slightly out of form, the back up bowlers would step up-to the plate and lead the bowling attack. In-fact, Australia always seem to have a rich tradition of producing bowlers, who may not be talented, but always have a big heart which in turn helped them to perform well even when Australia fielded a depleted side and they were forced to lead the attack.

During the last two decades, Australia have continued the rich tradition of producing bowlers, who seemed to be ready to even bang their heads to a concrete wall for the sake of their team. Seamers like Hughes, Kasper, Fleming, Reiffel and Bichel were nowhere in the class of McGrath, or not even in the class of Dizzy, Reid, McDermott and Lee, but no one can point a finger at them for lack of effort. All the above mentioned bowlers had big hearts who could do the donkey's work of bowling with a older ball and if needed, could easily lead the attack in the absence of main bowlers.

In this article, I would look at a few lion-hearted bowlers Australia has produced during the last two decades and how can the Aussies again have a bowling attack that can take twenty wickets.

Merv Hughes- When the Victorian fast bowler first came onto the scene during the 86/87 Ashes series most experts reckoned that it would be his first and last Ashes series as he was rubbish. Big Merv though, just kept proving his critics wrong and ended up with more than 200 wickets to his name. Actually, if I think about his run-up, his action, or the way he behaved, he came across as a bull in a China shop, but Oh! god, he was mighty effective as a bowler. He forged a great partnership with the Queenslander McDermott during the late 80's and early 90's. If McDermott was around, Hughes would act as the back-up seamer, but as soon Billy the Kid got injured, he easily took up the mantle of being the attack leader.

In 88/89 against the all conquering West Indies side, the big Merv suddenly had to lead the attack as there was no McDermott. Worse was to follow as Lawson got struck on his jaw by a lifting delivery from the giant Ambrose and had to be carried out of the ground on a stretcher. Our man Hughes though, didn't let the team down as he bowled 73.1 overs in that match and took 13 wickets for 217 runs! He seemed to thrive when he was confronted with a challenge as he was pitted against the all conquering West Indies side and in the second innings, Aussies were left with just three bowlers because of the injury to Lawson. Hughes rose to the occasion like a Trojan by doing well in adverse circumstances as he improved upon his first innings performance by taking 8 for 87 in the second innings. The proverb when the going gets tough, the tough gets going can be aptly used to describe the big Merv.

In-fact, his 13 wicket haul against the great West Indies side also included a hat-trick though no one seemed to have noticed it as couple of his wickets came in the first innings and his third wicket came during the first ball of the second innings. Anyway, his efforts didn't help Australia from crashing to another defeat against the Windies side, but Hughes proved to everyone that he could be relied upon to raise his game even against the best. In 1990/91, he again raised his game against the marauding Windies team by taking 19 wickets. In that series, none other than Hughes and McDermott took more than 10 wickets. The next best were part-timers like Mark Waugh and Allan Border. Even during the 93 Ashes series, it wasn't just Warne who did the damage, but in the absence of the injured McDermott, Hughes led the seam attack by taking 30 odd wickets. Hughes was never a purists delight, but he was a man with a big heart.

Kasprowicz- When I first saw the Queenslander in 96/97, I thought he wasn't test standard and would soon fade away from scene. I was though completely wrong as the same Kasper went onto play seventeen of his tests on the barren tracks of the subcontinent and took his wickets at under 30 on those flat tracks.

Kasper first showed his class at Edgbaston against England in 97. On the face of it, the Aussies had a star studded bowling attack as the likes of McGrath, Warne and Dizzy were playing, but in reality none of them were at their best during that test match. It is strange but true that for once McGrath and Warne bowled like mere mortals. On the other hand, Dizzy was troubled by a shoulder injury and could only bowl ten overs. In-fact, that was the only match in which I saw the slightly underrated McGrath looking lost for ideas. It didn't stop our man Kasper from trying hard though, as in-spite of Australian attack suddenly looking like a one man attack, Kasper toiled hard by bowling 40 overs and took four wickets at an economy rate of under three. It didn't stop England from cruising to a fantastic ten wicket win, but thanks to Kasper and brave fightback by the batsmen in the second innings, Australia weren't humiliated like we saw at Adelaide.

Kasper's best spells perhaps came in India in 98. With McGrath and Dizzy out of the side due to injuries and Tendulkar's brutal assault on Warne made sure that the inexperienced Kasper suddenly became the number one bowler. On unresponsive tracks of the subcontinent, Tendulkar took a heavy toll on Kapser as well. Poor Kapser, as especially during Tendulkar's epic knock at Chennai, it seemed like every-time Kapser bowled to SRT, the ball would just disappear into stands, but Kasper kept running in and maintained decent pace throughout the series. Finally, he was rewarded for his hard-wrok as Kasper took a five wicket haul at Bangalore. His ability to bowl at consistent pace and the reverse swing he extracted from that surface helped him to get a five wicket haul. Kasper's average during that series just won't tell the true story, as leaving a few decent spells by the novice off-spinner Robertson, it was a one man attack. Poor Kasper is said to have lost six kilos during that series.

Kasper's efforts in that series though, unfortunately made the selectors to think of him as a subcontinental specialist as he went onto play seventeen of his 38 tests in the subcontinent. Kasper didn't lose heart as later on in his career, he played a key role in Australia's three nil thrashing of Lanka in 03/04. McGrath was injured and they needed someone to open the bowling with Dizzy and in Kasper they found the right man as he took twelve wickets at just 25. Fans talk about how good Warne was in that series, but the series result could have been different if Kasper hadn't led the seam attack by not just taking twelve wickets, but by also restricting the batsmen from scoring runs on unresponsive tracks for the seamers.

In 2004/05, when Australia won a historic series in India, both Dizzy and McGrath rightly were showered with praises for their superlative bowling in the subcontinent. The fact though is, without Kasper's ability to bowl with the older ball, Australia may not have won the series. In a sense, he did all the donkey's work by bowling with a soft ball in the middle overs. His strike rate of over 70 during that series was nothing to write home about, but his bowling average of 28.33 and his E/R of just 2.35 tells us that without him, Australia may have struggled as it is one helluva task to bowl with the older ball under severe heat in the subcontinent. At Adelaide, Punter may have even given one of his eyes and a teeth, if someone had just whispered in his ears that in Sheffield Shield there is a bowler whose E/R is 2.35 and can also take wickets on flat pitches.

Paul Reiffel- When Reiffel or popularly known as Pistol first came onto the scene, he was thought of as a one-day bowler, but with time, he became a fine test match bowler as well. In 94/95 during the epic Frank Worrell trophy, he showed his worth by taking 15 wickets at just 17.53. The tour started on a bad note for Australia, as Australia got thrashed in the one-day series, their spearhead McDermott got injured and Warne was rendered ineffective thanks to big hitting by Hooper and Lara. Going into the test series, West Indies were expected to retain the Frank Worrell trophy, but a young seam attack and of course the famous partnership between Waugh twins made sure that Taylor would lift the prestigious Frank Worrell trophy.

When the epic series held in 95 comes up for discussion, everyone talks about McGrath, as that was the series in which McGrath showed to the cricketing world that Australia may have unearthed another great fast bowler, but in my opinion it was Reiffel who led the attack. Every-time there was a partnership between couple of Windies batsmen, Reiffel seemed to raise to the occasion and get the vital wicket. I still remember the last test at Jamaica, when Australia looked for quick wickets in the second innings, it was Reiffel who came to the party by knocking over top-order batsmen at the fag end of the fourth day's play. It was like a final nail in the coffin as with both Richardson and Lara back in the pavilion, the game was as good as over.

In 96/97, Australia again squared up against the men from the Caribbean. This time around though, Australia were comfortably the better side and they wrapped up the series even before the final match at Perth. In the match at Perth, Aussies seemed to be a bit off colour which was expected as they had already lost the series. Even the greats McGrath and Warne weren't at their best, but Reiffel rose to the occasion and led the attack beautifully by taking a five wicket haul. Pistol couldn't save Australia from being defeated by a detemrined Windies side, but he again showed that Australia wasn't just about McGrath and Warne.

Reiffel continued to do yeoman service for Australia. In 97/98, against the Saffers, OZ again missed the services of both Dizzy and McGrath, but Reiffel led the seam attack in the last couple of tests and averaged 23.6 for his wickets. Pistol was also good in English conditions as he consistently did well in England. Just like bowlers from the previous generations, he was yet another Aussie seamer who had a big heart and never gave up.

I can remember a few more bowlers like Bichel and Fleming who were successful. I always thought that Fleming was a talented cricketer as he could swing the ball like a banana. In his chequered test career Fleming was able to support McGrath as a back up bowler and at the same-time, he led the pace attack a few times. Bichel too did well for Australia during the late 90's and early noughties. I do remember him bowling some great spells during the 03 WC. Australia had yet again lost the injury prone Dizzy, but in his absence Bichel did very well. It just shows that Australia has always produced an assembly line of seamers, who could get into the team as back up bowlers, but if needed, they could easily lead the attack as well. They were men with a big heart.

I can say the same about the spinners as bowlers like Tim May and even Colin funky Miller were reasonably successful as off-spinners. I would even say that mediocre leg spinners like Sleep, Holland and McIntyre, or chinaman bowlers like Hogg and Beven may do a better job than the left arm spinners, who are getting selected for Australia now. None of the spinners were anywhere near the class of Warne, or even Macgill, but I would back Tim May or Miller to do a better job than few of present day left arm spinners Australia are keen on selecting.

Now, let us look at Australia's current bowling attack

Seamers

Siddle-Everyone in the media showered praises on Siddle for his six wicket haul on the first day at Gabba, but the reality was, it came on a pitch which had a bit of life in it on the first day and against a batting line-up which was slightly off colour. It maybe attributed to first day jitters of a Ashes series as after the first day's play, England's batsmen have been unstoppable.

Actually, when he first burst onto the scene in 08/09, I thought Australia have found another Hughes as he bowled a few decent spells on the barren tracks in India. He was even more impressive in South Africa albeit in bowler friendly conditions. Since then though, he has been disappointing as every-time I have watched him bowl, he seems to believe that the only way to get wickets on flat tracks is by bowling harmless bouncers. If he continues to bowl short in the ongoing Ashes series, I don't expect him to ever again get the wicket of KP as he swatted all those short deliveries like flies at Adelaide. I still think Australian selectors should show faith in him, but Siddle has to stop bowling so many harmless bouncers.

Hilfenhaus- In the present bowling line-up, he is perhaps the only bowler who can bowl line and length. There is a lot to like about him as he has a nice and easy action, can generate decent pace and can bowl a fine outswinger, but is that enough to succeed in test cricket?

The problem with Hilfy is, a good batsman can work him out rather easily as he mainly bowls the outswinger with the new ball and brings it back into a right-handed batsman with the older ball. It would help Hilfy, if he follows in the footsteps of Hoggy by adding an effective inswinger and even off-cutter. Hoggy too struggled early in his career on flat pitches in Australia, but with time, he added more weapons to his armoury and became a fine swing bowler. Just look at Hilfy's record against better batting line-ups like South Africa, India and England which in turn shows that Hilfy has to improve his wicket-taking ability.

It was unfortunate that Aussie selectors dropped him after just one bad game at Brisbane. It was a classic case of revolving door policy that England followed in the 90's and even Australia themselves followed in the 80's. Australian selectors should back him as with time, I see him doing well.

Mitchell Johnson- Mitch looked every bit the strike bowler that Australian selectors were looking for after the retirement of both McGrath and Warne against South Africa at home and against the same team in South Africa. Mitch frightened every Saffer batsmen with awkward bounce and pace, but to be called a strike bowler, he has to do well for a considerable period of time. Unfortunately for Australia, he hasn't been able to replicate his performance against the Saffers. In-fact, ever since the series in South Africa, he hasn't even remotely looked like a strike bowler as most of the times, he has bowled rubbish. Mitch continues to bowl first change which isn't the sign of a strike bowler and even bowls with a scrambled seam. The biggest worry is, he doesn't come across as a mentally tough cricketer.

If Mitch gets back his wicket-taking ability, he may find a place in the Australian team in the years to come, but I somehow don't see him as a long-term investment.

Ryan Harris-He was the best of a bad bunch at Adelaide which more than anything else says how bad other seamers were. Yes, he can bowl at decent pace and get a bit of seam movement, but the fact is, he is already 31 and won't be a long-term investment. Australia have also used Bollinger in recent times. The NSW left armer is Australia's answer to Sidebottom as he ripped through weak batting line-ups like Pakistan and New Zealand as they couldn't play the left armer's angle and his ability to generate decent pace. Against a better team like England though, he wasn't test standard at Adelaide. I was even more surprised by his inability to generate decent pace against England.

I have also seen a few fans discussing about test discard Stuart Clark. If Clark has to comeback into the side, then Australia must be in big trouble as he looked like a spent force when he bowled against India and in England. I do remember him trying lots of slower deliveries at both Headingley and Oval which in itself tells you that Clark can't comeback into the test team. Australia can look towards youth by introducing a few youngsters like Hazelwood, Copeland, George, or maybe even Strac.

Spinners

It is crystal clear that since the retirement of Warne, Australia have been struggling to find even a decent spinner. The cupboard is bare as the selectors are nowadays selecting ordinary left arm spinners. If someone had told me in the 90's that Australian selectors will select mediocre left arm spinners in the future, I would have laughed it off as a joke, but that is the reality now as the Aussies seem to be obsessed with selecting left arm spinners.

In the last two decades, the only left arm spinner I can think of having a bowling average of less than 40 even after playing 10 tests in Australia is Vettori and he too averaged just under 40. The likes of Monty, Benn, or Muscles(Raju) were just about ok, but they only played two or three tests in Australia. Even the immensely talented Murali Kartik took just one wicket in Australia. Here is a bowler, who can flight the ball, get turn and bowl a well disguised arm ball, but when he too can't succeed in Australia, there isn't even a hope in hell for the likes of Doherty and Beer.

I have already made my views clear about Doherty not being a test standard spinner and it looks like the same can be said about Beer. As per a few knowledgeable Aussie fans, Beer is said to be a floaty type non-turning conventional left arm spinner. It is unbelievable that Aussies are so intent on having left arm spinners as before Doherty, I have to go as far back as early 80's, when they selected couple of left arm spinners in Ray Bright and Murray Bennett. It just shows that Australian selectors are desperate and are trying too many options.

Australia also have a couple more spinners in Hauritz and Smith. I have never rated Hauritz as a test match spinner. Yes, he did well in 09, but I do believe it was due to him bowling against weak teams like West Indies and Pakistan. Pakistan's batsmen were crazy in the series they played against Australia, as they seemed to be intent on slogging every-time Hauritz bowled which resulted in them gifting wickets to Hauritz. Fans argue that Hauritz struggled only against India, who are rated as the best players of spin, but let me point out that even the Kiwi batsmen smashed him all over the park in the Kiwiland and they don't have good players of spin.

More than Hauritz, I do like the young Smith's temperament. At present, he can't play in the line-up just as a spinner, but I would still have him in the side as a allrounder. Recently at Hobart against England, he showed that he has a good temperament as with a bat in hand, he scored a fifty in bowler friendly conditions. I liked the way he constructed that innings as he respected the conditions and tried to play late. Rest of the batsmen including the highly rated Ferguson and Khawaja couldn't handle the conditions, but Smith was able to get a fifty. The innings at Hobart was a complete contrast to how he played against Pakistan in England as in that knock, he tried to smash the cover off the ball. It just shows that Smith can adapt to different situations as against Pakistan, Australia needed quick runs, but at Hobart, Australia A needed someone to handle the tough conditions. Experts may point out flaws in his technique, but cricket is also about having a good temperament. I also do believe with time, Smith would improve as a leg-spinner.

What next?

The Aussies would struggle to replace the likes of McGrath, Warne, or even other talented bowlers like Macgill, Dizzy and company, but I am sure there must be a Kasper or a Hughes somewhere in Australia. So, to find a bowling attack that can take twenty wickets, Australian selectors can either look at continuing with their revolving door policy, or they have to go for a youth based policy. On one hand, I just see Australia going down the same path that England followed during the dark days of English cricket in the 90's, but if they back youngsters to the hilt, there is a chance of Australia finding a decent attack .

If they have any sense, Aussie selectors should look at backing youngsters like Copeland, Smith, George, Hazelwood along with bowlers like Hilfy and Siddle. In-fact, it isn't just the bowling attack, but the time has come for Aussie selectors to perhaps look at the entire team and pick a core group of young players and back them. Maybe they can think of Hughes, Khawaja, Smith, Hazelwood with few older heads in the mix like Hussey, Clarke and perhaps White as the captain of side.

Australia have usually been a major force in cricket and for the sake of cricket, I hope that they can comeback. World cricket has already seen the once mighty West Indies side crumble and nowadays even Pakistan team is more of a rabble. Cricket can ill afford to have another major cricketing nation to lose their way.

Well done England!!

2010-12-08T11:27:00.014+04:00

Oh! my god, Australia have been thrashed by an innings and 71 runs and that too in their own backyard. Am I dreaming and have to pinch myself that it isn't Australia, but England who have been slaughtered at Adelaide??? During the late 90's and the last decade, I even thought that the great wall of China may fall, or Himalayas may melt, but Australia won't lose a series at home. In 08/09, SA finally won a series against Australia and now I see a holocaust at Adelaide as the margin of defeat is an innings and seventy one runs. The last time Aussies were defeated by an innings at home was way back in 92/93 when the deadly threesome of Amby, Bishop and Walsh made light-work of Australia on a lightning fast track at Perth. The last time England won by an innings in Australia was way back in 1986 at Melbourne.

My views on the test

Pitch conditions

It wasn't a typical Adelaide track as there was a bit of life in it on the first morning yet Australia should have at least made 350-400 on that pitch. The pitch got quicker on day two and three which helped batsmen as the ball came onto the bat and on expected lines, the Adelaide pitch gave assistance to the spinners on day four and five. I thought it was a decent pitch as there was something in it for all the bowlers. Even on days two and three, when the pitch got better for batting, there was decent carry for the quicker bowlers. I have seen pitches that can only be called as a batting paradise at Adelaide, but I would like to give credit to the groundsmen for preparing a track that had something in it for the bowlers this time around.

Australia's shambolic start

Any team would like to get a decent start from its openers, but Australia had the worst possible start as they lost a wicket during the very first over and that too through a run out. Shane Watson and Katich have already been involved in a couple of misunderstandings but they don't seem to have learnt their lesson. Losing a wicket through a run out and that too with it being the first over of a match is a clear sign that Australia lack the discipline to win test matches. The loss of Katich opened the flood gates for Anderson to attack right-handed batsmen like Punter and Clarke with outswingers and soon they were in doldrums at 2 for 3. The run out was catastrophic for Australia as it gave England the opportunity to bowl out Australia for a low score in the first innings.

Anderson silences his critics

I have perhaps heard it about 999,999 times that Anderson in Australia won't succeed as the pitches in Australia won't help swing bowlers and he has to bowl with a kookaburra ball. Most experts and fans would just point out that he averaged 82 in Australia in 06/07. It got so bad that just like Harmless-on's 7 for 12 spell in West Indies, I would never forget that Anderson averaged 82 in Ashes 06/07 blah blah blah. I won't repeat it again regarding why he failed in Ashes 06/07 as I have already written an article on it. If interested anyone can have a look at it. Anderson in Australia. In simple words, I can't fathom when fans just look at a stat and judge a cricketer. Bringing up Anderson's stats in 06/07 Ashes is like saying as Harmison took 7 for 12 in 04, he should be in the Ashes squad now.

Anyway, let us not focus on that disastrous Ashes tour of 06/07, but on the magical spell bowled by Anderson on the first day. In-fact, there wasn't any magic in what Anderson did, but just like any good swing bowler, he pitched it up and used a bit of swing on offer to his advantage. He bowled a couple of beauties to Ponting and Clarke as it swung late and both Punter and Clarke had no other option, but to edge it to the slips.

I have also seen a few criticising Anderson for being below par in the second innings, but he is a swing bowler and a swing bowler in an attempt to look for swing can go for runs, as sometimes when a bowler bowls full, it can turn out to be a half volley. Anderson though showed character by coming back with a fine spell on the fifth day and got the wickets of both Haddin and Harris. If anyone was going to save the match for Australia it was Haddin, but a trademark delivery from Anderson that initially slanted into the batsman and left him late produced the edge of Haddin's bat. I liked the way Anderson plotted Haddin's dismissal as he went a touch wide of the crease to create a bit of angle which in the end helped him to get the edge. More than anything else, I am impressed by Anderson's ability to use the inswinger. In the past, he neither had the control over the inswinger nor would he use it judiciously. Nowadays, he doesn't try to bowl his second weapon, the inswinger too often, but keeps it as a surprise element which in turn keeps the batsman guessing. Anderson alone took more wickets than all Australian bowlers combined and the talk before the series was, he can't bowl on featherbeds like Adelaide.

Hussey's battling knock

In the recent past, Hussey has been out of sorts, but in the Ashes series he has been a revelation. In recent times, he has come across as a batsman, who is afraid of getting out, but in this series, he has come out with a positive outlook which has helped him.

I don't think he has made any changes to his technique other than him trying to play as straight as possible. Even when Finn bowled a few decent deliveries with the older ball, I could see that Huss was trying his best to play with a straight bat.

Actually, I thought it wasn't Clarke, but Huss who played Swann very well. I especially liked the way he tried to play low against Swann. The Adelaide track was offering considerable turn for the spinners and it was getting very difficult for the batsmen to survive. The best way to play on such tracks is to play low as it can help the batsmen to escape from being caught by the close-in fielders because the edge won't carry to the fielder. It wasn't just his defensive technique which impressed me though, as he used his feet to keep Swann guessing. In in the end, it was a shame that he got out by playing a bad shot on the fifth day.

Aussies can't get Cook out

Before this tour commenced, it looked like even I could get Cook out by bowling a few of my left arm trundlers, but now the Aussies may feel that even if they throw a rock at Cook, he would defend it in his sleep. I just can't believe that he is the same batsman, who seemed to be chasing deliveries which were well wide of off-stump and was getting out against Pakistan.

I don't want to take anything away from his great knocks both at Gabba and Adelaide, but looking at some of the flat pitches and the bowling attacks going around at present, I feel that the best place to bat is at top of the order as the field won't be spread and the batsmen can make merry by feasting on roads and of course sub-standard bowling.

KP comes to the party

Before the series started, critics were asking questions like whether KP still has the hunger to play test cricket? has he been worked out by opposition bowlers? and many more. Yes, he has played just one great knock and needs to be consistent, but even his critics have to admit that he played a fabulous knock.

As I said in my previous article that he showed plenty of promise in his knock at Gabba, but at Adelaide he converted that promise into a big score. I don't think he has tinkered with his technique, but he tried his best to play a lot more through the mid on region rather than play across the line and flick it through the on-side. Of course, he played late which helped him to be confident to get a decent stride forward. KP just loves to come well forward and take the bowlers head on.

There is no denying the fact that during the last 18 months his confidence has been shot to pieces as he lost his captaincy, couldn't score a hundred and had that terrible achilles heel injury, but saying that he is already a 'has been' was laughable. He has been tested by far better bowlers early in his career, who tried the same tactic of bowling the outswinger by attacking his stumps and KP came out with flying colours. Yes, he didn't play SLA early in his career, but in the recent past has been troubled by left arm spinners yet, I don't see any major flaw in his technique. It was just that here was a player whose confidence was shot to pieces. A few of his comments before the series even made me think that whether KP is a mix of jekyll and hyde, but thankfully, he made a big impact at Adelaide by not just playing a fabulous knock, but by also taking the crucial wicket of Clarke on the fourth day.

At his best, KP is a nice mixture of power hitting and finesse. A few of his cover drives, pulls and the flamingo shot he played against the left arm spinner Doherty was brutal, but at the same-time, the way he nonchalantly flicked a few good length deliveries through the mid on region was a touch of pure class. I won't forget a few classy drives he played through the covers of Watson, when in-spite of a 7-2 field, he was able to find the gap.

A few of his harshest critics may never give him any credit, but I have no doubt that when in form, KP is England's best batsman as he doesn't just get a big score, but demoralises the opposition team by sending the fielders on a leather hunt. I guess I don't have to remind the fans about what he did at places like Oval(twice), Lord's, Mohali, Napier, Faislabad, Adelaide and many more. In-fact, I would even say that unless he gets seriously injured KP will break Gooch's record for being England's highest run-getter in test cricket, though I see Cook breaking even KP's record.

Swann makes his presence felt

Swann was ordinary in the first test at Gabba as he bowled short, but made up for it with a superlative performance at Adelaide. Yes, unlike say Anderson, Swann had the luxury of bowling on a wearing pitch, but a bowler still has to take advantage of it and Swann did just that as he bowled well on a track that offered assistance to the spinners.

Swann's strength isn't just in the amount of revolutions he imparts on the ball, but subtle changes in pace and turn makes him a dangerous bowler to face. I especially liked the way he plotted the downfall of Punter. Ponting was trying his best to get outside the line of off-stump so that he won't get out lbw to Swann. Swann perhaps noticed it and bowled a top spinner with an off-stump line to Ponting. Ponting had no other choice, but to edge it to the slip fielder Collingwood.

In-fact, I didn't like the way a few of the right-handed batsmen played Swann. For an amateur like me it felt like both Watson and Ponting were trying to bat outside the line of off-stump to negate the threat of Swann getting them out lbw. Now, I am not an expert, but when a batsman premeditates his footwork, it leaves him with lesser options to score runs. For instance, in an attempt to not get out lbw, a few Aussie batsmen perhaps missed out on scoring runs through the on-side as once a batsman gets outside the line of off-stump, he would struggle to flick it through the on-side.

If I have to criticise Swann, I would say that he has the tendency to bowl quicker through the air when a batsman goes after him. As soon as Clarke attacked Swann, he tended to bowl quicker through the air. Let me make it crystal clear that Michael Clarke played wonderfully well in the second innings, but I was surprised by a spinner of Swann's calibre bowling flat to Clarke. Anyway, I don't think one can criticise Swann too much as after playing 26 tests, he has a strike-rate of 56. I consider a strike-rate of 65 as outstanding for a spinner, but this guy has a S/R of 56!!!

Australia's toothless bowling attack

England's batsmen have to be praised for the way they have acclimatised to the conditions in Australia and have got huge scores, but what about Australia's bowling?

In the past, even when the Aussies fielded depleted attacks, the likes of Kasper, Bichel, Fleming, Reiffel, Macgill and co. would bowl out opposition teams for low scores on flat tracks, but the same can't be said about the current attack.

Seamers like Siddle, Bollinger, Johnson, Hilfenhaus and especially Bollinger have good averages, but against stronger teams on flat tracks, I do expect that attack to come a cropper. Bollinger has feasted on weaker teams, Siddle is good when the track offers something for the bowlers like on the first day at Brisbane, but has a tendency to test middle of the pitch on flat tracks. His innocuous short deliveries were swatted like flies by KP. Johnson is a strike bowler, when he gets awkward bounce and he can bowl at good pace too, but unfortnately for Australia, he has done that in only couple of series and that came against South Africa in 08/09. Everyone seem to rate Hilfy highly, but until he adds a decent inswinger to his armoury, good batsmen would just be content in leaving his outswingers. At present, he has a decent off-cutter, but that isn't good enough to succeed at the highest level. He doesn't get late swing like Anderson either. It just doesn't look good, when an average bowler like Harris looks the best bet and Shane Watson too seems to be better than some of the seamers.

I don't think I have to discuss much about Australia's lone spinner at Gabba and Adelaide, Doherty. In simple words, I would say that after watching Andy Whittal of Zimbabwe, Bradburn of New Zealand and Robin Peterson of South Africa, I thought I won't see a worse finger spinner in my life, but I was wrong as I have now watched Doherty. It would be better if he changes his profession to playing darts as he may turn out to be good at it. In-fact, North looks like Australia's best spinner at the moment as he is ready to give the ball a bit of air.

Ponting's captaincy

If the bowlers aren't good enough a captain can't do much yet Ponting's captaincy was abject poor. He set weird fields and seemed to be following the ball all the time.

More than a few fans and experts criticised the older Waugh for setting 7-2 fields during his time as a captain, but what do they make of Punter's captaincy? Waugh set a 7-2 field mainly for McGrath. Now, McGrath could bowl on a good length spot and just outside the off-stump perhaps even in his dream, but Punter set such a field for swing bowlers like Hilfy and even Watson. How can any captain expect a swing bowler to bowl to such a field? Was he expecting a swing bowler like Hilfy to bowl a three quarter length and wide of off-stump? absurd.

Ian Chappell on Ponting's captaincy,

"If a bowler is asked to bowl with a 7-2 field, he's entitled to throw the ball back and say 'you bowl it yourself' "

It wasn't just him setting a 7-2 field either as Punter sometimes had three men in the deep and three fielders in the short extra cover region. I can't fathom such tactics for sure. Australia even had the strange idea of getting Trott out caught on the leg-side as instead of trying to pull a short ball, Trott tends to flick it in the air. I don't think when a batsman first arrives at the crease any captain should look at getting a batsman caught on the on-side as the first plan should be to have a few slips and try to induce the edge. Yes, if nothing works such type of tactics can be thought of as the last option.

Ponting's opposite number Strauss isn't a great captain either, but more often than not, he sets a particular field and asks the bowler to bowl to it. On the other hand, Aussie bowlers must be really confused as their captain can't stick to a plan, but changes the field all the time.

Broad's injury

Everything went well for England except for the fact that Broad got injured and now has been ruled out for the rest of the tour. He must be feeling very bad as no one wants to be ruled out of the Ashes series because of an injury. We wish him a speedy recovery, but at the same-time, is he a big loss for England?

In the past, I have been criticised by more than a few fans as the general feeling is, I am biased against Broad. I have never rated him too highly as he comes across as a bowler, who bowls short and doesn't bowl a fuller length. Even when he bowls short, he doesn't get the awkward bounce that someone like Freddie used to get. Sky sports experts and most fans though think that he has bowled well without much luck in this series.

I don't like to go through what sky commentators say as they seem to be obsessed about praising Broad at every opportunity they get. So, I looked at what our great man Boycott has to say about Broad. I am not a fan of Boycott either, but he always makes some interesting observations.

Boycott on Broad after the first test,

"Stuart Broad bowled too short and needs to be reminded to pitch the ball up on that awkward length where batsmen are not sure whether to come forward or stay back. Many bouncers were too short and ineffective. They may have looked good but they were harmlessly going over the batsmen’s head. When he bangs it in short he needs accuracy to aim at the batsman’s ribs, high chest or neck area which is pretty awkward for the batsman to keep the ball down"

If Tremlett bowls like he did at Hobart, I do expect him to do better than Broad as he gets a bit of awkward bounce and finally Tremlett decided to bowl a fuller length in the second innings at Hobart and reaped the rewards by taking wickets.

What next

After a great victory at Adelaide, England would play Victoria in a three day game. It would be interesting to see how the back-up seamers Bresnan, Tremlett and Shahzad perform against the Vics. The batsmen are all in great form and if the team plays like they did at Adelaide, I do expect England to win at Perth as well.

Australia though have plenty of problems. Doherty wasn't even club standard and would likely be dropped with Hauritz coming back into side. The seam attack doesn't look much better which may result in a quick recall for the unpredictable Johnson, or maybe Aussies would go for a fresh face like Copeland or Cameroon? North continues to play like he hasn't ever picked up a cricket bat, but as Katich is out of the side with an injury, he may yet get another chance and North also bowled well in the first couple of tests.

The Aussies may make wholesale changes to the side, but what they need is a change in attitude. The way the lower-order collapsed on the last day was reminiscent of how England used to play during the dark days of 90's! If the lower-order had shown a bit more fight, they may have saved the game as Adelaide was hit by thunderstorms as soon as the match was over and it is said that rain stopped only during the wee hours of morning today. The fielding has been worse as they have fielded like Pakistan, India, or Bangladesh!

On the other hand though, England's team showed ruthlessness by taking the last six wickets on the fifth day to finish the match before Adelaide was hit by thunderstorms. In the 90's, Aussies used to say that Poms should show a bit of fight as it was boring to defeat the same team by huge margins. It hasn't come to that stage yet as we are thinking about just one loss, but the Aussies have to improve significantly to win the Ashes. Finally, I am not surprised that England are doing well in Australia, but Australia losing by a huge margin is a surprise.

Ashes-My views on England

2010-11-30T14:20:00.007+04:00

I still can't believe that after all the speculation and the excitement about the start of yet another Ashes series, the first test is already over. The biggest surprise of the first test was Australia didn't win at their fortress Gabba! In a way Australia's worst fears have come true as the bowling attack wasn't penetrative enough and the fielding was worse. After the match got over, for sometime I felt blank as I grew up watching Aussies ruthlessly dismantle every opponent they came across, but this Australian side is different as their body language is of a defeatist team and they have forgotten how to win a match. It was a pleasure to watch Cook and co. making a mincemeat of the toothless Australian bowling attack, but England's batsmen dominating Australia at Gabba was something that I wouldn't have envisaged even in my wildest dreams as Gabba after all is rightly known as the fortress of Australian cricket.

Why a draw at Brisbane is a significant achievement?

More than a few fans may argue that in the end it was just a draw and England didn't gain much from the draw. The simple fact is, leave alone losing a game, Australia don't even allow opponents to draw a game at Brisbane. Since their loss to the mighty Windies side in 88/89, Aussies have won 16 games and before this match had drawn just five games.  The amazing part is, they won all their six games between 2004/05 to 09/10. In-fact, before this match, they allowed only couple of teams to escape with draws in the last ten years. The first one came against the Kiwis in 01/02 and the second one was against India in 03/04. Both came in rain hit matches and it has to be said that Australia fielded a depleted attack against India in 03/04.

In that context, a drawn game at Gabba is a significant achievement for a touring side. I have said it many times that even if England are able to draw the first game at Brisbane, there is a very good chance of England beating Australia in the Ashes. In the past, Australian batsmen have thrived at Gabba by playing horizontal bat shots and the quicker bowlers almost perfected the art of bowling the traditional Australian three quarter length, but again the present Australian side is different.

Pitch conditions

As England were able to make a stunning recovery by scoring 517 runs for the loss of just one wicket in the second innings, the pitch has come in for severe criticism. Yes, after helping the bowlers on the first two days, the pitch flattened out considerably and it became a very good track for batting. Having said that, I would like to point out that in the last ten years or so, the track at Gabba has been similar to what we saw during the last five days.

When England came to the shores of Australia in 02/03, Australia made almost 500 runs in the first innings  and cruised to a total of 300 runs in the second innings before they declared. In the 2006/07 Ashes, Australia made a mammoth total of 602 runs in the first innings and slaughtered the bowlers in the second innings before they declared at 202 runs for the loss of just one wicket. In both those game though, they had couple of great bowlers like McGrath and Warne which helped them to crush the opposition by a huge margin. It wasn't like England had a bad attack either as the likes of Caddick,Freddie,Hoggy and co. played in those tests, but they were up against a very confident batting line-up and more so a flat pitch.

In-fact, leaving a couple of tests recently, especially the one in 2008 when Southee and the Aussie quicks took advantage of bowling friendly  conditions to take wickets, the track at Gabba has been a very good track for batting. I would even say that the track for the first test offered a bit of seam movement on the first couple of days unlike what we saw in 02/03 and 06/07.So, it is a indicator to the Australian management that they perhaps should prepare tracks that have a bit of life in it, otherwise they may have to be content with just draws, or even losing the series as when the pitch got flat, Australian attack looked worse than England's attack.

Batting line-up

I can only think of showering praises on the top-order for the rearguard action on the last couple of days. Cynics may say that pitch was flat, but is it is a herculean task for any team, when they are 200 runs behind and have to bat for two days. In such situations, the team which is behind can crumble under pressure. When Cook and Strauss started the second innings on the third day, I was a bit wary about what may happen as most teams tend to lose a few wickets as the team would be demoralised after being sent on a leather hunt by the opposition batsmen. So, the top-order deserves all the accolades they are getting as they showed great determination and discipline to help England draw the match.

The star of the show for England was of course Cook. Many have questioned his technique just outside the off-stump, but in the first test the discipline he showed just outside the off stump was exemplary. He was on the field for almost five days yet, he didn't lose his concentration and made a great double hundred. He seems to have worked on his batting as his back-lift looked better and he was just looking to time the ball through the covers and not force it through the covers. In the end, it is more of a mental issue as when a batsman isn't confident, he would worry about factors like his off-stump, or whether his technique is good enough. I just take my hats off to him as getting a double hundred with the team about million runs behind is one helluva task.

Now, it doesn't mean that one can forget the efforts of Strauss, or Trott either as both of them played extremely well. Strauss hasn't been in good form and he was on a pair as he scored a duck in the first innings, but in the second innings he too showed great concentration prowess and notched up a fine century. Strauss is surely underrated as a batsman as even after doing well in South Africa, West Indies, New Zealand, on turning tracks in India and now in Australia, I have seen fans reckoning that even Atherton was better than Strauss. Michael Atherton better than Strauss??? no way. Trott may not have a wide range of shots, but he brings a calmness to the team. It is good to see that England have finally found a batsman, who can bat at the crucial number three position.

In the second innings,I was also impressed by the way they left deliveries purely on length. Most visiting teams including England struggle to do well in Australia as they play at deliveries which should be left alone. In Australia, because of the extra bounce, a batsman can leave deliveries on length and the top-order batsmen did that very well in the second innings. It just shows that here is a team which is ready to learn from its mistakes as in the first innings few of the batsmen chased deliveries which could have been left alone. It also shows that by playing three warm-up games, England have got acclimatised to the conditions in Australia.

The middle-order consisting of KP, Colly and Bell didn't get the chance to bat on a featherbed in the second innings, but I was impressed by what I saw of Bell and KP in the first innings. KP has come under pressure for not doing well in the last 18-20 months, but his knock of 43 runs in the first innings was promising. Having watched him bat for a longtime, the feeling I got was, KP was playing on the move which didn't help him to get into a good position. KP has a exaggerated shuffle and when he isn't in form, he tends to play on the move and gets into a tangle. During his knock of 43 in the first innings, he was getting into a good position which is a positive sign for him and England. KP was also getting a decent stride forward. At his best, KP gets a decent forward and if it is on the shorter side, he has shown that he can just about rock back onto the back-foot to pull. It isn't just about him looking good at the crease though, as it is high time that he gets a century to silence his critics.

Ian Bell was the best batsman on show for England in the first innings. Bell finally seems to believe that he can succeed at the highest level and I also liked it when I saw that Bell was just caressing it and not trying to over-hit the ball. Bell has never been a power-hitter, but in the past he had a habit of trying to smash the cover off the ball instead of relying on his forte, which is timing. Colly flopped in the first innings as Australia exploited the weakness of Colly closing the face and edging it to the slips, or the keeper. The problem isn't as huge as what many make it out to be as at his best, he tends to leave lots of deliveries just outside the off-stump and waits for the bowler to bowl on his pads. The plan has worked perfectly for Colly, but against some teams like Australia, he has tended to poke at deliveries just outside the off-stump and get out. If he plays within his limitations and doesn't chase at deliveries outside the off-stump, he can comeback to form.

Wicket-keeper

I have never been a fan of Prior as a keeper, but I have to admit that his keeping was top-class in the first test at Brisbane. He has no doubt improved as a wicket-keeper and has silenced most of his critics. Prior made a duck with the bat in hand, but to be fair to him he got a good delivery from Siddle which swung late.

The bowlers

Leaving the luckless Anderson, none of the bowlers were good, but they didn't get the chance to bowl when there was a bit more help in the pitch on the first day. Of course, Anderson was the best bowler on show as he rarely strayed in line and made the batsmen play more often than not. Luck though deserted him as even after beating the bat about 25 times, he couldn't get more than a couple of wickets. Even a plumb lbw was turned down by Dar. Actually, I don't know what more should he do to take wickets in Australia. The only reason behind his lack of success in the first test can be, Anderson swings it late and as a result he keeps beating the bat. Hopefully he will get some luck at Adelaide as that pitch doesn't have much bounce which in turn may help Anderson to get few batsmen lbw, or bowled.

As far as rest of the attack is concerned, Broad continues to test middle of the pitch and wasn't penetrative enough, Finn was ok, when he bowled a fuller length, but he has to work on his bouncer. Hussey took full advantage of all those half-trackers that Finn bowled and made 195. In the past, bowlers like Powell, Nel, Ntini, Morkel and co. have got Huss out on the pull as he mainly pulls on the front-foot, but all of them bowled their bouncers head high which made it difficult for Huss to play the pull shot. Finn is said to be a quick learner, so hopefully he can improve on his bouncer. There was a lot of hype surrounding England's lone spinner Swann, but Swann was disappointing as he bowled short. To be frank though, it isn't easy for a spinner to take wickets on Australian tracks.

England in the field

England's fielding and tactics were passable. Yes, when Australia were on top, the wheels seemed to have come off as Anderson made a complete mess of what should have been an easy catch, but the slip catching as well as Strauss's captaincy wasn't bad. In the recent past, I have been critical of Strauss as a captain, but unlike Punter, Strauss seems to be growing in his role as a captain. For instance, I liked it when he tried to block Katich's leg glance by bringing a leg slip. Katich is very strong on the on-side and may not get out, but by placing a fielder at leg slip, Strauss would force Katich to be a bit more cautious of playing the leg glance in the upcoming tests. It also encourages the bowler to attack his stumps. A few may criticise him for declaring England's innings on the last day as both Trott and Cook were sending the Australian fielders on a leather hunt, but with England about 300 runs ahead and only a few overs left, there wasn't anything wrong in declaring the innings.

The next test would be played at Adelaide and usually it is a bowlers graveyard on the first two days. The pitch may turn on the fifth day, but both teams need to look at ways to get twenty wickets. England shouldn't get carried away as even though they have escaped from what looked like a certain defeat at fortress Gabba, the fact remains that series is still 0-0. Australia on the other hand, still don't seem to be sure about what their best side is. It is very difficult to predict the outcome of the series as both are evenly matched sides, but I would stick to my earlier prediction that England may win a closely contested series as the bowling attack of Anderson, Broad, Finn and Swann looks slightly better.

What is wrong with Sami?

2010-11-23T10:38:00.008+04:00

If we look back at the history of cricket, it can be seen that talent alone isn't enough to succeed at the highest level which is test cricket, but a cricketer needs a good temperament as well. Over the years, we have seen numerous cricketers, who have shown enormous potential, but just couldn't make it big in international cricket. One such immensely talented cricketer, who hasn't been able to succeed at the highest level is Sami. A few cricket fans may say that he has been a victim of the revolving door policy that Pakistan cricket is famous for, but  if a bowler averages over 50 after playing in 35 tests, then he too has to take some of the blame for not performing up-to his potential.

If I think about Sami, I would ask to myself what he doesn't have as a bowler? He has a bustling run-up and a whippy action, can be deceptively quick and can get late swing with both the new and the old ball. Sami is more of a hustler, who can surprise the batsman for a bit of pace. Unfortunately though, in-spite of having the required skills to succeed as a quick bowler, he has flopped miserably in test cricket.

Sami's career

If I have to track Sami's early career, I would have to go as far back as 2000/01, when a wiry 20 year old burst onto the scene with a eight wicket haul in his debut test in the land of long white cloud and helped Pakistan to win that test. In-fact, when Pakistan toured England in 01, there was a lot of hype surrounding Sami and the feeling was Pakistan have unearthed another top quality fast bowler. Akram though, couldn't pronounce his name correctly as he talked about how much potential a young bowler called Mohammad Salim  has. Jokes apart, he didn't play in that series yet, everyone believed that a star was born.

Unfortunately for Pakistan, he has rarely ever performed for them since that debut test in New Zealand. Yes, against his favourite opponents the Kiwis, he once more got a five wicket haul in 03, but other than that he hasn't got any other five wicket haul to his name in test cricket! Recently in Australia, he produced one decent spell in the first innings at Sydney albeit in helpful conditions, but was back to his old ways in the second innings. I may defend him by saying that Sami was excellent when he played CC for Sussex in 03, but if I do that I must be scraping the barrel!  Pakistan's selectors though, haven't learnt their lesson as they have recalled him back for the series against South Africa. I realise that with Asif and Ameer suspended, they are struggling to find decent bowlers, but there should be someone, who has a bit of talent and can play for Pakistan. Pakistan's selectors are just wasting their time by selecting a bowler who averages over 50.

It is hard to explain why would a bowler as talented as Sami averages over 50, but I would give it a try.

1) Discipline- The greatest bowlers in the history of the game always have great control as they rarely lose their line or length. Sami though, struggles to keep it tight and even maintain a modicum of pressure. Nowadays, I don't have to watch Sami bowl as I know that a particular over that Sami bowls would contain couple of good deliveries followed up by a few leg stump half volleys and a short and wide delivery. Sami always comes across as a bowler, who tries to bowl a jaffa. Every bowler loves it, when a ball pitches on the leg-stump and hits top of off-stump, but such deliveries can be produced once in a blue-moon. The lack of discipline in his bowling has meant that even in bowler friendly conditions like in England, he has struggled to take wickets. In-fact, modern day bowlers seem to lack the discipline to take wickets as most of them get frustrated as soon as they beat the bat a few times.

2)Trying to match Shoaib for pace- I also have a gut feeling that whenever Akthar plays, Sami tries his best to match him for pace and as a result lose his line and length. I can remember Sami trying to consistently hit over 90mph in Australia in 04/05 as Akthar was bowling at the pace of wind and even in a few series against England and India around that time Sami tried to bowl quicker and lost the plot. I have never thought of Sami as a out and out quick bowler. In my opinion, he is more of a hustler, who can surprise the batsman for a bit of pace. Sami is perhaps at his best, when he bowls around 87-88 mph as when he tries to bowl quicker, he loses his control, tends to bowl with a scrambled seam and can't get the late swing for which he is famous for.

Fans and experts may give about million more reasons for his failures yet, it would remain a mystery that a bowler of Sami's skills averages over 50 in test cricket. Finally, it again shows that to succeed at the highest level, just talent isn't enough, but it also requires temperament and sadly from Pakistan's point of view, Sami doesn't have it.

Ashes 2010/11- Sydney cricket ground

2010-11-20T16:56:00.009+04:00

A few months ago, I did promise that I would look at the various cricket grounds in Australia. So today, I would like to share my views about the Sydney cricket ground, or more famously known as SCG. The Sydney cricket ground situated in the Moore park in the city's east has a rich history and tradition as cricket has been played on that ground for more than 150 years now. Every year, the match at Sydney is known as the new year's test as it is played at the start of every year on either Jan. 2nd or 3rd. The ground has been graced by many great players and it is a witness to some of the classic tests ever played.

History of cricket at Sydney

To encapsulate the history of Sydney cricket ground in a few lines is a near impossible task yet, I would like to write in brief about the beautiful Sydney cricket ground. It is amazing and may even sound untrue to cricket fans, but the fact is, once upon a time, the SCG was a rubbish dump before it got transformed into one of cricket's major centres. The interesting part is, it was known as garrison ground. It was only in 1924, did it came to be known as Sydney cricket ground.

As the years went by, the ground was developed by the administrators and by the time the first test was played in 1882, already two grandstands could be seen. Two spectators mounds were also built in 1886. If we think about the developments that have taken place, one of the key point to notice is, the relationship between the trust and the New South Wales cricket board has always been strained which in turn has affected the development of Sydney cricket ground.

Nowadays, the hill, or more famously known as the Yabba Hill is sadly not there at the Sydney ground instead we can see O'Reilly, Noble and the Walters stands. The ladies pavilion is still there, but the disappearance of the Yabba hill and the outfield not looking as lush as it used to be, would perhaps make a cricket fan think that Sydney cricket ground has lost some of its sheen .

Conditions at the Sydney cricket ground

Historically, the Sydney cricket ground has been a good track for batting and more than a few huge scores have been made. Bradman's magnificent knock of 452 not out came on this very ground. The pitch has tended to help spinners on the fourth and fifth day yet, spinners have had to work hard for their wickets. With so many tests being played at SCG, there have been a few exceptions, but the track is generally good for batting with the spinners coming into play on the final two days of the match. For instance, in a bid to stop the rampaging West Indies from winning every test, the Aussies prepared a rank bad turner in 88/89. It surely helped a part-timer like Border to take a 10 wicket haul as Australia achieved their objective of winning the test. It is another matter altogether that Aussies still couldn't stop the great Malcolm Marshall from taking yet another five wicket haul on what was said to be a spinners paradise! In 02/03, the pitch became a minefield on the fifth day and it helped all sorts of bowlers. Both in 99/00 and in 09/10, there was too much sideways movement on the first two days mainly thanks to incessant rain.

As expected, Shane Warne has enjoyed the conditions at Sydney by taking 64 wickets, but his bowling average of 28 shows that it isn't a piece of cake to take wickets on that pitch. In-fact, Stuart Macgill has a better strike rate and even a better average than Warne. In the recent past, few subcontinental spinners have occasionally found success like Mushie in 95/96, or Kumble in 03/04 and again in 07/08.

Now, it doesn't mean that faster men won't get any encouragement from the surface at Sydney. I have always felt that Sydney is one ground in Australia, where the new ball can swing albeit just for a few overs. Hoggy got the new ball to swing at Sydney in 02/03 and even at his lowest ebb Anderson found some swing in 06/07 and got three wickets. A few cracks can also open up which in turn can help the taller bowlers to hit those cracks and get variable bounce. The Windies bowlers of the past like Wambrose (Ambrose and Walsh) were very good at hitting the cracks that would open up. The canny Fannie De Villiers did the same on a great day for the Saffers as they were able to defeat Australia at Sydney in 93/94 by just five runs. I am not too keen on including the heroics of Caddick in 02/03 as that became a minefield on the last day.

A few keen observers of Sheffield Shield may argue that track at Sydney has flattened out, but I don't think that is the case when it comes to test cricket. Yes, when I look at the 2009/10 Sheffield Shield season, I can at least think of five scores of over 400 at Sydney, but I have always thought the wickets prepared for test matches have a bit of life in it. This year there have been more than a few low scores all over Australia because of overcast conditions. Just yesterday, Tasmania won a low scoring game in which neither Tasmania nor New South Wales were able to get even 200 runs. No one can predict though, whether the conditions will remain the same when the test match would be played at Sydney.

England at Sydney

First the good news, unlike some of the other grounds in Australia, England have managed to win a test at Sydney in the last twenty years. The victory came in 02/03, but unfortunately it was a dead rubber. The pitch at Sydney in 02/03 was a bit strange as it became unplayable on the last day with huge cracks being visible. I still remember a young Harmison getting Martin Love with a delivery that didn't even reach the height of the batsman's knees which was followed up by Caddick getting a delivery to bounce awkwardly and Gilly could only feather a edge to the keeper. Caddick enjoyed bowling on that surface as he took a ten wicket haul.

In 94/95, England held the upper-hand thanks to the wholehearted efforts of Gough. First with the bat, he slogged a fifty and followed it up with a five wicket haul in helpful conditions. Australia though, were able to draw that match as the spin twins Warne and May came to their rescue not with the ball, but interestingly by batting for more than 20 overs on the last day. In 98/99, Australia were in a spot of bother in the first innings before the younger Waugh played another of his special knocks and it was followed up by Slater butchering the bowling in the second innings as England crashed to another defeat in Australia. I don't think I have to say much about what happened during England's ill fated Ashes campaign in 06/07!

If I think about England's strategy at Sydney, first and foremost, I do hope that team management won't fall into the trap of going with two spinners. Only if a team has two decent spinners, both spinners should play. Yes, someone may point out to me that Hemmings and Tufnell were successful at the same venue back in 90/91 as they took eight wickets between them in the second innings, but generally it isn't a good strategy. A few may even point to the fact that Monty is a decent spinner, but batsmen nowadays play him better as they have realised that he doesn't have an arm ball and doesn't really flight the ball. Of course, Swann would be a key bowler, especially in the second innings. I won't like to bore everyone again by saying that how effective he can be against all those lefthanders Australia have.

When it come to the quickies, the taller bowlers like Broad, Finn, or Tremlett may come in handy in the second innings as the pitch may deteriorate and there maybe a few cracks to aim at. Jimmy Anderson would likely get a bit of swing with the new ball and may get the older ball to reverse as the surface at Sydney isn't as lush as it used to be.

For the bowlers to succeed, the batsmen though have to do well on a track that is usually good for batting. Even if England don't win the toss, I don't think Strauss would be too perturbed as there is no Macgill, or Warne in the opposition ranks. The batsmen surely won't lose their sleep by thinking about the likes of Hauritz, Doherty, Smith, or Keefe. If the conditions are overcast, it would be a different ball game altogether and in that case Strauss may elect to bowl first.

Australia at Sydney

It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, if I say that Australia have been almost invincible at Sydney in the last decade. During that period they have won ten matches, lost one and drew one game. In-fact, Australia have won all their last seven matches including the recently concluded controversial tests against India in 07/08 and Pakistan in 09/10 respectively. Yes, Pakistan had a chance to defeat a slightly weaker Australian team this year, but Pakistan's captain Yousuf set some strange fields and gifted the match to Australia.

One has to go back to the early 90's, when Australia found it difficult to win matches and were able to only draw them. Between 89/90 to 95/96, they drew five games and lost couple of games, but didn't win anything. A few of those games were played, when Warne wasn't yet playing for Australia. Warne made his debut at Sydney in 91/92, but the Indian batsmen made a inexperienced spinner look ordinary. The couple of losses can be attributed to outstanding spells bowled by De Villiers in 93/94 and Mushie in 95/96 respectively. The games played by Australia in the early 90's is perhaps a better indicator about how Australia may do this time around as once the likes of Warne and Macgill began to weave their magic, Aussies almost became invincible at Sydney.

From Australia's point of view, it is imperative that if not as a wicket-taker, their spinner would at least do the holding job by drying up the runs. Among the seamers, Bollinger can do well as he is good at reversing the older ball. Hilfenhaus may swing the new ball and cause some problems. More than their bowling, the batting seems to be a bigger problem as most of their batsmen aren't in good form.

Finally, looking at both the squads, one can predict that unlike the recent past, the series would be alive when both teams travel to Sydney for the final test. As a cricket aficionado, I do hope that is the case as dead rubbers can get boring to watch.

Having a look at Tremlett and Shahzad

2010-11-17T21:09:00.014+04:00

Today, when England met Australia A at Hobart, there was action packed cricket with wickets going down at regular intervals, counter attack by Steve Smith and of course, the day's play would be remembered for Monty taking a fine catch. I would just like to share my views on the day's play.

Pitch conditions

The pitch at Hobart is usually slow and as the game progresses, it can help the spinners to get a bit of turn, but today I was shell shocked, when I saw exaggerated sideways movement. From the few matches I have seen at Hobart, I do understand that there would be times when the conditions can get overcast, but I was surprised by the amount of grass on the wicket and there seemed to be too much moisture underneath the surface.

Seamers

1) Shahzad- Every-time I see the young seamer from the White Rose county bowl, I feel that he has improved. Today, he bowled a great spell with the new ball and should have ended with a five wicket haul. Unfortunately, I didn't watch the entire first session, but from whatever I saw of his bowling, I was really impressed, as he used the helpful conditions well and bowled some jaffas which were too good for the batsmen. His ability to regularly hit the top of off-stump and make the batsmen play was a refreshing change from what most modern day bowlers do. Shahzad also has a fine bouncer and a decent leg-cutter in his armour. Yes, he lost his way a bit in his second spell, but he was no doubt the stand-out bowler of the day.

What impresses me most is that he is a quick learner. In the very first test he played against Bangladesh, just like any other debutant, he looked nervous at the start of his spell, but with the older ball, I was impressed by the fact that he was bowling it very full to utilise the abrasive nature of the pitch at Old Trafford to his advantage and get reverse swing.

2)Tremlett-The tall seamer has made a comeback into the team on the back of some consistent performances for his new county Surrey. Tremlett has been criticised for not being tough and his fitness record is poor, but he seems to have worked hard on his fitness as he did play most of the county matches for Surrey. Tremlett's record of 48 wickets at just about 20 on those belters at Brit Oval also proves the fact that he is perhaps mentally tougher now. Any pace bowler needs a big heart as it isn't easy to run up-to the bowling crease and watch being smashed all over the park by a batsman.

Anyway, coming back to today's match, Tremlett started the day well and used the helpful conditions to his advantage. Tremlett's ability to get awkward bounce helped him to induce Hughes into edging the delivery to slips. He also bowled a fine delivery to White as it was fuller in length which in turn helped him to get a bit of swing and find the gap between bat and pad to uproot White's stumps.

In the second session though, I wasn't impressed by what I saw of Tremlett, as he banged it short and the batsmen made merry. I can't fathom why would a tall bowler like Tremlett who gets a nice shape into the righthander bowls short. It isn't rocket science that if a tall bowler consistently hits the good length spot, he won't need to bowl either quick, or bang it into pitch as the bounce he would get will be enough to catch the edge of a batsman's bat. A few may argue that by bowling short, he got rid of both Paine and the tailender Cameroon, but the delivery he bowled to Paine was down the leg-side and the tailender Cameroon played a typical agricultural slog and got out.

Tremlett is not Fred to bang it short as unlike Fred, he doesn't bowl a heavy ball. Whenever he bowls short, Tremlett rarely ever makes the batsman play. I think someone needs to remind him about what happened in the last test he played against India as Tremlett bowled short and got zero wickets for about million runs. It seems to be a sort of virus as every tall bowler, who has played for England in the recent past has got into the habit of bowling short. It includes the likes of Caddick, Harmison, Tremlett, Broad and even Freddie, though Freddie could bowl the heavy ball.

The third seamer in the attack Bresnan bowled a few good deliveries in his first spell including a peach to dismiss Ferguson, but other than that he wasn't very impressive. In the second session, when the moisture dried out a bit, he tended to bowl short and bowled at the pads of batsmen. If Bresnan wants to become the stock bowler or more so, the all-rounder that England are looking for, he should stay away from a batsman's pads. The lone spinner in the attack, Panesar didn't had much to do on a pitch which was offering sideways movement, but he used the breeze to good effect by getting a bit of drift. He would be more remembered for the fine catch he took to dismiss Cowan. I don't know what Sussex have done with Monty, but he seems to be enjoying his fielding!

Smith's knock- The one player, who was able to show a bit of fight, though the conditions were against the batsmen and even played a few shots was Steve Smith. Smith certainly seems to have a good temperament as he played late and made a fine half century. He has a unusual stance and has a relatively high back-lift, but it seems to work for him, especially when he plays the pull shot. The bowlers though, helped him a bit by bowling short to him. It was crystal clear that with his bottom handed grip, he may struggle to play through the covers. The old trick of leaving the gap at cover open and tempting Smith to drive could have come in handy. Finally, Shahzad bowled a full delivery and got him out.

After an entertaining first day's play on a surprisingly green top, (at least going by modern standards) I am looking forward to watch how the batsmen would play on that wicket. Actually, I won't mind more such wickets being prepared as cricket fans can see a good contest between bat and ball!

Cricket in West Indies

2010-11-16T21:25:00.004+04:00

A few days back, I did say that I would like to celebrate the cricket played by Calypso kings by writing a few articles on cricket in West Indies. Sadly though, along with writing articles about the glory days of West Indies's cricket, I am forced to write about the gory days of West Indies as at present cricket in West Indies is in doldrums. Yes, I am writing the article on a day when the enigmatic Gayle woke up from his deep slumber and decided that today is the day that I have to score a triple hundred. The key point is, just one good day won't erase the fact that cricket in West Indies isn't in a healthy state.

If I visit cricket forums, look at articles written by journalists, or even listen to well respected commentators the feeling I get is, cricket is facing a massive challenge from other mainstream sports like basketball, football and athletics. I have always wondered whether it is true or more of a myth. Fortunately over the years, I have been lucky that I could interact with more than a few knowledgeable cricket fans from the Caribbean. Those invaluable discussions I had with them convinced me that it is true cricket is facing an uphill task of confronting the challenge of competing with other mainstream sports, but at the same-time, the situation isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be. In a nutshell, I would say that it has become a cliche to blame other sports for the decline of cricket. It isn't just about cricket competing with sports like basketball, or athletics, but there are few other problems which is hindering the progress of cricket in West Indies.

The challenge of competing with other mainstream sports

If anyone listens to journalists or commentators, they maybe brainwashed into believing that the advent of American sports have had a massive impact on the younger generation and there is no future for cricket in West Indies.

Yes, it is a known fact that basketball has grown in popularity not just in the Caribbean region, but also in other parts of the world. The same can be said about football which just like basketball, is a simple game and it doesn't cost much to buy the equipment. The point to note is, national basketball teams in the Caribbean are virtually unknown and rarely ever make the headlines. Can anyone remember a basketball player from the region making it big in NBA?.

Actually, it looks like cricket is facing more of a direct competition from football and athletics. Thanks to EPL, the champions league, La liga, the Euro and of course the big one, the world cup, football is said to have become a popular TV sport. At the same-time, it doesn't mean that everything is hunky dory as the players in local premier league in regions where football is popular like Jamaica are said to be earning a pittance. The rough estimate is, they earn J$2000 per match which is about $14. So, players have to look out for better opportunities in MLS,EPL and other leagues in the Europe. A few players like Yorke, Kenwyn Jones, Hislop, Jason Scotland and some Jamaican players like Sinclair, Noseworthy, Michael Johnsoon and maybe a few more about whom I don't know have been able to play in the EPL. I am not an expert in football, but unless if one thinks about Trinidad and Tobago, or Jamaica, it isn't like there has been a massive influx of football players from the Caribbean region into various leagues in Europe.

Yes, Jamaica did qualify for the WC in 98, but with a squad that was heavily dependent on players, who weren't based or maybe even born in Jamaica. In Jamaica that team was known as UB-40's (the band of of reggae singers in UK of Jamaican descent) Since then, Jamaica haven't qualified for the WC. T&T did qualify for the 06 WC by beating Bahrain in the play offs, but both in 01 and in 09 they probably finished at bottom of the regional table. It can be said that Islands in the Caribbean don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning the WC, or in some cases may not even qualify for the WC. However, it won't stop kids from taking football as a sport, as it is a simple sport and the exposure they get to the various leagues through television would tempt them to take up the game.

Athletics too has become popular in the Caribbean, especially with the success of Jamaican sprinters. It is said that in places like Jamaica, athletics and football have become so popular that schools find it hard to pick 11 players for a cricket match. Inspite of football and athletics becoming popular, cricket is still said to be a popular sport in Barbados, among the Asian population in T&T, Guyana or for that matter in both Windward and Leeward Islands.

Administration

In recent times, if anything that has let down cricket in West Indies, it is the administration. The president of the board Julian Hunte seems to be running cricket in West Indies in a autocratic manner. A few jokingly even say that Hunte has hunted cricket in West Indies! It doesn't mean that everything is bad with the administration, as well respected cricketers like Clive Lloyd and Garner continue to be among the board of directors. The bad part is along with administrators, who genuinely love the game like Lloyd, Garner, the present CEO Hilaire, there are people like Chetram Singh, who inspite of Guyana being rubbish for a long-time continues to be one of the board of directors and of course Hunte. The problem seems to stem from having bad eggs with the good ones. Another point to note is the fact that board members seem to change every two years which is a recipe for ineptitude as usually good initiatives get reversed and bad initiatives would have to be cleared by the successors.

The hastily signed deal with Digicel didn't help either, as it is believed that they got the sponsorship of the home and away series for the same price as the previous sponsors Cable and Wireless got just for the home series. They even apparently got near total rights over any representative West Indies team which lead to the Stanford fiasco.

Cricket in West Indies has also been hit by all those bitter fights between the board and the WIPA. The chairman of the players association and former leg spinner Ramnarine always seems to be waiting for a chance to fight with the board. As both the board and the players association have been at each other's throat, it has resulted in numerous players strikes and the board in the end, had to field a second string side like last year against Bangladesh and on a few occasions in 05. In-fact, last year our man Ramnarine even resigned as one of the board of directors. So, if he had genuine concerns about the way the game has been run in West Indies, wouldn't it have been better if he had continued as a member of the board? I really liked him as a leg spinner, but he seems to have become egotistic, who has a one point agenda and that is to fight with the board. In-fact, a few jokingly even say that if Ramnarine had the staying power at the test level that he has as the president of WIPA, he could have gone into the history books as one of the better spinners that West Indies has ever produced. In-spite of the negatives, more than a few West Indies's fans and former players were said to be happy with the 15 point plan that WIPA came up with earlier this year. So, there is some hope that Ramnarine can do a decent job.

The problem of sponsorship

With the West Indies team losing one series after another, the board seems to be struggling to find sponsors as well. If I am right their premier first class competition is being held without a sponsor. It got so bad that in-spite of doing well at the domestic level and in the Stanford series, T&T couldn't get a sponsor for the champions league in 2009. In the end, they had to go with the Indian company Venky's chicken. It isn't just a case of the terminal decline of West Indies's cricket which has led to the lack of sponsors, but it is believed that sponsors seem to expect a lot in return for very little.It is all about finding the right balance, but that doesn't seem to be the case in the Caribbean. For instance, let us think of KFC, a company that is said to be having a booming business in that region sponsors a tournament, but they would expect to get total rights because of which, local companies can't sponsor individual teams, as the KFC would sponsor everything. I have seen Windies fans saying that the kind of sponsorship deals companies get in the Caribbean for various sports including cricket, football and basketball would be laughed at by others.

Lack of discipline and hard work

A question may arise in a cricket fan's mind as to whether only the administrators are to be blamed for the mess and not the players? Having followed the fortunes of cricket in West Indies as closely as I can, I would say a definite no to that question. In the recent past, I can think of quite a few examples which shows that players too perhaps should take some of the blame for the decline of cricket in West Indies. I would like to cite a few examples of players who showed promise, but couldn't kick on mainly because they just didn't believe in putting hours of hard work and never showed the right attitude.

Marlon Samuels - When the younger brother of Richard Samuels, Marlon first came onto the scene, everyone hailed him as the next great cricketer from West Indies. His batting was a mixture of playing some well timed shots and in between, could play a few powerful shots. In-fact, he showed his class in his first series itself in Australia in 99/00. The Windies were losing every match they were playing on that tour yet, in such adverse circumstances, he made a couple of fine half centuries. A few years later, he smashed the Indian spinners all over the park in a one-day international. At that time everyone expected Samuels to take his game to the next level, but it wasn't to be as his career stagnated. He showed a bit of fighting spirit in a series in the Safferland in 07/08, but he was soon banned from cricket for a few years for giving information to a bookie. His is a classic case of someone, who had great potential, but not the temperament to succeed at the highest level.

Xavier Marshall- When he scored tons of runs at the under 19 level, the hype was he would be the next Viv Richards or Greenidge, but unfortunately success at the under 19 level won't guarantee success at the highest level. Even now Marshall is just 24, but after playing too many reckless shots at the international level, he now finds himself in the wilderness. His fc average of just about 25 shows that he is a massive underachiever.Just before the Stanford series, he even got embroiled in a drug controversy by failing a drug test.

Rampaul- Rampaul at his best, can swing the new ball and can act as a good support bowler. Rampaul showed promise, when he bowled a few crucial overs at the death at Pollock in a one-day match in 03/04 Yes, the Windies narrowly lost that match, but his efforts earned him praise from even the great Michael Holding as he was impressed by the young man's ability to fire in yorkers at such an young age. Since then, he has delivered in fits and starts in one-day cricket, but has never been consistent. Selectors can be blamed for not giving him a decent run in the side, but it is also up-to the player to come up with good performances. Rampaul even got a chance to play test cricket, but other than being the first player of Indian origin to be selected for his pace bowling, he has nothing else to show for. At present, he seems to lack fitness and looks overweight. He just struggles to bowl long spells which clearly shows that he hasn't worked hard on his fitness.

Franklyn Rose- Franklyn Rose burst onto the scene with a five wicket haul in his debut test against India in 97. Even now, I see a few Windies fans recollecting him uprooting the stumps of the little master Tendulkar in his debut test. Rose followed it up with another five wicket haul against the Saffers a few later, but he too had a few disciplinary issues and faded away from the international scene. Rose wasn't an out and out quick bowler, but could have been a good bowler for the Windies as he used to get bounce and get a bit of swing with the new ball.

Ramdin- He was a star of the Windies team that reached the final of the under 19 WC in 03/04 and everyone expected big things from him at the highest level, but it wasn't to be. At his best, he is a fine keeper and a decent batsman, but unfortunately, he comes up with a good performance once in a blue-moon and as a result he now finds himself in the wilderness.

There have been other cricketers too, who showed the potential, but just didn't show the focus required for success. Ryan Nurse at the under 19 level looked like a carbon copy of tall bowlers like Garner and Ambrose, but he is said to be struggling with fitness and doesn't even play fc cricket now. Even Jerome Taylor, who showed so much promise as a quick bowler, doesn't seem to have the focus as I see that he is struggling with fitness and has had disciplinary issues as well.

Selection issues

Most teams that are on a losing streak would have selection issues as usually they would try too many players with a hope that someone would succeed. The flaw with that policy is young players won't get a decent run in the side and it becomes more of a revolving door selection policy. The same can be said about the Windies side as they have tried too many players and as a result, quite a few talented cricketers haven't performed up-to their potential.

Reon King- When he first burst onto the scene, the Guyanese fast bowler looked like a real find for the Windies as he could bowl with good pace. His troubles started in England in 2000, when he completely lost his confidence and started bowling beamers. The selectors soon dropped him and didn't pick him for the next four or five years. When Reon King came back into the team in 2005, he was a spent force and was bowling medium pace.

Ramnarine- Ramnarine had good control as a leg-spinner and bowled some decent spells in test cricket, but he was never given a decent run in the side and as a result, he retired from the game in frustration. Perhaps that is the reason why he is always at loggerheads with the board.

Dwight Washington- The tall Jamaican quickie made his debut at a very young age. He showed good control in his debut test at Antigua, but was soon discarded after just one test which made him look for better opportunities in the US and he never again played even fc cricket. Washington didn't take even a single wicket in his only test, but his only test came on one of the flattest tracks ever seen in the history of the game, Antigua. The pitch was so flat that eight hundreds were scored in that match, but for the selectors, one test on a batting beauty was enough to decide that he wasn't good enough.

Colin Stuart- Colin Stuart showed a bit of promise in his debut series in Australia in 99/00. I vaguely remember a skiddy bowler, who could surprise the batsmen with a bit of pace, but soon he vanished into thin air. I can't explain what happened to him as even cricinfo don't have a profile page for him . It isn't a huge surprise to me as they seem to treat players from West Indies as second class citizens, but the fact is, in-spite of having a decent average of 31.4, he never again played for the Windies.

Collins- The left armer could get prodigious late swing and at his best, even troubled the likes of Tendulkar. He did play 32 tests, but rarely ever got a decent run in the side and soon faded away from the international scene.

Deonarine- The latest casualty of the revolving door policy seems to be Deonarine. The youngster seems to be a carbon copy of Chanders as he has a similar technique. He did play well last year at Perth and scored a fine hundred albeit on a flat deck this year against the Saffers, but I see that they have picked the young Darren Bravo in his place. I have nothing against Bravo as he seems to be a talented batsman, but why would anyone drop a player though he has been doing reasonably well in recent times? I don't think he is injured either.

The revolving door policy can be seen even when a cricket fan glances at the careers of young players like Walton, Pascal and Tonge. In-spite of Walton showing promise as a keeper in his first series against Bangladesh, they have gone for another young keeper in Thomas for the ongoing tour in Lanka. Pascal too is said to be promising, but I see that he has been dropped after playing in just one test and in his place, they have gone for Russell. I wonder how long would it take for them to drop either Thomas or Russell?

Should the team West Indies be disbanded and instead play as individual Islands?

In recent times, a few journalists like the expert who never gets off his high horse Peter Roebuck and someone, who wants to have an opinion on everything Ian Chappell suggested that West Indies as a team should be disbanded and they can play as individual Islands.The reason that Roebuck gave was, the commitment was missing when they played for West Indies, but as soon as they would represent their own country, the players would show the required commitment. He was quick to point out how well T&T performed at the champions league 09.

In my humble opinion, people who say that they should play as independent nations just want cricket in the Caribbean to die! I am sure Sir Frank Worrell or Malcolm Marshall must be turning in their grave, when they hear such comments. Cricket in the Caribbean is always about a group of Islands showing pride by playing for the team West Indies. The team West Indies is the soul of cricket and without them, cricket won't be the same. Yes, there have always been Inter-Island rivalries with people from Barbados alleging that too many players were picked from Antigua and after some years the Antiguans themselves started to say that their players were ignored! I don't think the situation is that bad though and it can be seen by the fact that in an interview to a local newspaper Andrew Richardson is believed to have said that when Tonge and Rampaul were selected ahead of him for the recent tour of Australia, he called up both of them and wished them well.

I would also like to point out that it is all very well to say that T&T did well in the Champions league, but would the bowling attack of Trinidad consisting of Stewart, Ganga, Pollard, Bravo and Rampaul ever succeed in test cricket? What about Guyana, who surprisingly qualified for the 2010 edition and were very poor. Most teams would struggle to compete with even some of the associate teams. What West Indies need is, a few good administrators who are ready to take the bull by its horns and a good captain.

Future of cricket in West Indies

The future of cricket in West Indies depends on whether they can sort it out with regards to their administration. It is high time that cricketers like Clive Lloyd take up the responsibility and try to ameliorate the standard of cricket in West Indies.

The West Indies would get better, if they also get a decent captain. I have nothing against Gayle as he is a fine cricketer and when he was the captain, the players seemed to like him, but on a cricket field, there were times when I felt that he was just going through the motions. In my opinion, Sammy can be a good choice as the captain of the side as he comes across as a enthusiastic cricketer and there is always Nash, who as a vice captain can be the calming influence which in turn would help Sammy. There are question marks over Sammy's place in the side and the general feeling among a few Caribbean fans is that he was appointed as the captain because he comes from the same region as Hunte, but maybe by default they have made the right choice.At present, more than anything else, West Indies need a decent captain.

The future may not look too bright as the cricket team has lost series after series, because of the poor performance by the team, the fans don't come to watch a cricket match played in West Indies and cricket now has to compete with other mainstream sports as well, but they can still be a force to reckon with, only if the board and the players association stop being at each other's throat and instead work together for the betterment of cricket in West Indies.

I would like to thank a few knowledgeable West Indies's cricket fans like Michael Siva for their valuable inputs

Has the last wicket become achilles heel?

2010-11-14T18:22:00.009+04:00

In cricket, a captain or the back-room staff would primarily think about plotting the downfall of batsmen in the opposition line-up, but in modern times, it seems like lower-order batsmen are becoming a hazard for bowlers and the captain. A few may point to the fact that nowadays coaches insist that lower-order batsmen should contribute with the bat and as a result, look at ways to improve their batting, bats have become better, bowlers aren't of the same class, or the pitches have become flat yet, is it so difficult to get the last wicket?

Today, I have to give the credit to Harbhajan for his stunning counter attack on the plucky Kiwi bowlers, but at the same-time, I couldn't fathom some of the tactics that Vettori employed. Yes, when the last man Sreesanth joined Harbhajan at crease, Harby played a few stunning shots of Vettori, but I was dumbfounded by how soon the Kiwi captain panicked and fielders went scurrying to the boundary.

To be frank, I realise that it is easy to say a captain is too defensive by sitting on a chair in front of a laptop, but some of the tactics that modern day captains employ is unfathomable. Cricket is sometimes known as a game of chess and that can be true as the captain on the field has to anticipate what a batsman would do next. Today, I felt that Vettori didn't use what is known as the brain. In-fact, it seemed like his brain became dead for the last hour of the day's play.

Strategy

If I look at the way the last pair played, I wouldn't have pushed the long-off back to Vettori as it could have tempted Harbie to play against the spin. Another reason why I wouldn't have pushed the long-off back is, I want the last man to play a rash shot and get out. As Harby was playing some audacious shots it made Sreesanth to play defensively, but a captain should look to tempt the last man to play a slog or two. If they had kept an attacking field for Harby, maybe Sreesanth would have played a rash shot or two. As soon as the captain sets a defensive field with just one wicket to fall, the better batsman would look to just take the odd risk and the last man would look to defend everything and a wicket won't fall. The Kiwi bowlers could have tried a few more short deliveries and the odd yorker to dismiss Sreesanth. I would also have a silly point for Harby as I would like to get under the skin of Harby and force him to play an audacious shot which is beyond even his range of stroke-play. Unfortunately, there isn't anyone like Mark Taylor around and such tactics would never be tried.

Sydney fiasco and the blunder at Oval

It isn't the first time either when captains have got defensive with the team needing just a few wickets to wrap up the innings. Recently at Sydney, Hussey scored a century with the tailenders supporting him. Hussey did play a fine knock under pressure, but the opposition captain Yousuf seemed to be intent on gifting him a birthday present. Yousuf spread the field and as expected, Huss started taking easy singles and in between was hitting the odd boundary. The tailenders at the other end, just defended everything. It happened at Oval too, when Azhar Ali added crucial runs with the last man. In the end, Pakistan won a close match, but if Strauss was a bit more attacking, it could have been a different story altogether as both Ali and the last man Asif added crucial 30-40 runs. The virus of setting defensive fields didn't end there as in the last test at Lord's, Strauss set defensive fields for Umar Akmal, though England were million runs ahead and just needed one wicket for victory! Why would anyone do that especially with Umar Akmal being known for playing reckless shots? Any captain should tempt Umar to play more reckless shots and what makes it more interesting is the fact that England were coasting to an easy victory.

Finally, I do agree that Harbhajan played a stunning knock. His timing was impeccable, he played late and played some audacious shots, but Vettori seemed to be treating him as the re-incarnation of Gilbret Jessop.

Celebration of West Indies cricket-Cricket classics

2010-11-13T15:03:00.034+04:00

When I was first introduced to the game of cricket, I felt it was a boring game which is played over five days and it looked silly, when I realised that even after five days a result may not be possible. So, what made me fall in love with the game? I have to thank the Calypso kings for that as their game just captivated my imagination and made me a cricket aficionado. The cricketers, who played for the Caribbean team in that era didn't seem like they were coached to bowl with mechanical bowling actions, or were the batsmen seemed to have gone through the MCC coaching manuel day and night to improve their technique, but they played a instinctive brand of cricket. The bowlers would bowl fast and if the ball was there to be hit, the batsmen would smash the cover off the ball. I still remember the days when commentators would be dumbfounded by Richards playing across the line on a pitch with sideways movement, or who can forget all those glares by fast bowlers which seemed to suggest that if the batsman wouldn't get out, he may have to soon find a place in the hospital.

So for the next few days, I would look at the glory days of West Indies cricket and certain issues which are affecting the game of cricket in West Indies. Today, I would look at the glory days of West Indies cricket by writing an article on the very first match played between West Indies and South Africa at Bridgetown Barbados in 1992.

Backdrop

It was a historic day for cricket as for the first time, the Saffers were playing the West Indies. After finding themselves isolated due to apartheid, the Saffers had just made a comeback into the test arena . Yes, they did play the World cup in 92 and a one-day series against India, but it was the first test match they were playing since the ban was lifted. It was funny to see 10 of the 11 players in a team making their test debut! The only player, who had previous experience of playing test cricket was Kepler Wessels as he had already played for the men from down under.

Just before the test match, there was an interesting development of Barbados cricket fans deciding to boycott the game. Now, you may think that it was because of West Indies playing a side made up of white players from South Africa, but that wasn't the reason for the boycott. The real reason was, the fans were upset that there weren't too many players from Barbados and the selectors made them more angry by dropping Anderson Cummins of Barbados.

Selection issues
West Indies

The main issue was of course the dropping of Cummins. In his place, Walsh made a comeback into the side after being dropped from the West Indian side for the World cup in 91/92. The reason for Walsh being dropped for the WC was he couldn't field! It wasn't like Cummins was Jonty, Junior, or Colly to be selected for his fielding alone and when it comes to bowling, he won't be able to hold even a candle in front of Walsh. In an interview, the modern day great batsman SRT even said that sometimes he found Walsh more difficult to face than Amby as his action was such that he struggled to pick the length. No wonder, Walsh went onto take 77 wickets at just 20 on the barren tracks of the subcontinent. The Windies selectors had other ideas as they picked Cummins for the WC as he could field!! Thankfully, the selectors dropped Cummins and gave Walsh a chance against South Africa. The people of Barbados though, didn't take the non-selection of Cummins lightly and boycotted the match.

Adams made his debut in the match for West Indies. I hated Adams as a batsman, as his batting was ugly to watch, but early in his career, he played more than a few vital knocks and even in this test, he played a crucial knock in the second innings. A few even touted him as the next Larry Gomes, but unfortunately after tasting success early in his career, Adams lost his way.

South Africa

For the Saffers, test cricket was a new experience as leaving Kepler Wessels, none of them had test match experience. Cricketers like Kuiper, Peter Kirsten, Donald and co. had already played lots of fc cricket yet, because of apartheid, they missed out on playing test cricket.

The South African line-up was on expected lines, though a few eyebrows may have been raised when Meyrick Pringle's name was seen on the team sheet. He could occasionally swing the ball like a banana, but also had the tendency to bowl rubbish. Snell was another inconsistent bowler who got picked in the side, but he could occasionally be a wicket-taker. The Saffers could have gone for the present coach Corrie Zyl as he was said to be a bit more consistent than Pringle or if available, the tearaway quick Schultz, but instead they went with Pringle.

West Indies's first innings

South Africa won the toss and surprisingly chose to field. In the 90's, the pitch at Barbados was still quick, but what made the strip for this match more interesting was its unevenness. Most would have expected the team that would win the toss to bat first as it was never going to be easy to face Amby and Walsh on a crumbling pitch on the last day, but perhaps Wessels wasn't sure about batting first as he had a team which lacked test match experience.

West Indies made a good start in their first innings with Haynes, Simmons, Arthurton and Richardson getting useful scores, but the Windies lost six wickets for just 20 odd runs and were bundled out for just 262 runs. The West Indies line-up also included a certain player by the name Brian Charles Lara. He played couple of glorious shots through the off-side, but those were the days, when he was too flashy and as expected threw his wicket away. Snell showed that he maybe inconsistent, but can take wickets as he took a four wicket haul. The White lightning supported him well by taking couple of wickets.

South Africa's first innings

South Africa's reply was led by the gutsy Hudson as he made a magnificent century against the fury of Walsh and Amby on a wearing pitch. Hudson was said to be a religious man, but on a cricket field, he had unflappable temperament which in turn helped him to tackle menacing fast bowlers like Walsh and Ambrose in his debut test. Kepler Wessels gave him good support, but other batsmen found it diffcult to handle the uneven bounce in the pitch. The key point though is, they got a vital first innings lead of more than 80 runs. On a pitch that was deteriorating quickly, it was a very handy lead.

West Indies's second innings

Lara showed his class by getting a vital half century, but the rest couldn't support him and soon the Windies looked dead and buried as they were eight wickets down, but had a lead of just over 100 runs. It needed someone to play out of his skin against the likes of Donald and co. It was the perfect opportunity for a gutsy player like Adams to come to the party. Adams played really well as he added crucial runs with the tailenders and finally, the Windies set a target of just over 200 runs. Watching Adams bore everyone with a bat in hand would make me think of how on earth did the selectors pick Adams? The side was made up of Bajans, who could play attractive cricket, but here was a man, who was a scrapper and would drive away the spectators. It doesn't mean that I didn't rate him as a player, but in a team made up of players with flair, he was the odd man out.

South Africa's second innings

Nowadays, a target of 201 may look rather easy, but those were the days when Amby and Walsh or more famously known as Wambrose were still around and the pitch was getting more and more uneven. The Saffers lost couple of early wickets including that of Hudson, but the two veterans in the side Wessels and Peter Kirsten took the Saffers closer to a famous victory as at the end of the fourth day, they were well placed at 122 for the loss of just two wickets. Both batsmen had to work very hard to get their runs and it can be seen by the fact that they scored their runs at a snail's pace against some incisive bowling by Wambrose.

The last day

The interesting story before the final day's play was, the Saffer bowler Pringle got so over-confident that he said to Lara, tomorrow after winning the match, there would be a huge party. Lara replied to him by saying that I do hope you won't have to bat to hit the winning runs, but yet again Pringle showed his over-confidence by saying that he wouldn't be needed to hit the winning runs. Now, he must be in hibernation as at that time everyone knew that with Amby and Walsh around, any score could be defended. Moreover, there was no need to wake up couple of sleeping lions from deep slumber.

Wicket-keeper Richardson on Pringle's over-confidence,

"Meyrck Pringle even bought a few bottles of champagne in anticipation of the win. When we fond this out, he was admonished for his over-confidence and the bottles were banished from the view, we ended up giving them to the West Indies team in the end"

Pringle's comments seemed to have woken up both Walsh and Amby as they stepped up a gear and that was the end of South Africa! Not a single loose delivery was bowled as they kept hitting the top of off-stump. The pitch was playing tricks on batsmen too, as more than a few deliveries were keeping low. The Saffer batsmen had no answer to it as they fell like a pack of cards. Finally, poor Pringle came to the crease and I am sure the Windies would have said a few words to him. I am also sure that batsmen who faced the Wambrose combination must have had nightmares of both bowling to them for a long time. Amby picked up six wickets and Walsh four as the Saffers were bundled out for the just 148 runs. Astonishingly, eight wickets fell for just 26 runs. Among the bowlers, Amby picked up couple more wickets than Walsh, but I would like to point out that it was Walsh, who started it all by removing both the overnight batsmen Wessels and Kirsten. Whenever I think of Walsh, I always feel that he was a touch underrated as unlike so many fast bowlers which includes Amby, he constantly played on barren tracks of the subcontinent and got lots of wickets. Of course, Amby was more deadly, but he could be moody.

It was no doubt a great test match, though unfortunately the match was played in front of empty stands as the fans boycotted the match. The Saffers were shell shocked by the defeat and that was perhaps the reason behind them getting slaughtered 3-0 in the one-day series. The one off test also showed that West Indies still have a good team and in that test they also played with the kind of flair that was usually associated with the men from the Caribbean. The match also showed a sporting wicket would help in producing edge of the seat matches.

Dementieva's shock retirement

2010-11-12T06:28:00.016+04:00

In the past few weeks, I have been concentrating on writing articles on cricket. Today though, I would like to write an article on Dementieva's retirement. Since the time I saw the sad news of Dementieva's retirement, I have been thinking about writing an article on her, and finally I got the time to write the article.

First glimpses of Dementieva

Dementieva made her debut around 95/96, but she made a impact for the first time only in 2000, when she won a few matches in all the grand slams she entered. Yes, a few tennis fans may say that her breakthrough year was in 99 itself, as if I remember correctly, she made a comeback from behind to beat Venus Williams in a Fed cup match. In 2000 though, she didn't just win more matches than what she did in 99, but she was able to break into the top 20 in the rankings. I vaguely even remember the young lass getting a silver medal in the 2000 Olympics at Athens. Dementieva lost the final to Venus Williams in the Olympics, but her court coverage was exemplary, though it was very much evident that her serve was a weak link in her game as sometimes she wasn't even finishing her service action. In the years to come, every player would target her weak serve and that would stop her from winning majors.

Rise of Dementieva

It was in 2004, when it looked like Dementieva would finally be able to fulfill the promise that she showed during the early years of her career. At the 2004 French open, she played sparkling tennis and reached the final of the French open, but lost out to the unheralded Myskinia. During the final, it became crystal clear that her service would stop her from winning majors. At the US open in 04, she yet again reached the final, but only to lose against her good friend Kuznetsova.

Golden opportunity missed

As the years went by, she started to slide in the rankings, but she had a good year in 2008 which helped her to get back into the top 10 in the rankings. What impressed me most during that year was Dementieva seemed to have worked day and night to improve her serve and as a result she was serving better. It just shows that she was a thorough professional and always demonstrated the commitment and work ethic required to succeed in tennis.

The improvements in her game helped her to reach a career high ranking of three in 09. It was in 09 itself that she had a golden opportunity to upset the apple-cart against Serena Williams at the Wimbledon championships. I would even say that match between Serena and Dementieva was as good as any match I have watched at Wimbledon. I would have no hesitation in rating that match on par with the match between Graf and Sanchez at Wimbledon in 95. In that epic match played at Wimbledon, Dementieva took the first set and it even looked like she may win it in straight sets, but Williams battled hard to win the second set to take the match to the decider. In the final set, both played like their lives were depended on it and hit winner after winner. In-fact, Dementieva came close to winning the match a few times and was even able to get a match point or two, but Serena is a one tough competitor, who has a never say die attitude which in the end, helped her to win the match. In-fact, I haven't seen too many players, who have been mentally tougher then Serena in the women's game. It was also the only time I backed Dementieva to win the elusive slam that was missing from her trophy cabinet, but my prediction bombed lol.

Actually, during that time she played a few great matches against Serena which includes the Australian open semifinal in 09. Yes, Serena won that match in straight sets, but for most part of that match, Dementieva matched Serena shot for shot and even led the second set by a break, but Serena again proved to be too powerful for our poor Dementieva.

Dementieva's retirement

2010 was a up and down year for our Dementieva. This year can be best described by her game against the serve and volleyer Stosur in the US open. Dementieva in that match played some brilliant shots, but also made lots of un-forced errors and in the end, lost the match. Throughout this year she was inconsistent and in the WTA tour finals held in Doha, her game went to pieces. She was troubled by an ankle injury throughout the tournament and looked a pale shadow of her former self as she won only one match. Immediately after the WTA tour championships, she announced her retirement and that ended the career of one of the game's most consistent players.

Dementieva's signature shot

Dementieva's main strength was her court coverage and in my opinion, her signature shot was the forehand winner she would hit on the run. Most players knew that with her excellent court coverage Elena could hit a forehand winner even when she was on the defensive.

Dementieva won't go down into the history books as one of the greats of the game, as she never won a major, but by winning six WTA tour titles and by consistently reaching the later stages of majors, she would be surely remembered as one of the most consistent players on the tour. Just like any other tennis fan, I would wish her all the best for her post retirement life.

Finally, her good friend Kuznetsova on twitter,

" I will stay in touch with her! Best wishes to Elena! hope to see her kids soon!!! Lol"

Masuud Qazi's blog

2010-11-11T16:26:00.000+04:00

I would like to welcome passionate cricket fan Masuud Qazi to the blogging world. The link to the blog Masuud Qazi has set up.

http://bloodycricket.blogspot.com/

Why Malinga is special

2010-11-09T20:32:00.026+04:00

Nowadays, I feel like I am not enjoying the game of cricket anymore. When I watched champions league, I felt like Leonardo da Vinci was applying whitewash to my house as batsmen with those big bats were playing agricultural slogs and the bowlers seemed to be clones, who have mechanical bowling actions. Of course, the media is there to glorify every slog, or even a decent spell. Just a couple of days ago, I saw comments like Martin's spell was one of the best ever on subcontinental pitches. Thankfully though, there are still few cricketers, who have great skills and a cricket aficionado would pay to watch them play. In my opinion, one such special cricketer is Srilanka's Slinga Malinga.

If I think about bowlers, I would say that unlike Donald or Warne, Malinga isn't a purists delight, he doesn't get the pulse racing like the Rawalpindi express would do and he is neither going to find a place among the pantheon of great bowlers as with the amount of stress he puts on his body would mean that he may not last long yet, for the unique brand of cricket he plays and his refreshing attitude makes him a special cricketer.

Malinga's action

If not for anything else, his action itself makes him a special cricketer. I saw him bowl for the first time about five years ago and I almost fell off my chair as he had a very slingy side arm action. In the recent past, there have been bowlers with slingy actions, but none as slingy as Malinga.

Just like most kids would do in the serene and beautiful emerald Isle of Srilanka, he took up the game of cricket. He grew up playing cricket with a tennis ball on the sand beaches and coconut grooves of a river in his village. I think the key point to consider is, Malinga playing with a tennis ball. In subcontinent, playing cricket with a tennis ball is popular and quite a few fast bowlers including the great Younis grew up playing cricket with a tennis ball. Playing with a tennis ball would mean that a bowler has to bowl quick, otherwise he would disappear into the orbit. Playing with a tennis ball perhaps forced Malinga to bowl fast and develop a slingy action.

Over the years, I have found it very difficult to explain Malinga's action still I would give it a try! When he hits the crease, his hips would be side-on, but is able to straighten it. He almost releases the ball in front of a umpire's chest. I have sympathy for the batsmen who face him as it must be very hard to pick a bowler bowling at 140mph and with a side arm action like Malinga. In-fact, in a series in New Zealand, Fleming even told the umpires to change their uniform as they couldn't pick him! What makes Malinga really special is his ability to consistently bowl those toe-crushing yorkers. A bowler with his action would likely struggle for consistency, but the reality is at present there is none better than Malinga, when it comes to bowling yorkers.

Malinga at his best

Now, let us look at some of Malinga's devastating spells.

Srilanka v South Africa- The 2007 WC was the most boring of all the world cups I have watched, but our man Malinga was able to liven up the proceedings in the match against the Saffers. Malinga produced a great spell as he took four wickets in four deliveries with toe-crushing yorkers and well disguised slower deliveries. If not for our man, the match wouldn't have had its fair share of hitchcockian twists as the Saffers were cruising to a victory with plenty of wickets in hand, but suddenly they were shell shocked by Malinga's devastating spell and found themselves nine down. Yes, in the end, the Saffers won the match by just one wicket, but Malinga's toe-crushing yorker to Ntini would be etched in my memory.

India v Srilanka - Due to injury problems Malinga didn't play test cricket for sometime, but thankfully made a comeback to play in the test match against India at Galle. Malinga immediately made an impact by taking a five wicket haul and helped Lanka to win the test. He is said to have bowled just three deliveries and they were the yorker, the bouncer and the slower delivery but his pace, his unique action and his great control over all those three deliveries was too hot to handle for the Indian batsmen. I have always felt that experts think too much about his yorker and underrate the other weapon in his armour, the bouncer. A batsman may get away with a few bouncers against a normal bowler as few of them would be too high and the batsman can also sway from the line, but with Malinga having a very slingy action and him being hard to pick would make a batsman feel like he is living in hell.

Of course, one can also think of his devastating spells against England at home in 07/08, his match winning spell at Wellington in New Zealand in 06 and all those match winning spells in T/20 cricket.

Malinga's batting

Yes, Malinga is a tailender, but I really enjoyed the carefree spirit with which he played against the Ozzies a few days back at Melbourne. The Lankans were staring down the barrel, but Malinga used the long handle very well to help Lanka snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. What impressed me most was, even though the bowlers kept beating him and he almost got bowled on numerous occasions, Malinga still kept leaving all his three stumps and continued to play those agricultural hoicks.

I would like to say that Malinga isn't a special cricketer just for his skills as a bowler, but I have never seen him sledge. If a batsman gets beaten, he just gives a wry smile and goes back to his mark. It has made me call him the smiling assassin. I would also like to give credit to the Lankan system for not looking to tinker the game of unorthodox cricketers like Malinga. I am sure, if Malinga was born in Australia, England, or in the Safferland, he wouldn't have even played fc cricket. Yes, Malinga may not last long as the amount of stress he puts on his body may result in injuries which would shorten his career, but he is one of the few cricketers that I am willing to pay to watch on a cricket field.

Williamson shows his class

2010-11-06T16:23:00.009+04:00

When I wrote an article for the first time in July, or for that matter a few days back about Williamson's maiden one-day hundred in Bangladesh, I didn't envisage that in a few days time, I would be compelled to write another article in praise of Williamson. Yes, since the time I saw him bat in the under 19 world cup in Malaysia, I have been eagerly awaiting for him to make his debut as he came across as a batsman, who has the potential to succeed at the highest level yet, I don't think anyone could have envisaged him getting his first one-day hundred as well as playing out more than couple of sessions on the slow wickets in India at the age of just 20.

Today, Williamson and Ryder showed exemplary technique and also great temperament to play out more than two sessions on a slow track at Ahmadabad. The feature of Williamson's knock was his ability to play late, the way he used the depth of the crease and his shot selection on a slow track. All three factors are needed to succeed in the subcontinent, as on the slow tracks of the subcontinent, it isn't easy to hit on the up. The fact though is, most batsmen who play for the first time in the subcontinent struggle, but Williamson played like he has already 50 tests under his belt. From whatever little I have seen of him, he is also a stroke-maker, but today on a slow wicket, he showed great application by waiting for the loose ball. In-fact, his shot selection resembled that of a 50 test veteran. Yes, he had a slice of luck, when he wasn't given caught behind of Zaheer's bowling, but it is India's fault that they didn't take the UDRS for the series.

Now, I won't forget Ryder's knock either as he too showed great application to play for more than two sessions and score a hundred, though I don't understand him getting a runner for just a cramp! In my opinion, the innings of the day though was by Williamson, as I have rarely seen a debutant play with such composure on a slow wicket in the subcontinent.

As far as the wicket is concerned, it is very slow and once a batsman gets in, it is hard to dislodge him. The Indian bowlers, especially the spin twins were disappointing as when they were bowling, it seemed like they were robots manufactured in a factory. Ojha has good control, but doesn't have the subtle variations that Vettori has and doesn't use the crease.

Anyway, it is great to see a young batsman step up-to the plate and do well for the Kiwis and the Kiwis desperately needed a talented young batsman. Actually, a batting line-up of Taylor, Ryder, McCullum and Williamson looks very promising.

Ashes 2010/11- The Baggy Green Cap

2010-11-02T10:12:00.024+04:00

From the time I started following cricket, I have constantly heard about how tough it is to wear the Baggy Green cap. Anyone who was lucky enough to wear the cap really earned it. Players like Martyn, Haydos, Lehmann and co. had to score tons of runs to get into the side. In recent times though, the Australian selection policy has been riddled with confusion. A few younger players have got the chance to represent Australia, but they have been discarded without being given a decent run in the side. At the same-time, players like North and Huss continue to struggle, but haven't been dropped.

Let us have a look at the number of debutants for the top teams

Since Jan 1 2008

England (37 debuts)
Tests - 12
ODIs - 11
20/20s - 14

Australia (58 debuts)
Tests - 17
ODIs - 22
20/20s - 19

South Africa (34 debuts)
Tests - 8
ODIs - 11
20/20s - 15

India( 39 debuts)
Tests- 8
ODI's -19
20/20's- 12

Srilanka( 36 debuts)
Tests- 6
ODI's-12
20/20's-18

First of all, 58 is a ridiculous number. Yes, nowadays most teams are experimenting with younger players in the shorter versions of the game yet, when I scratch the surface and look in-depth into the Australian selection policies, there seems to be confusion.

For instance, Phil Hughes made his debut in South Africa and was successful, but as soon as he failed in a few games in the Ashes, he was dropped. Yes, he looked vulnerable against the short stuff and I do feel that he is weak against spinners too, but would it be better to invest in a young guy, who has got a very good FC record and had a good start to his test career in the Safferland, or is it better to persist with the out of form North, who is over 30 years of age? The same can be said about Khawaja, as he was picked in the squad to play against Pakistan, but wasn't even in the squad that toured India. On the other hand, Henriques got his chance to play in the shorter formats of the game last year, but unlike Hughes, Moises hadn't backed his inclusion with good performances in domestic cricket. The same can be said about Steve Smith as even now, he looks like a batsman who bowls a bit. I do agree that sometimes it is fine to pick players, who may not have a good fc record, but on the basis of their potential. The key point though is, once they are picked, they should be given a decent run in the side.

So, are the Aussie selectors going back to the dark days of 80's? I do remember that Bob Simpson, the coach who rejuvenated the Australian side in the 80's saying that when he took over as the coach of Australian team almost 90% of the state players had played a match for Australia. It made Simpson and the group of selectors at that time to pick certain players, who they thought would succeed and they were backed to the hilt.

Debutants for Australia in test cricket during the tenure of Bob Simpson as the coach( between 86 to 95/96)

Just 32 players made their debut during the time of Simpson as the coach of the side and leaving a few players like Zoerher, Dyer, Veletta, Angel, Law, Campbell, Emery and Phillips most of them got a decent run in the side. Among the players mentioned, I can only think of Angel, Law and maybe Zoerher who deserved a better run in the side.I always got the feeling that both Angel and Law were dropped for reasons other than their ability. One can think of Martyn and Hayden not getting a decent run, but I do believe the selectors at that time rightly dropped them as they were perhaps not mentally up-to playing test cricket. The fact though is, thanks to Simpson, selectors of that time and Border, Australia became a superpower in cricket. The selection panel continued to take good decisions including the tough ones like axing senior players of the calibre of Waugh twins, or for that matter introducing Clarke into the test set up with a career path in mind for him.

Actually nowadays, England seem to be following the policy of what Australia used to do in the late 80's and 90's. The side has a settled look to it, but at the same-time tough decisions have been taken. For instance, KP was axed from the one-day team. Younger players like Shahzad and Morgan may not have good fc records, but I get the feeling that the selectors have a career path in mind for Morgan and even Shahzad. Yes, it was a huge surprise to see Pattinson making his debut and the same can be said about a journeyman like Tredwell, but leaving the odd selection which have raised the eyebrows of fans and experts, most decisions seem to have a logic behind it. In-fact, even fringe players like Denly and Bopara were given a decent run in the side before they were discarded.

During the dark days of 90's it was different, as a batsman who scored zero in his first international match would be dropped and some journeyman will replace him. A trundler, who picked a five wicket haul on a green top would suddenly be playing test cricket. Players like Ramps, Crawley, Hick and to a lesser extant Cork, Hussain, Gough, Knight, Caddick and co. were affected by it. It got so bad that in the 89 Ashes, 29 players played for England and in the 93 Ashes, 24 players represented England. No wonder, Australia won nine of the eleven tests played in those two series in England.

Finally, as a cricket aficionado my views on selection

1) The first point is, don't continue to have deadwood in the side. Let it be Waugh twins or Hussey, if they don't perform, drop them. It surely hinders the progress of younger players like Hughes and Khawaja.

2) Sometimes on the basis of personal judgment, selectors can surely pick players, who may not have a great fc record like Simon Jones, Steve Smith, Trescothick, Vaughan or Morgan, but once they are picked, back them to the hilt by giving them a decent run in the side.

(For some of the stats, I would like to thank 1000 Yardstare)