A fighting 76 by C Sachdev could not prevent Tripura from going downto a 35-run defeat to Assam in the East Zone Ranji Trophy one daymatch at the Calcutta Cricket and Football ground on Saturday.Put in to bat, Assam were restricted to 216 for nine in 50 overs. Theywere given a good start by openers PJ Das (33) and SB Saikia (38) whoput on 60 runs off 13 overs. Thereafter, they lost wickets at regularintervals until S Ghosh (26) and Sukhbinder Singh (41) added 58 runsfor the seventh wicket off 9.5 overs. Sukhbinder, who came in at No 8,top scored with a breezy 41 off 38 balls with two fours and two sixes.Tripura were never really in the hunt after a poor start (32 forthree) and it was only Sachdev’s defiance that saw them get 181 beforethey were all out in 47.1 overs. Sachdev, who came in at the fall ofthe third wicket in the 13th over, was eighth out at 171 in the 46thover. Sachdev faced 98 balls and hit six fours and three sixes.
Former Premier League Golden Boot winner Kevin Phillips believes that Leeds United colossus Kalvin Phillips could be temped by a move to Aston Villa in the summer transfer window.
The Lowdown: Phillips on the move?
The 26-year-old has been one of the poster boys of the modern era at Elland Road, blossoming into arguably one of the best midfielders in the Premier League.
Given Phillips’ current stature in the game – he is England’s reigning Player of the Year – it could be that he looks for a new challenge at the end of the season.
He has been linked with a move away from his boyhood club already, and former Sunderland striker Phillips believes that the Leeds midfielder could be enticed away from Elland Road by Steven Gerrard and co.
[freshpress-quiz id=“383507″]
The Latest: Phillips could be tempted by Villa
Speaking to Football Insider, the 48-year-old claimed that he could see a move to Villa materialising for Leeds’ Phillips this summer, saying:
“He’s very capable of playing for those big six clubs, there’s no doubt about it. He’s a superb player but he’s struggled with injury this season – which could be a concern for any interested club.
“I think when he’s fully fit, he could slot into any of those top sides, and Leeds United are going to have a real battle on their hands to keep him around.
“The only saving grace is that he loves the club, and you’d think that he would want to help them stay in the Premier League. I think there’ll be bids flying in for him. There’s no surprise that Villa with Steven Gerrard are in for him.
“It could be a very tempting move for him. He’d be playing under one of the Premier League’s best midfielders.”
[web_stories_embed url=”https://www.footballtransfertavern.com/web-stories/latest-leeds-united-news-37/” title=”Latest Leeds United news!” poster=”” width=”360″ height=”600″ align=”none”]
The Verdict: Leeds must stay up to keep Phillips
For Leeds to have any realistic chance of keeping hold of Phillips beyond this season, they simply have to retain their Premier League status between now and May.
For all of his admirable loyalty to Leeds, he surely wouldn’t accept playing Championship football again, considering that he is arguably good enough to be playing for a Champions League club given reported interest from the likes of Liverpool.
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
Should the Whites preserve their top-flight status, the possibility of Phillips staying put certainly shouldn’t be ruled out, but it would be hard to begrudge him a transfer elsewhere as he may look to kick on in his career.
In other news, Phil Hay has provided an injury update on one Leeds player. Find out who it is here.
Venkatesh Prasad, the former India new-ball bowler who is currently the team’s bowling coach, has revealed his chat with Dennis Lillee, the former Australian fast bowler, played a part in India’s historic win in Perth.Prasad, who had worked under Lillee at the MRF Pace Foundation in Chennai, met him on the morning of the second day of the Test in Perth and learnt how his bowlers could utilise the conditions.”I was under him at the MRF Pace Foundation,” Prasad said. “He’s a fantastic person and has a great knowledge of fast bowling. He told me how to use the breeze. He said that was the best thing to do here.”Prasad in turn passed on the advice to the Indian medium-pacers, who played a big part in Australia’s first defeat in Perth since 1997. “It depends on the line each bowler is bowling,” he said on the plan to use the Fremantle Doctor, the breeze at the WACA. “If you feel the breeze is blowing across and it’s coming back a long way you need to bowl on the fifth or the sixth stump to get it to come back towards the off and middle stump. You need to gauge that out in the middle.”I’ve always been saying our bowlers are the best in the business. Almost all can swing it at a good pace. All have a great wrist and seam position at the time of delivery. With the breeze here it helped them more. They’re usually bowling at 135-140 [kph] and swing it at a good pace. They trouble any batsman with their pace – not express but quick.”Prasad, who toured Australia in 1999-2000, was happy his bowlers had stuck to their plans for each batsman. “The venue doesn’t really bother us,” he said. “For some batsmen it’s about bowling full when they come in. For others it’s about bowling outside off. I’ve seen a lot of batsmen not being comfortable against swing bowling and our bowlers have shown they can produce that anywhere in the world. They did it in England and did it here. We’ve done it in Bangladesh and India as well.”The fact that a number of young Indian fast bowlers have managed to make an instant impact on the international circuit heartened Prasad. “The biggest difference between domestic and international cricket is in the mind. A good ball in domestic is a good ball here. But it’s about adaptability, planning and execution. In India you play on pitches that aren’t so encouraging to fast bowlers. A bowlers job is really hard and they don’t get as much credit as the batsmen do in India. Considering the wickets we bowl on, they deserve a lot of credit.”
England’s prospects of staging a surprise turnaround from CB Series passengers to finalists have improved with Michael Vaughan expected to open against New Zealand at the Gabba on Tuesday.Vaughan has missed five matches since tearing a hamstring in Hobart, but he batted twice in the nets in the team’s final training session for the knock-out contest in Brisbane. “He seemed fine in practice and I’m sure he will be fine,” Andrew Strauss, the No. 4, said.England were due to finalise their team at a meeting on Monday night with Vaughan due to come in for Mal Loye and Paul Collingwood to return after missing the 92-run win over Australia on Friday with an illness.While New Zealand have concerns over Kyle Mills, John Bracewell, the coach, was “delighted” Shane Bond would be fit to face England after taking part in the five-wicket loss to Australia in Melbourne on Sunday. New Zealand had been avoiding using Bond in consecutive games due to his recovery from a back injury, but Bracewell felt it was time to “up the ante”. “He wanted to push it a bit by playing back-to-back,” Bracewell said, “and he’s really pleased with the way he’s come through.”England were so bad over the first three-quarters of the tournament that they were planning to fly out on Wednesday – they still might – but their success on Friday ended New Zealand’s easy run into the best-of-three finals, which start in Melbourne on Friday. “The times we got 120 and 110 were depressing for us, but that win was much overdue and made a massive difference,” Strauss said. “There’s a buoyancy about the guys and we’re all really excited about the prospect of winning this game.”While England do not have a workout after this tournament until the warm-up stage of the World Cup, New Zealand have the fallback of the Chappell-Hadlee Series against Australia if they are knocked out on Tuesday. “[A loss] would hurt in the short term, but in the big-picture context, with three games to go against Australia regardless of the outcome of this, we are going to get sufficient cricket leading up to the World Cup,” Bracewell said. “In terms of continued momentum, riding that wave, those little edges are important. We’d be disappointed to lose.”
ScorecardMatch packageBulletin – Yuvraj and Dhoni clinch the win Ind view – Chasing perfection Pak view – The thin red line On the Ball – Conquering the conditions Stats – Razzaq’s double and Yousuf’s struggle Quotes – ‘Special’ Tendulkar a treat to watch, says Dravid Quotes – ‘Dhoni’s innings was the turning point’ – Inzamam News – Sami to join Pakistan squad Gallery – India canter to five-wicket win Match previewPreview – Pakistan dented by Shoaib’s absence News – Sehwag and Harbhajan to return home Javagal Srinath – Sreesanth passes with flying colours News – Three injured in crowd stampede
Pakistan’s coach Bob Woolmer has been reported under the ICC Code of Conduct for comments made about the umpiring during Pakistan’s recent tour of Australia. He told an Australian newspaper that the close decisions ‘went 29-5 against us’.Woolmer also alleged that five close calls against Pakistan in the first match of the one-day VB Series finals, and added that a declined appeal against Adam Gilchrist in the first over of the second final was “plumb”. Woolmer concluded: “Quite frankly, Australia were the better side against us this summer, but some of these decisions made a huge difference. You are talking about decisions which players’ careers rested on.”But Woolmer’s outspoken comments did not go down well at the ICC, whose high-performance manager he used to be. Malcolm Speed, the chief executive, has exercised his right to cite Woolmer under Level 2.4 of the ICC Code, which deals with “public criticism of, or inappropriate comment on a match-related incident or match official”.The hearing will be dealt with by the Pakistan Cricket Board as soon as is reasonably practicable. All Level 2 breaches carry a minimum penalty of 50% of the player or official’s match fee, and a maximum penalty of their full match fee and/or a ban for one Test or two ODIs. In the case of officials who are not paid a match fee, it is considered to be the same as that of the players. If an official is banned they are not permitted to carry out their duties during the matches in question.
On 12 October 2003 the Western Australian Cricket Association (‘WACA’) lodged a complaint pursuant to Cricket Australia’s Code of Behaviour (‘the Code of Behaviour’) in respect of certain comments allegedly made by Mr Murray Goodwin who is a prominent cricketer having previously had a distinguished international career for Zimbabwe and currently a member of the Western Australian Cricket side.
The charge laid against Mr Goodwin by the WACA was for a breach of Rule 9 of Section 1 of the Code of Behaviour. Rule 9 is in the following form:-“Without limiting any other Rule, players and officials must not make public or media comment which is detrimental to the interests of the game.”
The guidelines which form part of the Code of Behaviour indicate that players and officials will breach this Rule if by making any public or media comment they:- “
Publicly denigrate another player or publicly denigrate or criticise an …. official …. or team against which they have played or will play, whether in relation to incidents which occurred in the match or otherwise ….
Denigrate another player or official by inappropriately commenting on any aspect of his or her performance, abilities or characteristics …. “
Subsequent to the laying of the charge, the WACA gave detailed particulars of the charge. It is unnecessary to refer to the detailed particulars of the charge. It is sufficient to summarise the charge against Mr Goodwin in this fashion. During a series of interviews on 7 and 8 October 2003 to various media sources, Mr Goodwin made comments which suggested that players were chosen for the Zimbabweian Test Cricket Team otherwise than on pure ability. He suggested that race played a part in such selection.
Following several directions hearings by tele-conference a hearing of the matter was scheduled for Saturday 1 November 2003. On Friday 31st October 2003 I was advised that Mr Goodwin intended to plead guilty to the charge and I was requested, accordingly, only to adjudicate on the question of penalty.
This course of action was one which was agreed by both parties to the matter, namely the WACA and Mr Goodwin who was very ably represented by Mr Ron Birmingham QC.
The parties have asked me to determine the question of penalty, if I regard this course as appropriate, in the light of a signed statement made by Mr Murray Goodwin dated 30 October 2003 and a written submission made on behalf of the WACA dated 31 October 2003. I attach hereto copies of each of those documents.
It is apparent from Mr Goodwin’s Statement that he acknowledges making the comments attributed by the WACA and acknowledges that they constituted a contravention of the Code of Behaviour. That Statement also makes plain, in my mind, Mr Goodwin’s sincere regret for making statements which, on any view of it, were ill-timed, potentially harmful to the interests of cricket and otherwise inappropriate.
Mr Goodwin is, in my view, to be commended for acknowledging his mistake in making the comments and expressing such contrition which I believe is totally genuine.
It is pleasing also that the WACA, which properly made this complaint, has given due weight to Mr Goodwin’s Statement.
In the WACA’s submission, it urges me to take account of Mr Goodwin’s ‘genuine contrition’ and that submission urges me ‘strongly’ to issue no more than a reprimand with respect to Mr Goodwin’s conduct.
It is not, of course, my function to simply rubber stamp an agreement between the parties to a complaint as to the appropriate penalty for a breach of the Code of Behaviour. Such a course would be completely contrary to the letter and spirit of the Code of Behaviour. It is a role of the Commissioner for the Code of Behaviour to determine what is the appropriate penalty for a breach of the Code irrespective of the wishes or views of the parties. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the views of the parties are a significant factor to have regard to in considering an appropriate penalty.
Mr Goodwin’s plea of guilty to the charge relieves me of the obligation of adjudicating upon whether there was, in fact, a breach of the Code of Behaviour. Having said that, I should indicate that, on the materials which I have seen, Mr Goodwin’s decision to plead guilty to the charge was appropriate. That is not to say that I may not have come to a different conclusion upon having heard all the evidence. In particular, however, I note that there is no material before me to suggest, one way or the other, whether the comments made by Mr Goodwin are in fact accurate or reflect the true state of affairs in respect of Zimbabweian selection policies. Further, I expressly make no comment on whether or not, upon a proper construction of the Code of Behaviour, truth would be a defence to a charge under Rule 9 of the Code of Behaviour. It suffices to say that the Code of Behaviour, in my view, contractually binds players who participate in competitions under the auspices of Cricket Australia. Notions of freedom of speech which may otherwise be in vogue pursuant to the common law can, of course, be limited or restricted by the contractual agreement of parties. The Code of Behaviour, in my view, is such a contractual limitation. Cricketers who wish to enjoy the benefits of playing in competitions conducted under the auspices of Cricket Australia must also be prepared to incur the obligations which are imposed by the contractual arrangements to which they agree.
As a result of a number of well publicised incidents in the past 12 months, the Code of Behaviour has been considerably revised to reflect and enhance the Spirit of Cricket. As I understand it, all players playing in elite competitions under the auspices of Cricket Australia have been fully briefed upon the new requirements under the Code of Behaviour. I infer that Mr Goodwin, at the time he made the comments attributed to him, had been the beneficiary of such a briefing.
That is a matter of concern for me because, as I apprehend it, the revised Code of Behaviour is intended to not only sanction a player for a breach of it but also to deter future breaches not only by the player concerned but also by others. Ordinarily, in my view, that may mean that a less sympathetic approach to breaches of the Code of Behaviour should be taken now than has hitherto been the case. In saying this, of course, I am not seeking to prejudge any future breaches of the Code of Behaviour, rather I am seeking to state my impression of the purpose and intention of the revisions to the Code.
Under Section 5 Rule 2 of the Code I am obliged to apply one or more of the following penalties to a breach of Section 9 of Section 1 of the Code of Behaviour:-
Ban the person from participating in any match;
…..
Fine the person an amount that accords with Rule 11 of this Section;
….
Require the person to undergo counselling for a specified time;
Require the person to perform voluntary service to cricket or the community; and/or
Reprimand the person.
Under Section 5 Rule 3 of the Code I am entitled, in considering the appropriate penalty, to take into account any relevant circumstance including the following:-
The seriousness of the breach;
The harm caused by the breach in the interests of cricket;
The person’s seniority and standing in the game;
Remorse shown by the person and the prospects of further breaches;
The prior record of the person in abiding by this Code, the ICC Code of Conduct and any similar Code of Behaviour;
The impact of the penalty on the person.
In considering the appropriate penalty, pursuant to these considerations, I have formed the following views:-The seriousness of the breachI consider the breach to be a moderately serious one. Leaving aside the truth or otherwise of Mr Goodwin’s allegations, the comments were very inappropriately timed (immediately before the commencement of Test Series between Australia and Zimbabwe) and were likely to cause embarrassment to, and place pressure upon, Zimbabweian players and officials at an important time in the development of cricket in that country .
The harm caused by the breach to the interests of cricket Given Mr Goodwin’s contrition and apologetic remarks I consider the harm which could otherwise have been done by his comments has been very substantially alleviated. Nevertheless, I think those comments were harmful to the interests of cricket.The player’s seniority and standing in the game Mr Goodwin is a senior player of high standing in the game. He has played at the highest levels of the game and with distinction not only for Zimbabwe but also in first class cricket in Australia and England. This is a neutral factor in my mind because Mr Goodwin’s standing in the game gave added legitimacy to his allegations but, on the other hand, that consideration is cancelled out by the contribution he has made to the game.The remorse shown by Mr Goodwin and the prospect of further breaches Mr Goodwin has shown considerable and commendable remorse and I do not consider there is the likelihood of any further breaches of the Code by him.Mr Goodwin’s prior record Mr Goodwin has had a long and distinguished international and first class career without any other blemish of the Code of Behaviour or any similar Code of Conduct. This is to his great credit and must be taken into account on the question of penalty.The impact of the penalty on Mr Goodwin I regard this as an irrelevant factor. I consider that any fine I may impose will be within Mr Goodwin’s reasonable means.
Having considered all of the matters listed above and having taken into account the contents and nature of the breach of the Code by Mr Goodwin, in this case I consider that a reprimand is the appropriate penalty.
In this regard, my finding is consistent with the finding I made in a recent matter in respect of Mr Adam Gilchrist and reflects the fact that I consider that Mr Goodwin intended no malice in the comments he made. Further, I do not believe that Mr Goodwin realised the impact and significance of his comments. In respect of each of these matters, I consider that I should give Mr Goodwin the benefit of any doubts I have about them.
Accordingly, pursuant to Section 5 Rule 2 of the Code of Behaviour I reprimand Mr Goodwin in respect of the conduct the subject of the charge. I impose no further sanction.
In conclusion, as will be apparent from these Reasons, I wish to stress that the sanction which I have imposed in this matter should not beregarded by players or officials subject to the control of Cricket Australia as a precedent for future similar conduct. Of considerable significance to me in imposing the present penalty has been the fact that the revised Code of Behaviour has only recently been promulgated and I think that, in this particular case, justifies a more lenient approach than might otherwise be the case at a subsequent time when players are more familiar with the revised Code. Further, the leniency of the sanction in this regard has also been considerably influenced by the compassionate attitude taken by the complainant.ALAN SULLIVAN QC Deputy Senior Commissioner Friday 31 October 2003
The CricInfo panel came up with a different XI to decide who would win thetickets to see India in England this summer.All Time Indian XI – as chosen by the CricInfo panel:-
Sunil Gavaskar
Vijay Merchant
Mohinder Amarnath
Sachin Tendulkar
Gundappa Viswanath
Kapil Dev
Syed Kirmani
Vinoo Mankad
Bishan Bedi
Bhagwat Chandrasekhar
Anil KumbleCricInfo’s Anand Vasu comments “Choosing an all time XI for any team is atask that will inevitably end in discussion about the various omissions and inclusions in the final selection. From the pool available, several people pick themselves – Sunil Gavaskar and Vijay Merchant to open the innings. Sachin Tendulkar for the sheer volumes of runs he has scored. The all-rounder’s slot is an easy one with Kapil Dev being head and shoulders above the competition. Syed Kirmani bags the keeper’s slot and has to stand up to the legendary spin combo of Chandra and Bedi. Anil Kumble will back the spinners up with the versatile Vinoo Mankad completing the attack. The two slots for middle order batsmen however are trickier than most and Amarnath and Viswanath pip thecompetition at the post. Amarnath for his ability to play fast bowlingalmost better than anyone else and Vishy for his ability to turn any gamearound at number five.Vasu continues “Interestingly, the choices made by the audience in the UKseem quite different from CricInfo’s All Time Indian XI. As is often thecase in surveys of this kind, fans tend to favour players they have watchedin recent times. For that reason the cavalier Srikkanth finds a space as does the dour Dravid. Dilip Vengsarkar edges out Amarnath while Srinath comes in ahead of Mankad. Another point worth mulling over is the appearance of five cricketers from the state of Karnataka in the final XI!”Of the CricInfo users who chose their XI, the following winners were drawnfrom those who came closest to the CricInfo panel’s selection:
Rajiv Mundayat Ashford
Vikrant Singal London
G B Mehra CardiffEach winner gets a pair of tickets to either India v England at Durham orIndia v Sri Lanka at Bristol, and will receive an email confirmationshortly.
Wellington became the first team to win back-to-back Shell Super Max series at Eden Park’s Outer Oval today when claiming a comfortable eight-wicket win in a disappointing final.Wellington was never pressured at any stage and its bowlers deserve most credit for producing the answers in varying conditions over the two days.Matthew Walker, Paul Hitchcock and Carl Bulfin were especially successful in their control and length which allowed no Auckland batsman to really take to them.Auckland also paid the price for an indifferent second innings. Wellington made the most of its 12-run first innings lead and then embarrassed Auckland by restricting it completely throughout the second innings.Wellington Firebirds captain Matthew Bell used his bowlers with some finesse in the first innings to ensure he had the firepower in the second innings and his bowlers responded.Walker may be one of the bulkier players on the summer scene but it is no hindrance to the commitment he is able to make in finals play. His bowling was outstanding as he took 2-24 from his four overs in the match, and also pulled off a superb catch to remove the hard-hitting Auckland opener Llorne Howell in the first over of the second innings.It was a vital blow. Auckland had no response and when Bulfin slipped into his final two overs with superb control, the die was cast. Roger Twose took a fine catch at fly slip to end Aaron Barnes’ innings.Earlier, Wellington gained a boost when its downwind bowlers James Franklin and Bulfin made life miserable in Auckland’s first innings.Auckland could only managed 99-2, and against the strong Wellington batting line-up that was never going to be enough.Auckland’s bowlers couldn’t reach a similar standard and Wellington was able to take a 12-run lead into the second innings.With 52 the target in eight overs it was going to take a Wellington calamity to deny it the win, and the Capital Firebirds were in no mood to give anything away. The big hits were put away and a sensible accumulation policy took the game to the sixth over before the win was achieved.
According to reports out of Spain, Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp has issued a transfer demand as news emerges on Atletico Madrid star Marcos Llorente.
The Lowdown: Llorente pivotal over 2020/2021…
The 27-year-old was a pivotal player for manager Diego Simeone over 2020/2021 as Atletico sealed the La Liga title in dramatic fashion on the final day.
Llorente was described as one of the ‘revelations’ of their league-clinching campaign with the midfielder notching a mightily impressive 12 goals and 11 assists over his 37 Spanish top flight appearances (Transfermarkt).
Hailed as an ‘incredible’ player and ‘world class’ by Football Talent Scout Jacek Kulig, his impressive displays resulted in call-ups to the Spanish national team.
While he has played a less significant role this season, with Simeone often deploying him as a makeshift right-back, Reds boss Klopp has still been impressed enough by Llorente to issue a transfer demand.
The Latest: Liverpool eye Llorente move…
According to Spanish sources, Liverpool, and by extension owners Fenway Sports Group, have Atletico’s ace ‘on the agenda’ this summer after a personal transfer demand by Klopp.
It is believed the Reds want sign a player who ‘can occupy the most forward role’ and ‘reinforce’ the ‘interiors’ – coming after a ‘personal’ request by their manager.
Llorente, as a result, is Liverpool’s ‘new goal’ for the summer transfer window with his versatility coming as a major attraction.
The Verdict: Make a move…
Once valued at his €120 million (£101m) release clause in March 2021, the ace can be deployed in a variety of roles – defensive midfield, central midfield, attacking midfield, right midfield as a second striker and in the full-back role (Transfermarkt).
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
Llorente put pen to paper on a new deal until 2027 in mid-August last year with it being unclear whether his £101m release clause is still valid.
However, if Liverpool get quoted a reasonable price for the player, he may well come as a shrewd option for Klopp going by his huge performances during Atletico’s title-winning campaign.
In other news: FSG also readying bid to sign ‘top level’ £67m man as opportunity opens for him to join Liverpool, find out more here.