All posts by n8rngtd.top

Why Sourav Ganguly is the most fascinating Indian cricketer of our time

Rahul Bhattacharya08-Feb-2006

At some stage, hard to say when, Sourav Ganguly no longer remained a cricketer and turned into a folk hero and a folk villain. Averages and the rest came into it but with Ganguly things became a matter of convictions of the soul. Anything he did or did not do could provoke an outcry. Everything that was done to him or not done to him could provoke an outcry. Ganguly issues took the form of movements. In many ways he is cricketer-phenomenon in India’s modern pop culture.A year of sustained chaos, encompassing several riots, numerous u-turns and countless epitaphs, has now led to a predicament of superb absurdity. In a recent column the satirist Jug Suraiya was badgered by his partner to attend yet another festive-season party. ” meet lots of interesting people,” he protests. “I’ll end up as always like a spare Sourav; present and accounted for, but no one quite knows what’s to be done with him.” Indeed, no one quite knows.The Ganguly situation is impossible. No answer is a solution, not even the one of respectfully putting him out to pasture, because he isn’t going, and if he isn’t going he is almost certain to be back. No, the situation must resolve itself and the rest is commentary. The fashion is to be exasperated, if not disgusted, by the whole affair. Personally I’m not tired of it. Not in the least. I’d be lying if I say I’m not fascinated: as human dramas go, there’s too much in it.And the situation could not be what it is were Ganguly not what he is. On braving my surname and referring to Ganguly as the most fascinating Indian cricketer of his generation in a recent article, I was ticked off by a reader: “I am sure no person, living or dead, on earth outside people of Bengali origin thinks that Ganguly comes anywhere close to being one of the most fascinating cricketers, let alone being `the most’.” Another put it more succinctly: “A f***ing Bong standing up for another f***ing Bong.”Never mind the enlightened. The reactions Ganguly evokes comprise a phenomenon broader than Bengali parochialism. Cricinfo.com’s diarist Siddhartha Vaidyanathan reported from Pakistan that the first thing locals asked him after the was about Ganguly. They were unhappy with the treatment meted out to him. They related to his naked passion. In one way or another Ganguly speaks to watchers. At once he compels you to assume both the best and worst about him; at once he can prove you both right and wrong. In short, he makes you feel. I have not spent quite so much time discussing, debating, any other cricketer. What is it about him?

I suppose Ganguly came to symbolise individualism and rebellion. Individualism in that he was given to flouting norms, yes, but also in the way he could not be bothered about members fitting into or giving energy to the group. To him match-winning talent was match-winning talent and that was that. Type was important: the brasher the better. In his book Aakash Chopra and Mohammad Kaif were meant for walk-on parts and Yuvraj Singh and Harbhajan Singh for glory. This could not be scoffed at because, as much as the attitude may have bred hubris, at the time the team was being built there exuded from it a rawness of belief that was both effective and appealing.A journalist recalls being phoned by Ganguly to watch a youngster in a first-class game that was being televised. (Watch this boy. He is going to be a big player. I want to pick him right away.)” A few months on, Mahendra Singh Dhoni smashed 148 against Pakistan from No. 3. One player put it this way: “If you capture Dadi’s imagination, he will do anything for you.” And vice-versa, for once he’d captured Dadi’s imagination the player too would do for anything for Dadi. Yuvraj on his first comeback to the team was quoted saying: “I’m ready to die for such a captain.” Harbhajan’s unstinting support can in some way be understood in light of the fact that, feeling defeated by disciplinary issues, the chucking saga, an ordinary international track record, and economic pressure at home, he was contemplating moving to the US to drive trucks for a living at the time Ganguly fought for his selection.Generally Ganguly fostered angry or reckless young men. To him “good behaviour”, a broad term espoused by the present team management, belonged in school and probably not even there. He himself had been summoned to the match referee no less than 12 times in the last decade. His approach was bound to precipitate what could possibly be termed a cultural conflict in the world of modern sport. For Ganguly, like for Arjuna Ranatunga, competitiveness involved brinksmanship rather than training. As far as they were concerned Australia were not to be aspired to. They were simply to be toppled. England were not to be appeased. Victory lay precisely in their disapproval. In other words, Ganguly and Ranatunga wanted to do things their way. Both carried a resonance of the anti-colonial rather than that of the savvy global sports professional of the age (in Pakistan, Ganguly blithely sported an oversized beanie bearing a logo of the wrong corporate). If it was limiting it was also inspiring. And it invited, from Western observers especially, a ludicrous mix of suspicion, ridicule and condemnation. Much more easy to be gracious about well-mannered fellows who toe the line.So far so good. Ganguly quenched the thirst for individualism, which is an essential allure of sport; he had an effect on young players and followers similar to that of a rock concert, and all the while kept a successful team together thanks also to a wonderful set of seniors and a fine coach.And yet, after a point every day for him became a day of decay: the uncorrected technical errors, the sinking fitness levels, the sagging fielding, the jaded tactics, the lowering of standards for himself and by extension for the entire side – not least the gifted youngsters over whom he had so much influence. Finally, his almost politician-like desperation to hold on to power manifested itself in an insecurity – or was it the other way round? – that tore away at the very fabric of the team.The deterioration looked all the more stark because of the contrast with that most outstanding of cricketers, and Ganguly’s exact contemporary and heir, Rahul Dravid. Simply, Dravid built himself on stronger foundations. Ganguly batted pretty as a butterfly but, distracted, found himself blown away by the winds of high pace. Dravid opened up once his base was sufficiently secure. When it came down to it, Dravid had the rigour to last. Likewise, where Ganguly the leader powered on bare-chested with the belief that with flair on his side nothing was impossible, Dravid appreciates that any group must have the safety net of work ethic, discipline, punctuality, enthusiasm – the finer things. Dravid’s brand of risk-taking is more cerebral. With Ganguly there was always the element of danger, of losing it all. Ganguly was not about systems and processes. Ganguly was about whims and instincts. This was the thrill, and a great thrill. But I suppose when you’re losing, the thrill is gone.***Personally, commenting on the Ganguly situation has been challenging because it involves a tussle between the heart, which wants the individual, the rebel, to beat the odds and win, and the mind, which cannot help but log the slow, sad decline. Then the watcher and the journalist in you battle and they can be, but are not in every instance, the same.Besides, this was a situation like no other. The more I dwelled on the issue the more I stopped dwelling on the rights and wrongs (there were so many that there weren’t any) and the merits of the case (which became too tiresome). They didn’t matter so much either. Simply, I just wanted to see how it would unfold on a human level.I suppose in effect I was choosing the simple intimacy of the watcher to the powerful insider-ness of the journalist. I couldn’t see why a nebulous “what’s best for the team” should become a pamphleteering cause with me – that was merely a parameter to be considered while trying to pass honest judgement on the actions of the men responsible. Beyond that it was neither my duty nor my inclination and I felt foolish for harbouring any guilt in this respect. At a deeply personal level it did not matter a great deal to me whether India became the next Australia or not. Cricket was at once a massive joke and the most significant human theatre and all the joy ultimately came from the universal stuff and would be fulfilling regardless. And banging on either way missed the most crucial point of sport – that we really don’t know what’s going to come.It was with this sense of freedom that a colleague and I jumped on to a spontaneous train to Rajkot on the eve of a Duleep Trophy fixture in which Ganguly would need to prove his form and fitness. It felt like something special might happen, and it did. On a municipal ground, in an environment so anti-climactic that it was melodramatic, the soon-to-be-deposed Indian Test captain hit a rousing century. It was lovely to watch, not so much because of his strokes, some of which were indeed vintage, but because of all the other layers to it.That evening I met Ganguly at his hotel. I was apprehensive. I had written critical articles about him over the past few months and these things have a way of getting around, often in exaggerated form. I had nothing specific to ask him. I only wanted to try and gauge what he might be thinking, how he might be reacting to the uniqueness of his dilemma.

There was an air of complete serenity about him, heightened because he was initially sitting on a swing in an open courtyard. He looked the perfect : crisp white kurta pyjama, hair neatly parted, thin-rimmed spectacles.It was an easy, enjoyable, and in some ways warm, conversation. Broadly, three things were striking. One was that retirement was very far from his mind; how others might like to remember him seemed to be their own business. Another was his sense of hurt about allegations of “divide and rule”. But the most remarkable was his aura of calm. His family members would later tell that he has always been so, that he had never ever lost his cool off the cricket field, that nothing ever fazes him. He himself would say that he believed in destiny and expected to be playing the World Cup of 2007. In that short little meeting I could appreciate more properly than ever before the temperament of a man who at any moment of time has more knives at his back and more garlands at his face than a cabinet of ministers.A week on, Ganguly was dropped from the one-day squad altogether. Then stripped of Test captaincy, then deemed a Test allrounder, then… you know the story.The most revealing moment came in the response to his being dropped after the Delhi Test against Sri Lanka. He could have retired right then a saint, all sins forgotten. The man who a few months ago was among the most reviled in the land now had the undiluted support of the nation. It was extraordinary that he would pass up the opportunity and choose instead to put himself and the team under so much pressure and run the risk even of humiliation – were he to return and flop. As ever he left you grappling with mixed feelings: to admire his self-belief or to dismiss him as delusional? What to make of such a man?And so there he was in Lahore in India’s first Test of the new year. He probably should not have been playing at all. Despite the denials to the contrary, it is learnt that his inclusion in the touring party had more to do with the wishes of authorities other than the selectors and the team management.Late on the second afternoon: Pakistan 668 for 6, India wilting. Ganguly had just made an impressive dive at the boundary. Now a high ball swirled above his head. An initial misjudgement, frantic back-tracking, a final, flailing leap, a one-handed catch both spectacular and comic, a slow-motion backward roll on hitting the ground, and off like a bomb upon regaining poise, injecting humour and spirit into a weary side. It felt like he was one of the boys again. Even Greg Chappell smiled. It was by a distance the most contagious moment of the game. He did not bat a single ball and humbly carried drinks in the next Test.He was back again for the final match. He made 34, 37, and two errors which were each to be – as luck would have it, and since this story has a strain of tragedy running through it – his only error of each innings. Both times the team required a big score and in the final analysis these were a pair of letdowns. Still it was not an illusion: he indeed batted beautifully, more fluently than any other Indian in the match and as fluently as he had ever done in his career. Few could have expected it. Among those few was Ganguly.Two days later he flew back home as Dravid turned his mind to the upcoming one-dayers and, some part of it no doubt, to the batting order for the next Test series. And that’s where the Sourav Ganguly saga rested at the last opportunity to update.

Andrew White, the Ireland allrounder, speaks to Cricinfo about trying to be a professional in an amateur game

Andrew McGlashan26-Jun-2007

Andrew White became an instant Irish hero when he bowled the final over of their World Cup match against Zimbabwe, forcing a tie after nine were needed. Half the deliveries were full tosses, two were long hops, but the one that mattered – the final ball – was a full, spearing yorker that went under Stuart Matsikenyeri’s bat. Ireland had their first World Cup point and the rest, as they say, is history.”If it’s not mentioned every day, it’s mentioned every other day. I think the legacy will always be there after what we achieved,” White said proudly while talking to Cricinfo during the delayed start to Ireland’s match against South Africa at Stormont. “But we are very conscious it can’t be a flash in the pan, which is why it’s great to have India and South Africa here, we need to play more games at this level otherwise we will slip backwards.”The warning signs have already starting flashing since Ireland returned from the Caribbean. Their Friends Provident campaign ended without a win as they struggled to compete without many of the World Cup stars. White would like to see all touring teams warm up with games in Ireland and an annual fixture against England, who they played and ran close in the World Cup – “Bar those last ten overs of Paul Collingwood at his very best it could have been a very different story”. But he understands the fixture congestion in international cricket makes it difficult.Ireland’s captain Trent Johnston has spoken regularly about the difficulties the side faces and White admits keeping the momentum going has been tough. “People go back to their full-time day jobs, it’s been mentioned quite a bit by most of the players, but that’s the reality of it,” he said. “It leaves very little time to put into the cricket. We are meeting up the day before and it’s very difficult to step up and turn it on. We are going to have to come up with ways and means around it, but that’s for the hierarchy to try and sort out.”

The hierarchy in question is the Irish Cricket Union, headed by the chief executive, Warren Deutrom, and they have already begun looking into how to turn the game professional. However, it’s not as simple as getting everyone to sign a piece of paper. Somehow the money has to be found and a regular supply of decent cricket scheduled to keep the players in form. The decision by Eoin Morgan to remain with Middlesex is completely understandable because he has a career to think about, while Jeremy Bray’s recent newspaper comments highlight the problems.Another idea suggested is a semi-professional set-up, which would give the ICU some control over the players. White, though, isn’t convinced. “It could work for the younger members of the squad, but for the likes of Kyle [McCallan], myself who starts a full-time teaching job in September, and others who are in full-time jobs I can’t see semi-professional working.”The argument is that senior players like Kevin O’Brien should be going into full-time contracts because they are the ones at a stage in their life and career where they’ve finished their studies and aren’t working. So why not invest money in players who are going to be the spine of the team for the next 10 years.”White will get a proper taste of the problems faced when he takes up a full-time teaching post, at the same school as team-mate McCallan, in September. “The principle of the school both Kyle and I are involved in has been extremely good in allowing us the time,” he said. “But there’s only a limit to that and how much time we can have. Kyle had to take a sabbatical for six months and if you kept asking for that they wouldn’t be too chuffed.”

So what does a typical week have in store for White as tries to maintain his two careers? “You are practising with your club two nights a week then you have a club game on Saturday if there’s no game for Ireland and besides that you are trying to get into the gym when possible. People like Kyle are leaving the house at half seven and he’s not home until six, then he’s got family time to consider as well. It’s an impossible task trying to balance your day job and the cricket at this level.”But while the current system remains, the players will continue to try and, somehow, find a work-life balance. White says every player is “extremely proud” to play for Ireland and the decisions taken by Morgan and Boyd Rankin have not come easily. Club cricket is thriving around the country with participation reaching record levels, so the desire to play is clearly still climbing after the World Cup success.”Club cricket has been played in Ireland for so long and hopefully it will continue to be so because the success of the national team encourages the club system, and the players, to keep going and play week after week. They are reporting that numbers have doubled, tripled and quadrupled.”That’s why I fail to understand when people like Michael Holding and Mike Atherton said we shouldn’t have been at the World Cup, because we weren’t good enough. I think it was a very narrow-minded insight into what it meant to the game back home. Our performances at the World Cup were truly inspirational from that point of view and the numbers coming into the game have been fantastic.” However, what sort of future is waiting for those who make it to the top level is still uncertain.

Pakistan had a chance but blew it, and overall Australia completely dominated in all aspects in the three-Test series which ended in another whitewash for the visitors

S Rajesh19-Jan-2010Played 12, lost 12. That’s how Pakistan’s record reads against Australia over the last decade and a bit. They’ve threatened to pull off an upset more than once during this period, but Australia have won all the key moments. The trend was repeated in the most recent series, with Pakistan collapsing in astonishing fashion in Sydney. The first and third Tests were utter routs, which is why Australia are so far ahead in the overall series stats. They averaged 17 more runs per wicket, and scored five hundreds to Pakistan’s one. Five Australian batsmen averaged more than 50, while Salman Butt, Pakistan’s best, averaged 46.67. Only three other batsmen averaged more than 30, of whom two played only the last Test. (Click here for more details.) Pakistan did manage more five-fors than Australia, but that’s because the Australians mostly shared the wickets around, with all the bowlers chipping in.

The difference is vast in terms of partnerships as well. Traditionally, Pakistan have struggled with their opening combination, but in this series, the first wicket stands were the most productive: in six innings Imran Farhat and Butt put together a century and a half-century stand, and averaged 43.50. The only other partnership that managed an average of 40 was the fifth wicket, the highlight of which was the 129-run stand between Butt and Shoaib Malik in the Hobart Test.For Butt, it was a second successful trip to Australia, following on the one in 2004-05. His running between the wickets gave Pakistan plenty of grief, but Butt still managed an average of 46.67, easily the highest for Pakistan. In six Tests in Australia, he averages 42.08, well above his career average of 30.96.However, the middle order was a huge disappointment, with the captain being the biggest letdown. The average partnerships for the second, third and fourth wickets were all less than 30, which means Australia usually had an opportunity to attack the lower middle order fairly early.Overall, Pakistan had only two century stands, compared to six by Australia. The home team’s top two wickets put together solid partnerships, with both averaging more than 50. Watson, combining with Simon Katich and Philip Hughes, added two century partnerships for the first wicket, while the 191-run stand between Katich and Ricky Ponting in the Hobart Test lifted the overall second-wicket average to 53.67. The fourth-wicket pair was even more prolific, with the 352-run stand between Ponting and Michael Clarke in Hobart leading the way.The return to form for Michael Hussey was perhaps the most significant gain for Australia. Hussey also played arguably the most crucial innings of the series, scoring a century and bailing Australia out when all had seemed lost in Sydney. During that innings he was also involved in a century stand for the ninth wicket, which lifted the overall partnership average for that wicket to 67.

Head-to-head contestsMohammad Asif was Pakistan’s leading wicket-taker, but even his numbers were skewed – he was outstanding against left-handers, but couldn’t manage as much success against the right-handers. He dismissed only six right-handers at a cost of 40 each, which was more than twice his average against the left-handers.

The break-up of Asif’s stats against each batsman indicates Simon Katich and Marcus North had the most trouble against him. Katich fell three times to him, while North was dismissed twice in 13 deliveries. On the other hand, Watson didn’t fall to him even once 170 balls, while Ponting averaged 86 against him.

Nathan Hauritz was the leading wicket-taker of the series, and he achieved plenty of success against the right-handers, averaging 19.60 against them. His 18 wickets came at 23.05 apiece, but a fair number of his wickets were those of the lower-order batsmen – he dismissed Nos 8-11 ten times. The two top-order batsmen who fared best against him were Butt and Umar Akmal, who between them scored 133 runs without being dismissed.

In a tournament where much depended on which team held their nerve at crucial junctures, Dileep Premchandran picks out the moments to cherish

25-Sep-2007

The Last Scoop: Against a genuine pace bowler, Misbah-ul-Haq’s cute attempt to scoop the ball down to fine leg might have been a four. But with Joginder Sharma offering no pace to work with, it was a stroke laced with risk. As soon as he played it, millions of anxious eyes looked towards the rope, but instead of getting that far, the ball merely looped into Sreesanth’s hands at short fine leg. As the Indians basked in the enormity of their achievement, Misbah sat on his haunches in disbelief – the defiant sailor who had evaded the U-boats only to be sunk as the harbour came into view.Direct hit parade: Rohit Sharma had shown the way against South Africa, and it was Robin Uthappa’s turn in the final as Imran Nazir and Pakistan threatened to waltz away with the match. Nazir had blazed his way to 33 from just 14 balls when Younis Khan tapped one to mid-off and called for the run. Nazir, suffering from a groin strain, was slow to react, and Uthappa’s pick-up and measured throw caught him inches short at the keeper’s end. India were seldom behind the eight-ball after that.The Eccentric Returns: Matthew Hayden loves to bully the bowlers, but had looked like a novice against an inspired new-ball spell from Sreesanth. But having ridden the rough waves out, he and Andrew Symonds were threatening to see Australia home when Sreesanth was brought back for his final over. Coming round the wicket to Hayden, he produced the perfect ball for the situation, the fast yorker. Hayden missed, the off stump was uprooted, and India were on their way to a famous triumph.Ton up: When Chris Gayle drove Shaun Pollock down the ground for two in the 15th over of the tournament opener, history was made. It had taken Gayle just 51 balls to bring up the first century seen in Twenty20 at the international level, and no one that watched it will ever forget the amalgam of brute force and sweet timing. A shame that it was all downhill for West Indies thereafter.All Tied Up: In the space of less than three overs, Misbah had transformed certain defeat into likely victory at Kingsmead. With Sreesanth conceding 11 from the first four balls of the final over, Pakistan needed just one from two. But Misbah missed the penultimate delivery, and then miscued the next to cover before haring down the pitch. Yuvraj Singh swooped, threw to Sreesanth, and the World Cup had its first tie. In the bowl-out that followed, both teams were 100 percent – three Indians hit, and all three Pakistanis missed.Almost a Michelle: Mornè Morkel had magnificent figures of 4 for 14 two balls into his final over against a struggling New Zealand side. With Mark Gillespie facing, the first five-for in this format was a distinct possibility. Sure enough, his third delivery to Gillespie was a superb yorker that uprooted the off stump. Unfortunately, Billy Doctrove cut short the celebrations with a no-ball call. History would have to wait.Thrice as nice: Lee’s no stranger to hat-tricks, but the tournament hadn’t seen the best of him until the Bangladesh game. Having seen Shakib Al Hasan caught behind and Mashrafe Mortaza bowled with a lethal off-stump yorker, the Newlands crowd was buzzing as Lee walked back to the top of his run-up. As the noise grew, he ran in and pitched one on a length. Alok Kapali had shuffled across the crease, and the pace of the ball beat his attempted flick to midwicket. The moment the ball thudded into the pad and Lee went up in appeal, you knew there would only be one outcome.Maximum Man: By the time the fifth six of the over landed in the crowd at midwicket, Stuart Broad had a glazed look in his eyes, a bit like Ernie Terrell after Mohammad Ali had punched him into a stupor while asking; “What’s my name, uncle Tom, what’s my name?” The similarity ended there. Ali never administered the knockout punch in that fight, but Yuvraj did, leaning back and hitting the final delivery with pristine power over wide mid-on for another mammoth six. Sobers, Shastri and Gibbs had been there before him, but no one had ever done it against a Test-playing nation.Can’t catch, can bowl: No matter how big a total you’re defending, the last thing you want to do as a fielding side is give Sanath Jayasuriya a reprieve. But that was exactly what Sohail Tanvir did in Mohammad Asif’s opening over at the Wanderers, fluffing a simple chance at short fine leg. A weaker individual would have slunk away and searched for a corner to hide, but when Shoaib Malik tossed him the ball a minute later, Tanvir produced the perfect riposte. A yorker on off stump, a wild flail from Jayasuriya, and the stumps in a mess.Brendan the giant-killer: Zimbabwe had exceeded all expectations against Australia, getting to the final over with only 12 needed for victory. Nathan Bracken was the bowler though, one of the stars of Australian successes at the Champions Trophy and World Cup and a man with some canny variations. But Taylor had a trick up his bright-red sleeve too, and when Bracken delivered a low full toss outside off stump, Taylor adjusted his body, stuck the bat out and somehow deflected the ball past the man at short fine leg. Four balls later, four leg-byes clinched one of the great upsets in the game’s history.Fire and ice: Bangladesh had careered out of the blocks against South Africa, slamming their first 38 runs in boundaries. Aftab Ahmed was the chief instigator of the mayhem, clouting 32 from the first 12 balls he faced. When Mornè Morkel was given the ball, Aftab’s response was dismissive, a whiplash cover-drive that sped to the rope at Concorde speed. Morkel’s response was chilling, a fairly full delivery timed at 146.9 km/hr. Aftab swung and missed, and the off stump was given a long kiss goodnight.

Cricinfo picks out the best performances from the county circuit during June

Andrew McGlashan02-Jul-2008

Team of the month – Middlesex
Crisis, what crisis? At the end of May the frustrated Middlesex members signed a petition calling for a Special General Meeting to discuss the team’s poor form. The only problem is Middlesex have since gone on one of their best winning streaks in recent years. Two Championship wins, an FP Trophy victory and five straight Twenty20 success made it an eight-match unbeaten run. A couple of hiccups followed, but they are safely into the Twenty20 quarter-finals as group winners. Their Twenty20 form was especially surprising, considering their miserable record in previous seasons. The stand-out feature has been their bowling attack, especially the unheralded Dirk Nannes from Victoria who collected a hat-trick against Essex and the ageless Shaun Udal who is enjoying an Indian summer to his career.Innings of the month – Graham Napier, 152 out, v Sussex
This was looking like a tough category to judge – until a Tuesday evening in Chelmsford. Graham Napier told his coach, Paul Grayson, that he’d felt pretty good in the nets and how about a chance at No.3. After some discussion he was moved up the order, and proceeded to blast an English Twenty20 record 152 off 58 balls. His innings included a world record 16 sixes, beating Brendon McCullum’s record from the IPL, and it made him the talk of Chelmsford. Napier’s career hasn’t developed since he was part of England’s Under-19 World Cup winning side in 1998, but given all the money now being thrown at Twenty20 it’s a good time to show you can hit a long ball.Judgement of the month – Gareth Breese
There were a fair few last-ball finishes during the qualifying stages, but none quite in the fashion of Durham’s tie against Yorkshire at Headingley. Needing eight off two balls, Ben Harmison crunched the penultimate ball down the ground and was desperate to come back for as second. However, Breese said no, leaving Durham with seven to win off one ball…or six to tie. Breese clearly had more confidence in his ability to clear the ropes than Harmison’s, and duly backed up that belief with deeds as he launched Tim Bresnan for six and secured Durham a point, which ultimately helped them top the groupBatsman of the month – Anthony McGrath
Yorkshire are keen to give Darren Gough the send-off he deserves with some silverware in the final year and are still in the race for two one-day finals. Their position in the Twenty20 is down to an impressive team effort from a side Gough has galvanised, but you still need a stand-out performer or two. That man with the bat has been McGrath, once and England international, who finished the group stage as the leading run-scorer with 392 runs at 56, more than 200 ahead of the next highest Jacques Rudolph.Bowler of the month – Ian Salisbury
It isn’t unfair to say that there have been times during his career, especially at international level, when Salisbury has struggled to land the ball. Last season, with injuries taking their toll, it appeared his professional days were numbered. But like Udal, another long-serving spinner who has found a new lease of life, Salisbury’s move to Warwickshire has worked wonders. He finished the Twenty20 as the most economical bowler, conceding just 5.03 per over, and capped the group stage with 3 for 14. He will be key figure in the quarter-finals.Youngster of the month – Dawid Malan
There must be something in water around NW8, because Middlesex keep churning out left-handers as thought they are going out of fashion. They can field a top five of southpaws with Billy Godleman and Eoin Morgan already showing they have bright futures and now there’s another name to throw in. Dawid Malan, 20, was handed his chance during the Twenty20 and responded with 197 runs at 49 and a strike rate of 124 and ended as Middlesex’s second-highest scorer behind Morgan. He carried his form into the Championship with a maiden century against Northamptonshire.

How thin is the line between victory and loss in an ODI game? It’s the line that separated Ishant Sharma and Thilina Kandamby on Saturday at the R Premadasa Stadium

Sriram Veera in Colombo01-Feb-2009

How thin is the line between victory and loss in an ODI game? It’s the line that separated Ishant Sharma and Thilina Kandamby on Saturday at the R Premadasa Stadium.Kandamby ultimately finished on the wrong end of the line, but his superb unbeaten 93 is a huge boost for the struggling Sri Lankan middle order. If he continues to bat the way he did today, the pressure will lift from Mahela Jayawardene’s shoulders and the captain can then ease himself back into form rather than fret over what his lack of runs is doing to the team. And when the classy Jayawardene eventually reaches there – there were enough glimpses in his 52 that his journey back to form had begun – the likes of Sanath Jayasuriya and Kumar Sangakkara can play with more freedom, knowing that the innings won’t collapse after them.Chamara Kapugedera’s barren run with the bat remains a problem though – he averages a mere 22.30 from 56 games – but Kandamby’s presence has significantly eased the worry. Like Kapugedera, Kandamby has been struggling to make the transition to international cricket. A talented schoolboy cricketer, he was at the risk of being labelled as a boy who could never grow. His march to maturity could not have come at a better time for Sri Lanka, and Jayawardene was an understandably happy man at the end of the day.”Today he [Kandamby] showed he has the maturity in him. He did not panic and showed lot of courage in the middle,” Jayawardene said. “It was an amazing knock from him. I should have waited for a bit longer before I started trying something. It got a bit too much for Kanda in the end; if we had another batsman left in the end we could have probably done it.”Kandamby had scored only a solitary fifty in ODIs prior to this game and he walked into a pressure-cooker situation today. The top three departed early and he and Jayawardene had no choice but to consolidate, even as 88 balls flew by without a boundary.Kandamby has a backlift identical to Sangakkara’s, and he showed similar composure today. He was dropped early, a tough chance off Ishant Sharma, and dug in after that, making good use of the fact that Mahendra Singh Dhoni used irregular bowlers in the middle overs.”After Mahela left, I was trying to tell the others to try and hit a boundary; with the tail in the end I was just telling them to give me the strike, and I will try to do something,” Kandamby said. He nearly did, showing immense maturity in waiting for the batting Powerplay, which Sri Lanka took in the 42nd over. He unfurled three fours in four balls – a pull, a deft late glide and a biff over mid-off – and threatened to hunt down India. He picked 45 from the last 38 deliveries he faced, but ran out of steam and partners at the end.Kapugedera played a fine hand too, but his lack of consistency might force Sri Lanka to send Tillakaratne Dilshan, their main attacking weapon after Jayasuriya, back down the order to make better use of the middle and end overs.Sri Lanka haven’t sorted out all their problems, but their display today indicated they are ready to step it up a notch to match India. Asked whether he has begun to feel at home in international cricket, Kandamby said, “If I score more runs, then I will”. He is already getting there, and the line separating the two teams is getting thinner. Which is perfect for this series.

A fan enjoys Raina’s assault, and relishes the face-off between Warne and Dhoni, but is disappointed not to witness a close finish

John van der Westhuizen01-May-2009Team supported
I have supported the Deccan Chargers since the IPL started. I felt with Herschelle Gibbs, Adam Gilchrist, Andrew Symonds and Shahid Afridi in their ranks, anything under 400 was gettable! I was proven very, very wrong, and was ridiculed for 12 months. This year things are very different and despite today’s loss, I still fancy Deccan to lift the trophy.Key performer
Suresh Raina – After Chennai stuttered early on, Raina set about assuredly dismantling the Rajasthan attack. His 98 off 55 balls proved to be the backbone of the innings, and he also weighed in with a wicket and two catches, including one to finish the match. A welcome return to last year’s IPL form.One thing I’d have changed about the match
More fruitful innings, particularly from Yusuf Pathan and Graeme Smith, would have gone a long way to satisfying the Rajasthan-supporting crowd.Key face-off
For me it was Shane Warne v MS Dhoni – not just Warne bowling to Dhoni but skipper v skipper. Dhoni as last year’s losing captain in the final will have wanted revenge. Incidentally, Chennai also lost both league games against the Royals last year .Two great cricketers, two great cricketing brains. It was always going to be interesting. In the end, and not for the first time in the tournament, Rajasthan’s batting let them down badly, and this time Pathan could not save them.Star-spotting
The big screen offered a minimal amount of celeb face-time, but the glitterati were definitely out and about. The usual array of Bollywood stars and their entourages were to be seen, and a number of Titans players, past and present, turned up at their old hunting ground. Most notable of these was the former tearaway Proteas quick, Rudi Bryson, who was in great spirits and mingled with a few fans in between the two fixtures.Wow moment
The local crowd would have realised a tough game for Rajasthan was in the pipeline when Smith chased a wide one and was caught early on. Another big moment was Pathan rattling Matthew Hayden’s stumps with the first ball of the second over. Turned out it wasn’t big enough to take the wind out of Chennai’s sails though.Cheerleader factor
Both sets of cheerleaders were very easy on the eye, enjoyed their teams’ successes with passion, and were difficult to separate in terms of the overall product they offered. In the end Rajasthan get the nod, based on ever-encroaching hemlines. Also known in cheerleading competitions as “The TKO”.Crowd meter
Supersport Park is considered by many South Africans as the top ground for “cheap-seat spectators”. As always, the atmosphere was great, good play was applauded from all sides, and a lot of fun was had. It was a Rajasthan-biased crowd, though Albie Morkel turning out for the Chennai gold. The organisers will have been very happy with the large turnout.Entertainment
With the usual chart-topping commercial – and at times also Indian – music, the crowd were kept going during breaks. Pockets of students who had adopted one side or the other regularly broke out into war cries that can only be described as beer-fuelled and thoroughly entertaining. The young lady chosen for a potential career in Bollywood in the ongoing IPL reality competition can only be described as gorgeous. Despite my lack of information on other chosen participants, she will have to be among the bookies’ early favourite to win, unless the judges are blind.Banner of the Day
“Get umbrellas out, weather forecast predicts Raina”Marks out of 10
I would rate it 7.5, with points being deducted for lack of a close finish, underperformance from local favourite Smith, and the fact that Morkel only faced one ball in the Chennai innings – though in trademark fashion he did club it for four.

The deficiency in the pace stocks, especially after the injuries to Andrew Flintoff and Jacob Oram, has hurt Chennai’s campaign severely

Cricinfo staff25-Mar-2010During the IPL auction this year, Chennai Super Kings wanted to buy a fast bowler but failed to pursue their targets with the single-minded determination necessary to land a big catch. After losing allrounder Kieron Pollard to Mumbai Indians during the silent tiebreaker, Chennai bid aggressively for Shane Bond but dropped out of the race once the price passed $600,000. They then pursued the West Indian quick Kemar Roach, bidding higher than they had for Bond, but let Deccan Chargers have him for $720,000. They did not chase Wayne Parnell.The deficiency in the fast-bowling stocks as a result of those failed bids, especially after the injuries to Andrew Flintoff and Jacob Oram, has hurt Chennai’s campaign severely. The franchise reportedly rated the best in the IPL in terms of brand value doesn’t possess one of game’s best match-winners – a genuine fast bowler.Today, Chennai’s attack was led by Albie Morkel. Bangalore’s Dale Steyn spearheads the bowling for South Africa, Kolkata’s Bond opens for New Zealand, Mumbai’s Zaheer Khan leads India’s attack, Delhi’s Dirk Nannes and Rajasthan’s Shaun Tait do the job for Australia, and Deccan’s Chaminda Vaas was Sri Lanka’s new-ball expert for years. Morkel, the tall South African, is usually first or second change for his national side.Morkel has failed to make much of an impact with only four wickets in six matches. He’s been given the new ball but has often finished a first spell without denting the opposition’s batting order. His control has been good but that amounts to little without wickets, especially when there’s not much firepower to come. It would be unfair to pin it on Morkel, though, for he isn’t a natural strike bowler. Circumstances have made Chennai give him that responsibility.Most of the other franchises have a support cast of international quality fast bowlers as well. Mumbai, for example, had Lasith Malinga, Dwayne Bravo, Pollard and Ryan McLaren. Chennai possess the gentle medium-pace of L Balaji and Joginder Sharma, both easy prey for batsmen intent on attack. They have Makhaya Ntini on the bench but his form in recent months has been poor and he hasn’t got a game yet. There are no other reserves.The Indian bowlers sharing the new ball with Morkel are Balaji, Sudeep Tyagi and Manpreet Gony. Balaji has the ability to produce variations that can take batsmen by surprise but his accuracy is poor. Tyagi is still raw and, despite an encouraging performance in Bangalore, is a work in progress. Despite spending time in the Indian dressing room over the last six months, Tyagi hasn’t put those lessons into practice in the middle. Gony blows hot and cold.MS Dhoni acknowledged bowling was an area of concern, with the tournament approaching the halfway stage and Chennai having lost four out of six games. “We are lacking confidence in the bowling department,” Dhoni said after the defeat to Mumbai.But he did not agree that a tearaway quick would solve his team’s problems. “It is not just about pace. Because if that was the case, Shaun Tait would’ve been doing really well and Chaminda Vaas wouldn’t have been taking wickets.” Fair point, but he would love to have the option of a Tait to try and rattle the opposition openers.

What are the things that set the great man apart from mere mortals? The ability to read the game acutely, pick the ball early, dedication, discipline and more

As told to Nagraj Gollapudi14-Nov-2009The first time Virender Sehwag met Sachin Tendulkar was in March 2001, at a practice session ahead of the first ODI of the home series against Australia. For Sehwag, Tendulkar was the man who had inspired him to skip exams in school and allowed him to dream of cricket as a career. Sehwag was shy then, and didn’t speak to his hero. He got 58 off 51 balls and picked up three wickets. Tendulkar later walked up to him and said, “You’ve got talent. Continue playing the same way and I’m sure you will make your name.” That ability to motivate youngsters is one of the traits, Sehwag says, that makes Tendulkar special. Here he tells Cricinfo about 10 things that make Tendulkar stand out.Master and pupil: Sehwag credits Tendulkar with teaching him how to compile big hundreds•AFPDiscipline

He never comes late to any practice session, never comes late to the team bus, never comes late to any meeting – he is always five minutes ahead of time. If you are disciplined, it shows you are organised. And then he is ready for anything on the cricket field.Mental strength
I’ve learned a lot of things from him as far as mental strength goes – on how to tacke a situation, how to tackle a ball or bowler. If you are not tough mentally, you can’t score the number of runs and centuries he has in the last two decades. He is a very good self-motivator.He always said to me: whatever the situation or whichever the bowler you face, always believe in yourself. There was this occasion in South Africa, early in my career, when I was not scoring runs fluently, so he suggested I try a few mental techniques that had worked for him. One of the things he said was: Always tell yourself you are better than others. You have some talent and that is why you are playing for India, so believe in yourself.Picking the ball early
He can pick the ball earlier than other batsmen and that is a mark of a great batsman. He is virtually ready for the ball before it is bowled. Only great players can have two shots for one ball, like Tendulkar does, and a big reason is that he picks the ball very early.Soft hands
I’ve never seen him play strokes with hard hands. He always tries to play with soft hands, always tries to meet the ball with the centre of the bat. That is timing. I have never been able to play consistently with soft hands.Planning
One reason he can convert his fifties into hundreds is planning: which bowler he should go after, which bowler he should respect, in which situation he should play aggressively, in which situation he should defend. It is because he has spent hours thinking about all of it, planning what to do. He knows what a bowler will do in different situations and he is ready for it.In my debut Test he scored 155 and he knew exactly what to do every ball. We had already lost four wickets (68 for 4) when I walked in, and he warned me about the short ball. He told me that the South African fast bowlers would bowl short-of-length balls regularly, but he knew how to counter that. If they bowled short of a length, he cut them over slips; when they bowled outside off stump, he cut them; and when they tried to bowl short into his body, he pulled with ease. Luckily his advice had its effect on me, and I made my maiden hundred!Adaptability
This is one area where he is really fast. And that is because he is such a good reader of the game. After playing just one or two overs he can tell you how the pitch will behave, what kind of bounce it has, which length is a good one for the batsman, what shots to play and what not to.A good example was in the Centurion ODI of the 2006-07 series. India were batting first. Shaun Pollock bowled the first over and fired in a few short-of-length balls, against which I tried to play the back-foot punch. Tendulkar cautioned me immediately and said that shot was not a good option. A couple of overs later I went for it again and was caught behind, against Pollock.Making bowlers bowl to his strengths
He will leave a lot of balls and give the bowler a false sense of security, but the moment it is pitched up to the stumps or closer to them, Tendulkar will easily score runs.If the bowler is bowling outside off stump Tendulkar can disturb his line by going across outside off stump and playing to midwicket. He puts doubts in the bowler’s mind, so that he begins to wonder if he has bowled the wrong line and tries to bowl a little outside off stump – which Tendulkar can comfortably play through covers.

Only great players can have two shots for one ball, like Tendulkar does, and a big reason is that he picks the ball very early

In Sydney in 2004, in the first innings he didn’t play a single cover drive, and remained undefeated on 241. He decided to play the straight drive and flicks, so he made the bowlers pitch to his strengths. It is not easy. In the Test before that, in Melbourne, he had got out trying to flick. After that when we had a chat he said he was getting out playing the cover drive and the next game he would avoid the cover drive. I thought he was joking because nobody cannot not play the cover drive – doesn’t matter if you are connecting or not. I realised he was serious in Sydney when he was on about 180-odd and he had missed plenty of opportunities to play a cover drive. I was stunned.Ability to bat in different gears
This is one aspect of batting I have always discussed with Tendulkar: how he controls his game; the way he can change gears after scoring a half-century. Suddenly he scores 10-12 runs an over, or maybe a quick 30 runs in five overs, and then again slows down and paces his innings.He has maintained that it all depends on the team’s position. If you are in a good position you tend to play faster. He also pointed out that the batsman must always think about what can happen if he gets out and the consequences for the team. The best example is the knock of 175. I was confident he would pull it off for India and he almost did.Building on an innings
I learned from Tendulkar how to get big hundreds. He told me early on that once you get a hundred you are satisfied for yourself. But it is also the best time to convert that into a bigger score for the team because then the team will be in a good position.If you look at my centuries they have always been big. A good instance of this was in Multan in 2004, when he told me I had given away a good position in Melbourne (195) the previous year and the team lost, and I needed to keep that in mind against Pakistan. In Multan, in the first hundred of the triple century I had hit a few sixes. He walked up to me after I reached the century and said he would slap me if I hit any further sixes. I said why. He said that if I tried hitting a six and got out the team would lose the control over the game, and I needed to bat through the day. So I didn’t hit a single six till I reached 295. By then India were 500-plus and I told him I was going to hit a six!Dedication
This is the most important aspect of his success. In his life cricket comes first. When he is on tour he is thinking about nothing but cricket, and when he is not on tour he dedicates quality time to his family. That shows his dedication to the game and to his family. He has found the right balance.

Video footage is well and good, but there are also plenty of clues for bowlers to pick up from their opponents’ grips, back-lifts and stances

Aakash Chopra12-Aug-2010What if a bowler could read a batsman’s mind – predict how a batsman would play before bowling a ball to him or having watched him play? Wouldn’t it bolster his chances, give him leeway to plan, and buttress his skill?Some may call it wishful thinking, others a secret science, but often just looking at the grip with which a batsman holds his bat tells you something about his preferences in terms of shots, and the way he stands may help you place your fielders.Will a batsman be a good driver of the ball or more comfortable scoring off the back foot? Will he prefer scoring runs through the on side or the off? It’s important to observe the finer nuances of a batsman’s grip, stance and back-lift to size him up and plan accordingly. While it may seem utterly useless in this day and age of exhaustive analysis based on video footage, which is available to almost all professional teams, observation was one of the tools players relied heavily on in the past, and it continues to be useful.The grip
Most batsmen playing professional cricket hold the bat correctly with regard to the Vs made by thumbs and forefingers. The top hand is firmer and the V its thumb and forefinger makes opens out towards the outer edge of the bat, while the bottom hand plays only a supporting role.A correct grip allows a proper downswing, which in turn enables a batsman to play the ball with the full face of the bat. The right grip is also imperative if you want to play the entire range of shots.While the basics remain the same, lots of batsmen do enough with the grip to give some information away. For instance, Sanath Jayasuriya holds the bat close to the bottom of the handle, and Adam Gilchrist higher up. Now the coaching manual recommends that one holds the bat in the middle of the handle, but to say that successful players like these two don’t hold the bat correctly would be grossly incorrect. While there are pros and cons to each approach, it all boils down to what suits your game best.Holding the bat closer to the bottom gives you more control and helps you generate more power at the point of impact. In such cases, since the bottom hand becomes dominant very often, you don’t need a high back-lift to hit the ball long and hard. That’s why Jayasuriya is ever so good with his short-arm jabs. Such players generally are more comfortable on the back foot, and horizontal bat shots are their bread and butter. The flip side of holding the bat close to the base of the handle is that the arc of the downswing gets radically smaller, which in turn reduces the reach and makes driving off the front foot that much difficult. But some players are exceptions to this rule. Sachin Tendulkar holds the bat close to the bottom of the handle but has managed to overcome the shortcomings with ease.On the contrary, Gilchrist’s batting is built on the extension of the arms, and holding the bat high on the handle complements the extension. With this grip, the arc of the downswing becomes bigger, and hence increases the reach of the batsman. Lower-order batsmen tend to prefer this grip to enhance their reach. That’s how the phrase “using the long handle” was coined. The flip side of such a grip is that you may not have enough control and you have to rely on the downswing to generate power. Players with such grips prefer playing on the front foot and can also be a little circumspect against quick short-pitched bowling. Gilchrist, like Tendulkar, is an exception here.Then there were those like Javed Miandad, who had a gap between the top and bottom hands. The textbook recommends keeping the hands close to each other on the handle, to ensure that they move in unison. Yet Miandad’s grip allowed him to manoeuvre the bowling and milk it for singles, though he possibly sacrificed some fluency in the bargain.The stance
If the grip on the bat is the first giveaway, the manner in which a batsman stands is the second. While the coaching manual recommends the feet be about a shoulder span apart, lots of batsmen have toyed with different options to suit their game.People who stand with their feet too close to each other are often good back-foot players and the ones with wider stances are generally stronger on the front foot. Here, too, there are snags: you lose some balance if both feet are too close, and too wide apart results in lack of foot movement.A stance that’s too side-on or too open-chested also tells you a bit about the strengths and weaknesses of a batsman. While you’d be suspect against inswingers if your stance is too side-on, you’d struggle against away-going deliveries if it is too open. Sachin Tendulkar’s is the closest to what would be a perfect stance – though even he tended to lean too much towards the off side when he started.

The textbook recommends keeping the hands close to each other on the handle, to ensure that they move in unison. Yet Miandad’s grip, with hands apart, allowed him to manoeuvre the bowling and milk it for singles

Even the way you take guard can give the bowler a pointer or two. Generally players who ask for a leg-stump guard are good on the off side, for they try to make room by staying beside the line. And the ones who ask for middle stump are good on the leg side, for their endeavour is to whip it through the leg side. It’s not a hard-and-fast rule but any information is better than none at all.If a batsman is falling over, with his head not in line with his toes – which is the case with a lot of batsmen – he will predominantly be an on-side player, but would still be susceptible to sharp, incoming deliveries. Also, the intended ground shots on the leg side will probably travel in the air for a while, and hence positioning a fielder at short midwicket comes in handy. Such a batsman would also be unsure of his off stump and hence might play balls that are meant to be left alone.The back-lift
The last clues before the ball is finally bowled come from the height of the back-lift and its arc. Ideally the bat should come down from somewhere between the off stump and first slip, to ensure that the bat moves straight in the downswing.Players who bring the bat in from wider than second slip, like Rahul Dravid, need to make a loop at the top of the downswing, or else they will find it difficult to negotiate sharp incoming deliveries. Should they fail to make that loop, the bat won’t come down straight, which means meeting the ball at an angle instead of straight on.Batsmen with higher back-lifts find it difficult to deal with changes of pace, because with higher back-lifts it’s tougher to pull out of a shot after committing. Also, there’s always a possibility they will be late in bringing the bat down to keep yorkers out. Ergo, yorkers and slower ones might just do the trick.Since players with short back-lifts, like Paul Collingwood and Andrew Symonds, don’t have a reasonable downswing, they rely on the pace of the ball to generate power for their shots. They tend to struggle if the ball has no pace on it, so taking the pace off isn’t a bad move against them. On the contrary, short back-lifts are almost ideal to keep yorkers out with.If anyone has to think on his feet in cricket, it is the bowler. For it is he who initiates the action and everyone else reacts to what he delivers. Yet, these days he’s the game’s underdog, constantly at risk of being on the receiving end, and bound to follow a plan to render himself effective. Since video data isn’t available to teams before they reach a certain level, most bowlers rely on observing the finer nuances of their opponents in order to strategise.