Rahul Dravid’s meticulous, wide-ranging and fascinating speech proved very much the equal of a place that can rightfully be described as hallowed ground

Daniel Brettig14-Dec-2011Had the orator been entirely unmemorable, the 2011 Bradman Oration would still have lived long in the mind’s eye of all those present. The War Memorial in Canberra provided a backdrop that was at once breathtaking and sobering, heavy with the kind of meaning seldom found amid 21st century cricket’s ever more commercial treadmill of fixtures. As it turned out, Rahul Dravid ‘s meticulous, wide-ranging and fascinating speech was perhaps the most significant delivered since the Oration began, and proved very much the equal of a place that can rightfully be described as hallowed ground.The pathos of the Memorial was first apparent as guests walked into the halls commemorating Australia’s military history. Passing through wings devoted to the first and second World Wars, the assembly of Australian cricket’s great and good, plus the entire Indian touring party, arrived to dine in Anzac Hall. Pre-dinner conversations were as much about the venue as the cricket, for it was hard for guests to ignore the sights and sounds all around. The room is dominated by an Avro Lancaster bomber aircraft – those with a restricted view of the stage could take plenty of solace in the uniqueness of the obstruction. They might also have noted that India’s players were dressed resplendently in team blazers, a gesture of respect the team had not managed to accomplish for the most recent edition of the ICC awards.Not long after all had settled in their seats, word was relayed that Dravid’s speech would be delivered earlier in the night than planned, the better to accommodate the jet-lagged bodies of an Indian touring team that had arrived in Canberra at 3am that morning. It was a concession to exactly the sort of crammed and muddled schedule that Dravid would go on to examine in one of the more striking passages of his speech, and a cause for some hurried shuffling of dinner plates in the Memorial kitchen.After a few words of introduction from Cricket Australia’s chairman Wally Edwards, and enjoyable recognition of the men who took part in the 1945 “Victory Tests” in England, Dravid walked to the stand, to deliver what he had confessed to CA would be his first significant speech of any kind. There were a few early nerves, and some self-deprecation to win over the audience, plus the observation that before India and Australia had been cricketing foes they were military allies, under the umbrella of empire.Much as Kumar Sangakkara had done in his famed Cowdrey Lecture at Lord’s earlier this year, Dravid spoke in a way that reflected his character as much as the occasion. There were jokes, but only a handful, echoing the studious nature of the man. More abundant were thoughtful, considered observations, sculpted with care and precision like so many of Dravid’s strokes for India in Test matches over the past 15 years.

Dravid spoke in a way that reflected his character as much as the occasion. There were jokes, but only a handful, echoing the studious nature of the man. More abundant were thoughtful, considered observations, sculpted with care and precision like so many of Dravid’s strokes for India in Test matches over the past 15 years

He did not criticise India for its wealth and power in cricket, preferring to demonstrate how that wealth and its television offshoots had turned the game of princes and well-to-do businessmen into that of the people, whatever their language, background or financial standing. This was artfully demonstrated by an illustration of the diversity now found within the Indian dressing room. He did not swing heedlessly at the ICC, so often an easy target for angry words. Instead he counseled all administrators to look at why crowds had recently fallen even in India, and to ask themselves how the erosion of support for the game would hurt everyone, even if today they can still negotiate a fat broadcast rights contract for matches attended by no-one.The balance of formats was addressed carefully, for the matter is at the same level of complexity that Muttiah Muralitharan once concocted for the world’s batsmen. Test cricket, Dravid declared, had to be protected in the manner of its scheduling, while ODIs should be contested less frequently, and with more care. Twenty20, the game Dravid has most cause to view with suspicion as a batting classicist, has its best place as a contest between domestic teams or clubs. Given their own similarly held views, the heads of CA chairmen past and present could be seen perking up at this point. Dravid observed that all formats have a place, but not an equal one, for to maintain the present glut of fixtures would be to overburden the public and the players to the point of no return, be it financial or otherwise.Finally, Dravid directed his words towards the cricket pitch, to the place he finds from time to time where the wider issues of money, attendances, formats and corruption are swept away. Every now and then, Dravid said, it was possible to feel the same rush of excitement that accompanied his first boundary, first catch, or first victory. The timelessness of such moments gave him pause to consider his link in the game’s long history, and the role cricket’s players and organisers must play in the preservation of its future. As he concluded, the room rose to applaud, having been kept enthralled for more than 40 minutes.As the audience drifted off into the cold Canberra night, the nature of most conversation had changed. Where beforehand much of the talk centered on the majesty of the venue, now it was all about the content of the speech and the character of the speaker. Plenty of words were used to describe what Dravid had said, but among the most common of all was “insightful”. Dravid had provoked plenty of deep thought, and it can only be hoped that his words will go on to inspire equally thoughtful action.

The ICC’s revision of the rules to do with Powerplays, new balls in ODIs, runners, and obstruction of the field take effect from today. Former and current players weigh in on the changes

11-Oct-2011

Using Powerplays between overs 16 and 40

Alastair Cook, England one-day captain It’s certainly very interesting and it will change the tactics in those last 10 overs. It can be a bit of nightmare when the Powerplay is taken in the 45th over – you can feel a bit helpless. It will certainly change things now that they have to be taken before the 40th over.Ian Chappell, former Australia captain and current commentator I don’t think there’s enough foresight with the framing of all the laws. You need to think of the laws occasionally, but we are having major changes all the time, which means you haven’t thought through the rules properly at first. If I am a captain, this rule makes me feel, “Why don’t you come out and lead the side instead of me, because you are telling me what I need to do all the time – when to take the fielders, where to place my fielders.” This Powerplay legislation distracts from allowing the captain to lead the side.Michael Kasprowicz, former Australia fast bowler and now a Cricket Australia board member The Powerplays have worked really well for bowlers. There seems to be a lot more impact from bowlers, and I think that’s good for the game. Enforcing their use between the 16th and 40th overs increases the need to think about it in a tactical sense rather than just leaving the batting Powerplay, in particular, for the final few overs.Andrew Hudson, former South Africa batsman and currently South Africa’s convenor of selectors A lot of teams would just wait until the end of the 45th over to take the Powerplay, because then they would have no choice, but now it will make them commit to a game plan. It will probably create a bit more interest.Sanjay Manjrekar, former India batsman and current commentator Again, we can see some of the problems 50-over cricket has been having and this is an attempt to infuse some excitement into the middle stages. I’m not overly excited by it. It’s another little tweak. It’ll just shake captains a bit out of their comfort zone because they had been doing it the standard way [last five and after the mandatory first 10]. Very few captains actually used [Powerplays] to their advantage.Ian Bishop, former West Indies bowler and current commentator I think teams will eventually find a way to create some sort of equilibrium. I hope this ruling will create some more interest in middle overs. I have no empirical evidence to back this, but generally bowling teams take their Powerplay straight after 10 overs. Forcing them to take it in 16-40 will give the spectators something to watch, if sixes and fours are your kind of thing.I don’t think forcing batting sides to take it before the 40th over is a bad thing, or that it might end up being a double-edged sword. I have no sympathy for batsmen, not because I don’t like them, but they generally hold the advantage in limited-overs cricket. A lot of batting sides have lost their way in the Powerplay overs, but the problem was that their approach to the restrictions wasn’t clear; I don’t think when it is being taken is as much an issue as how it is approached. If you are reckless in the Powerplay, which was often the case in the World Cup, it can be a problem, but I think batsmen are going to get smart enough in time to learn how to handle it.

New balls from either end

Ravi Rampaul, West Indies fast bowler Playing with two new balls keeps the ball a lot newer, so from where I stand it is probably a good thing for the bowlers but not the batters. The two new balls might rule out reverse-swing later in the innings, but you will have a harder ball to bowl with later on in the innings.Bishop This rule will suit different people in different conditions. In the subcontinent, where you have dry and flat grounds, it is going to favour the batsmen, but in England, Australia and New Zealand it will help the bowling side, since the balls will seam and swing through the course of the innings. The disadvantage that will come into play will be that bowlers will struggle to achieve legitimate reverse-swing in most conditions, and that disappoints me. This rule seems to have come about to do away with the practice of changing the ball midway through the innings due to discoloration, and we might in the process lose out on one or two aspects, like reverse-swing.Kasprowicz I never thought the compulsory change of ball was a good thing. If the ball is worn and batsmen can’t see it, then fair enough. But to go to a ball at each end is a good move, and is one of the few changes we’ve seen over the years that is going to help the bowlers, fast bowlers in particular. We didn’t really see much reverse-swing in recent times anyway, because of the change of ball, so I think we will see more of that, as teams can work on the ball.

“If I am a captain, this rule makes me feel, ‘Why don’t you come out and lead the side instead of me, because you are telling me what I need to do all the time – when to take the fielders, where to place my fielders'”Ian Chappell

Chappell Australia tried the new balls from both sides and gave it up 10 years back. So where has it come from again? For god’s sake, get the white ball fixed so that it retains its colour and character, instead of tinkering with everything else. This rule is surely going to favour bowlers more in certain conditions. And that affects the balance between bat and ball, which is a bad thing.Chris Woakes, England fast bowler The new rule looks good. The ball keeps shape a lot longer, and with the ball not changed towards the end, you have a good feel of it through the innings. The ball did start to reverse towards the end, and that, I think, would happen here because of the outfield.Manjrekar I have absolutely no issue with two new balls. The mandatory change after 34 overs exposed what happens with the ball. It just didn’t look good that you had to change the ball because you didn’t have the quality of balls that could last the distance. A lot of modern-day spinners are able to use the hard seam of the cricket ball to work to their advantage. R Ashwin recently made a statement that he found spinning the ball easier with the hard seam because he was able to grip it better and it was responding well off the pitch. So the old-school [belief] that the ball has to be old for the spinners doesn’t necessarily hold true now. Also, I saw Umar Gul get reverse-swing as early as the ninth over in England during the World Twenty20. If you’re good enough, reverse-swing can still be part of a 50-over innings despite the two new balls.In livelier conditions, the effect of the new ball and seamers will put pressure on batsmen for longer, but if you look at world cricket generally, we have placid pitches. It’ll work in favour of the batsmen a bit because they’ll constantly have the hard ball to smash around. We won’t see the stage of 25 to 34 overs where the ball was at its softest. Hudson It was not ideal to be changing the ball at 34 overs, so it takes out that variable. It could have an impact on reverse-swing, but at least discolouring won’t be a problem, particularly for night games. It will also give the bowlers a slight advantage, which is a good thing since it has been a batter’s game for so long.Murali Kartik, former India left-arm spinner Earlier there was a chance for spinners that the old ball wouldn’t go off of the bat. Now with two new balls they will remain fresh a longer time. Yes, at the same time spinners can grip the ball better, but I am sure even this rule is only for batsmen.

Obstructing the field

Bishop I think this ruling is absolutely correct. Changing direction and getting between the stumps and the throw has become an acceptable practice. I think that is wrong and is tantamount to cheating. It is the nature of the game that if you run, you are taking a risk. Your challenge is to back that judgement by reaching the other end. If your judgement is poor, you face the consequences. And doing anything to preserve your wicket is cheating. So I think if batsmen change direction to impede the fielding team, they should be penalised.Chappell This one is plain ridiculous. Batsmen have been allowed to come in between the throw and the stumps right from the time I started playing, which is bloody long ago. Fielders are going to now throw the ball at the batsman needlessly, purely in the hope of getting a wicket. Even if he doesn’t get the wicket, it is going to go up to the third umpire and take another decision away from the on-field umpires. The rule needlessly tries to legislate for a one-in-a-million chance. It is even more ludicrous since there is already enough in the law to allow the umpires to legislate that rare case. This is going to create controversies that are totally unnecessary. It is just another example of the stupidity in the law-making. The best example for the ridiculous law-making is the Mankad law. The man who changed that rule needs to be lined up against the wall and shot. The administrators need to rewrite the laws to simplify them as much as possible and not complicate them even more. I’m afraid that’s what they are doing right now – complicating things too often.Kasprowicz I’m not sure how they’re actually going to dictate that or determine what the line is [for the batsman running between the wickets]. Trigonometry might come into it as to point A and point B. I can’t recall too many instances when it was a major issue, but it must have taken place often enough in an international match for it to be one.Manjrekar I think it’s fair. You have a law that says you can’t deliberately obstruct a fielder who’s trying to take a catch unless you have a right to be in that area at the time. Some of this escaped all these years, that a batsman, while running, could change his direction deliberately to get in the path of the ball. There was a slight amount of gamesmanship and cheating involved. But it’s another thing that the umpire will have to watch out for, another nuance in the game that will have to be monitored now – to determine if the change in direction was deliberate.

No runners

Will we never again see three batsmen on the field at a time?•AFPThe MCC MCC feels that not to allow a runner for an incapacitated batsman does not comply with the spirit of equity within the Laws. If a bowler is incapacitated, another bowler can take over; if an incapacitated batsman is not permitted a runner, this effectively means the loss of his wicket, which is a disproportionate effect.Hudson In terms of injuries, there was always a bit of a dilemma with guys who got cramps, especially in the subcontinent. Sometimes the idea of a runner could have been abused and misused. Outlawing runners may be a bit harsh on genuine cases, where there is an injury, and with so much cricket being played, genuine cases may suffer, but overall it will prevent any abuse the system was taking.Kasprowicz I think the abolition of runners is a tremendous rule change, because for a team, if a bowler gets injured you weren’t able to replace a bowler, and in some circumstances that could be damaging to the team’s performance. Whereas with a batsman, he always got the luxury of someone else to do the running for him. So I think that’s a good one, and unfortunately if you do suffer an injury, somehow you just have to manage it and get through it. It has seemed like it was a bit too easy at times for some batsmen, and as a former fast bowler I certainly applaud it.

Batting first is the way to go at the Adelaide Oval but the opening exchanges at the venue can be more influential on the outcome of a Test than almost anywhere else in the world

Daniel Brettig22-Jan-2012For about 60 minutes on the first morning of every Test match at the Adelaide Oval, a famously benign pitch starts its life with delusions of a green-top. Like a teenager experimenting with wilder things before settling into sensible adulthood, the surface is briefly open to the suggestions of the fast bowlers, and far less agreeable to batsmen raised on the assumption that Adelaide is a place for harvesting runs, not edging catches.As the crowd files onto the Scoreboard hill and the members settle in their seats on the western side, the surface retains the merest trace of freshness left by the thoughtful ground staff, allowing the ball to briefly swing and seam. The pace and bounce off the pitch is more pronounced than at any other stage of the match. Given how placid the track can become for batsmen later on, once the dry heat of South Australia’s desert climate has had its way with the remaining moisture, Adelaide’s opening exchanges can be more influential on the final outcome of a Test than almost anywhere else in the world – ground lost in that first hour is seldom regathered without great, and sometimes futile effort.Michael Hussey has experienced the oval’s early life as an opening batsman for Western Australia, and also been called on to repair the damage it can cause from his berth in Australia’s middle order. He agrees that in Adelaide, an early stumble when the seam stands up can take days to recover from, if it is at all.”Yes I think so [the first hour is more important in Adelaide],” Hussey said. “It certainly does do a little bit in the first morning, maybe the first session, and then generally can be a very good batting pitch for a few days, so it is very important and England certainly exposed us in that respect. We started with a run-out but after that they got other quick wickets which put us under enormous pressure and stopped us getting to a good first-innings total. So it’s certainly a crucial time in the game, if the openers can get through that then good runs can be had. It’s a very crucial part of the game. I think any Test match, the first hour or the first session can shape how the match is going to go as well.”As Hussey recalled, Australia were reminded of this state of things in graphic fashion last summer, when it was possible to conclude that the second Test was lost to England inside the first 13 balls of its commencement. In that time the hosts lost 3 for 2, Simon Katich’s run-out followed by fretful edges into the slips by Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke at the hands of the artful fast man Jimmy Anderson. Both Ponting and Clarke pushed out firmly at deliveries that left them late, and would later stand solemnly in the field as nary another ball did quite as much for the rest of the match.Ponting knew the importance of the first few overs of an Adelaide Test, having played so many, and at the toss before had observed: “Like Indian conditions sometimes a lot can happen late in the games here, so you have to make sure you play really well at the start of the game and keep yourself in the contest right up until the end.” Australia’s failure to do so after Ponting had given them first use of the pitch would haunt them for the remainder of the series, and now serves as a reminder of how important it is to be vigilant at the start of the Adelaide Test.Initial curve and cut notwithstanding, there remains no question that the team winning the toss in Adelaide must bat. There are Englishmen who still cuss and mutter at the fateful decision made by Bob Willis in 1982-83 to insert Greg Chappell’s Australians upon calling correctly. Needing a victory to regain parity in the series, Willis gambled on a surface that had shown signs of dampness in the lead-up, but watched disconsolately in the field as Chappell crafted a century and the hosts tallied 438 – the platform for an eight-wicket victory. Bowlers may have the narrowest of windows in which to strike, but with the help of decisive footwork and good early judgement the batsmen can settle themselves in for the day, or more.Since Willis, the only other visiting captain to chance bowling first was Mohammad Azharuddin. India’s arrival for the 1992 Test coincided with the first match on a relaid square, which promised to offer a little more help to those delivering the ball after a soporific sequence of six consecutive drawn Tests. Chasing a victory to keep the series alive, Azharuddin fielded, and rejoiced as Kapil Dev, Manoj Prabhakar and a young part-time seamer called Sachin Tendulkar fetched seven cheap wickets between them to rumble out an inattentive Australia for 145. This was a rare occasion on which the reverses of the first day were to be atoned for, as the hosts ground their way back into the contest and ultimately squeaked a 38-run victory.Though the match was sullied by arguments about the respective lbw counts for both sides, and made notable by Allan Border’s refusal to take the field on the final morning after learning that Geoff Marsh was to be dropped for the final Test, it was the start of a far more enticing run of results. Since then only three of 20 Adelaide Tests have been drawn, and on each occasion the offer of first morning assistance has provided a critical element to the ensuing drama. Whoever bats first in Adelaide on Tuesday will have reason to be watchful, and whoever bowls will have cause to be hopeful … for about an hour.

Bowlers usually get punished in Adelaide but India’s hapless performance is not merely due to a flat pitch and in-form opposition

Daniel Brettig at Adelaide Oval25-Jan-2012At first glance very little seemed extraordinary about the first two days of the Test unfolding at Adelaide Oval. The weather was hot, the pitch dry, and the batting suitably relentless. A captain and his predecessor peeled off double-centuries, and the bowlers wilted steadily under the glare of the sun. Take out a few advertising signs and new stands and it might have been any Adelaide Test since the second World War.It is not sufficient, however, to attribute India’s struggles against an Australian side guided by the flowing strokes of Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke to a flat pitch and a January heat wave. Australia’s 7 for 604 declared was the latest episode in a series that has struck the same notes with about as much dogged consistency as a punk bass player. India did as they had done in Melbourne and Sydney, fetching early wickets then subsiding with all the compliance of a team that knows it is beaten. In Perth the wickets fell later, after spirits were broken by David Warner and Ed Cowan.Few teams as prominently billed as this Indian side have been made to look this poor for an entire series, and by an opposing team in transition. It is arguable that not since Peter May’s England in 1958-59 has a visiting party been so comprehensively trounced having arrived in Australia as warm favourites. The result that summer was 4-0 as a younger home side, led imaginatively by Richie Benaud and spearheaded by a strong pace attack, had too much energy for a team with players such as May, Ted Dexter, Colin Cowdrey, Fred Trueman and Jim Laker.Then, as now, the tourists were thought to have brought their strongest team. India’s squad was beefier than the one that had limped through England last summer, being bolstered by the return to fitness of Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma. The batting was far from sprightly, still relying heavily on Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Virender Sehwag and VVS Laxman. Dravid referred to them as “a few creaking terminators”, a description that has grown more poignant with each passing humiliation.Their destruction has been brought about on the pitch by Australia’s bowlers and batsmen. But off it India have been burrowed under by near-sighted selection and planning. Cricket history is littered with instances of players and teams that hung on too long and were punished for their tardy regeneration, and now the 2011-12 Indians are added to their number. Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman in particular do not deserve to be remembered this way in Australia, but it is inescapable that their final tour of this country will sour many memories, for them and their supporters. In that sense they resemble Muhammad Ali in the years after the Rumble in the Jungle, unwilling to bring the curtain down at the ideal time and paying a price for it.While Tendulkar has made runs and looked fluent, he has found himself distracted by the pursuit of a milestone that is more a statistical quirk than a solid achievement. Dravid’s feet and hands have proven to be slow and unsure on pitches offering more pace than those in England, where he excelled against bowling of similar quality but perhaps lesser velocity. Laxman’s predicament is the saddest of all, as the man who confounded Australia for years looks immobile on ageing knees, unable to get forward to cover the movement on offer to the bowlers.At the other end of the age scale, Umesh Yadav and R Ashwin have provided minor bright spots for India and in Adelaide they were joined in doing so by Wriddhiman Saha, the wicketkeeper called up to replace the suspended MS Dhoni. Saha’s standards remained high throughout 157 overs and he conceded only three byes, while Yadav and Ashwin showed glimpses of the sort of bowling that is required to defeat the best batsmen. None of them are the finished article, but how much better might they have been with earlier opportunities?Kris Srikkanth, India’s chairman of selectors, now stands to face almost as much criticism as his former Australian counterpart Andrew Hilditch. A smiling, laughing presence in front of the cameras, Srikkanth carried the air of a man with not a care in the world for much of the past three and a half years. Yet he will now face a sterner examination from those who will ask about the likes of Rohit Sharma, Cheteshwar Pujara and the aforementioned trio. India needed to plan for this Australian tour in a more rigorous manner than has been evident. It is too easy in the current climate of non-stop fixtures to lose track of an opponent’s development. The Australia of 2011-12 is nearly unrecognisable from that of 2010-11, yet India seem to have lost sight of their opponents’ progress since they last met in the World Cup.This leads to the door of Duncan Fletcher, India’s coach. Fletcher has said he tried as much as possible to replicate the methods of Gary Kirsten, his successful predecessor. But they are different men, with different approaches. It cannot be forgotten that Fletcher ventured to Australia with a record of underachievement on these shores that few can match. Before the Adelaide Test he had coached international teams in 13 Tests here, winning one and losing 12. Australia’s current selectors have placed an emphasis on the matter of whether or not the players they are selecting have come from winning teams. It may have been worth augmenting Fletcher’s advice with other consulting voices, to help the coach as much as the players.Most dangerous of all is the indication that India’s attitude to overseas results has deteriorated, their desire and resolve waning with the rationalisation that home results count for more than those away – a populist view that has very little to do with the ways of high performance sportsmen. Taunts directed at Australia’s batsmen from the likes of Virat Kohli and Ishant have suggested that it is the younger players who have taken this stance, bleak tidings indeed for those hoping for life beyond Laxman, Tendulkar, Dravid and Zaheer. It was the sort of view brought to Australia by Indian teams of decades ago. And it is another reason why the first two days of this Test should not be written off as that same old Adelaide Oval script.

Shane Watson needs to find greater composure in order to become Australia’s batting barometer

Daniel Brettig at Kensington Oval09-Apr-2012If a cricket team’s character can be defined by that of its captain, then a batting order’s stability or otherwise is often dictated by the man who walks to the wicket at No.3. In the past decade the likes of Ricky Ponting, Rahul Dravid, Jacques Kallis and Kumar Sangakkara have set a high mark for the position, their strengths bolstering the batsmen around them.Before them the Australian and West Indian Test batting orders of the early 1990s were given their direction by the Nos.3 David Boon and Richie Richardson. While the latter was a little more flamboyant than the former, both were fearless. Were Boon to be unnerved by a pitch or a bowler, the rest of the Australian order would take uneasy note. Were Richardson to be deceived, as he was by Shane Warne on the final day of the 1992 Boxing Day Test at the MCG, there was every chance the rest would be similarly befuddled.So it was significant that Shane Watson set a jittery marker for Michael Clarke’s Australian team in his first innings at No.3. Watson is in the third phase of his Test batting career, having started in the middle order then graduated with some success to an opener’s post. His batting is strong, powerful and aggressive. But his mind is given to the occasional bout of the scattershot, and his knack for crease occupation remains under-developed. Watson knew the importance of his position when he walked out to the middle on the third morning of the first Test, and returned to the Garfield Sobers Pavilion bitterly disappointed to make a contribution that did almost as much harm to Australia’s cause as any West Indian bowler.Watson was not called upon until a 50-run stand had been posted, but his first foray into the world of No.3 batsmanship was far from comforting. He could have been out early lbw, padding up to Darren Sammy, and after David Warner perished he played a major role in Ponting’s run-out. As Ponting marched off Watson leaned on his haunches and cursed, with good reason. Eight times he has been involved in run-outs in his 33 Tests, a statistic to quicken the pulse of all batsmen to accompany him.Australia’s was racing second ball after lunch, when Watson drove expansively at Kemar Roach and edged into the gloves of Carlton Baugh. His innings had begun at 50 for 1 and ended at 133 for 4, leaving a sizeable salvage job in the hands of Michael Clarke and Michael Hussey. Talented as they are, neither man has attempted to bat at No.3 for Australia, adding gravitas to the notion that such batsmen should be chosen carefully.When Boon retired in 1996, a wrestle for his position took place over five years. Ponting took the spot in Australia’s next Test, but held it for only two more. Justin Langer and Greg Blewett then claimed it with varying degrees of success, but the relentless march of Steve Waugh’s team was given noticeable momentum when Ponting returned to the post. Starting with the 2001 Ashes series, he carved up attacks with rare monotony and offered plenty of composure, too.Watson’s entry has come at the end of a period of experimentation, as Usman Khawaja and Shaun Marsh were also granted chances to enter at first wicket down. Both played innings of substance there – Marsh a laudable century on debut in Sri Lanka and Khawaja a strikingly calm half-century to help set-up a thrilling chase against South Africa in Johannesburg. However their limitations, both mental and technical, were laid bare after a time, and Marsh became particularly bereft as the selectors persisted with him over four Tests against India that grew ever more nightmarish amid a sea of Australian successes.Most of these lessons were learned while Watson convalesced after hamstring and calf injuries. In his absence the team performed strongly, Clarke rotating four bowlers as adroitly as he had five when Watson was available, while the cavalier Warner and circumspect Ed Cowan formed a balanced opening union. Leadership was also in plentiful supply, Brad Haddin serving as an able lieutenant to Clarke though Watson remained the official vice-captain. In this can be found the seeds of Watson’s return at No.3 – Marsh’s poor form made it the most easily available berth for a returning batsman, and so Watson travelled to the West Indies thinking about the role.On the second evening, before he went in to bat, Watson indicated that by moving out of the opening post he might also give his body and mind a greater chance of adjusting from the mental demands of bowling to those of batting. He was looking forward to the potential rest it offered, especially as Cowan and Warner stand a chance of making consistent starts.”There’s no doubt the more I do it the more comfortable I’m going to be about waiting my turn to go in,” Watson had said. “It’s a bit of a different experience to the last couple of years but at least, on the flip-side, it gives me a little bit more time to freshen up even after bowling a few overs today. In that sense, hopefully it’ll pay off tomorrow to give me a little bit more time to mentally freshen up. The more I do it the better I’m going to get, the more comfortable I’m going to be at finding the routines to make sure I can switch off, to make sure I’m mentally and physically ready to go when I need to.”With as much cricket as we do play even having that little bit of time to just chill out, even though you’re taking in every ball that’s going on out in the middle, but just from a mental perspective it’s just going to give me that little bit more time to actually relax and know that I can have a little bit of downtime to be able to get my head ready to start batting.”Watson had plenty of downtime to contemplate following his dismissal, and an unhappy Ponting to accompany him. As capable as he is with the bat and the ball, Watson must find greater composure – both between the wickets and at the batting crease – in order to become the batting barometer of a successful Australian team.

ESPNcricinfo presents the plays of the day from the final day of the opening Test at Lord’s

Andrew McGlashan at Lord's21-May-2012Wicket of the dayShannon Gabriel has made a very positive impression during his first Test. After three wickets in the first innings he added the prized scalp of Kevin Pietersen on the final day to leave England wobbling on 57 for 4. And it was the manner in which he struck which impressed. Pietersen, trying to dominate, had just dispatched a dismissive pull to square leg but Gabriel did not shirk the challenge. He bowled another short ball, which did not quite bounce as much, and Pietersen could not resist another pull which resulted in a bottom edge to the keeper and a jubilant bowler.Collision of the dayThere has been some curious running in this match with most of it centred around Shivnarine Chanderpaul. This time, however, with Alastair Cook and Ian Bell in their crucial stand, Cook became tangled with Darren Sammy at the bowler’s end as he turned for a second run. Both players ended in a heap but Bell had time to sense the danger and get back into his ground. Cook and Sammy dusted themselves off and acknowledged each other in good spirits.Oddity of the dayIt was going to take a huge effort from West Indies to win the Test, yet at 57 for 4 there was more than a glimmer. So it was surprising to see some of Sammy’s tactics as lunch approached and England whittled down the target. Roach was not recalled for a second spell while Sammy and Samuels operated in tandem. A captain cannot bowl his strike man into the ground, especially with two more Tests to go, but sometimes an occasion demands going for broke. This felt like one of those.Futile review of the dayThe game had long since gone from West Indies but when Darren Sammy had a big appeal for lbw against Jonny Bairstow turned down the captain opted for a review anyway. No one really looked that interested and even less so when Hot Spot showed a thin edge from Bairstow. It was another excellent umpiring decision in what was a fine Test for Aleem Dar and Marais Erasmus.Perambulation of the dayAfter a slow start, the crowd grew during the morning session. It wasn’t quite a People’s Monday as against India last year but there are understandable reasons why – people needing to work and the amount of cricket being high up there. Those who were in the ground by lunch were given the chance to walk, or perambulate as they like to call it in these parts, around a portion of the outfield although a large section was kept well protected. It does not just host cricket this year, there’s the Olympic archery to come too.

Sunil Narine didn’t rely on mystery to defeat Ed Joyce, nor even on big turn. He cornered the batsman into surrendering his wicket – a hallmark of a maturing spinner.

Andrew Fernando in Colombo25-Sep-2012On a forgettable night fraught with soggy frustration for fans and disappointment for the exiting team, Sunil Narine produced a piece of cricketing brilliance that will linger with those who were watching closely.The first rain interruption had shaved two overs from the match, and as soon as play resumed, Darren Sammy brought Narine into the attack. Left-hander Ed Joyce was on strike and Narine opened with a menacing offbreak; whirring through the air unnervingly, dipping, pitching on leg stump and spitting beyond the batsman’s prod.The victory was twofold for Narine. He had the batsman groping already, but there was also turn here, plenty more than there had been on previous evenings. On Saturday he had shaken off indifferent form in the practice matches to send down two good overs against Australia. Had he not overstepped in his second over and the free-hit been sent into the stands, he might have traveled at less than a run-a-ball on a surface favouring batsman.Joyce didn’t come close to hitting that first ball and, like Narine, knew now that the pitch was pulling for the bowler tonight. He also knew that trotting down the wicket might be too big a risk. If the bowler sees him coming, a shorter delivery will take enough turn on this pitch to evade him. Even if Narine didn’t anticipate his advance, there would be no room for error. If the first ball was so charged with venom, maybe Narine will become even more difficult to judge in the flight as he warms to his work. Better to stay at home and play it off the turf.Smelling the batsman’s hesitance, Narine pitched another one on leg, only slightly shorter, to give Joyce an even better look at the deviation. The batsman prodded again, and again he did was beaten thoroughly. Ireland’s run rate was flagging. With the game shortened and rain in the air, boundaries became more imperative with every dot ball.Having ruled out going down the track to combat the turn, Joyce decided lateral movement would help him. As the bowler entered his delivery stride, Joyce shuffled towards off stump. This time, he might have hoped, he could get closer to the ball as it turned away from him and play it away through the off side.Only, it didn’t turn away. Perhaps seeing Joyce’s movement, or maybe having anticipated it, Narine had gone wide of the crease and pitched the ball outside leg. It wasn’t the off-break either, it just went straight on. Once Joyce realised this, it was already too late. His hurried sweep missed, and the ball zipped behind his pads to peg back leg stump.In three deliveries, Joyce had not been able to get near the ball. Narine was helped by the surface, sure, but when the batsman took measures to negate that turn, Narine was a step ahead. Having set him up with two big offbreaks, he made the batsman look inept with one that barely turned at all. Narine says Muttiah Muralitharan is his idol – and given how much he rips his offbreaks, it’s not difficult to see Murali’s influence – but that dismissal had a touch of Shane Warne about it. He didn’t rely on mystery or even just on big turn; he cornered the batsman into surrendering his wicket – a hallmark of a maturing spinner.”He’s a guy who has got a lot of tricks up his sleeve and always thinks he can learn new stuff,” captain Darren Sammy said of Narine after the match. “When you see him practice he’s always trying new things. New run-ups, new actions, he just looks to improve his game all the time.”West Indies now move into the Super Eights without having won or completed a full match. Their batting looks as powerful as that of any team in the tournament, but despite a good outing against Ireland, questions remain about their bowling against top opposition. Narine has already proved himself adept at this format, having earned the purple cap in this year’s IPL, and perhaps he can be the bowler who quells those fears and propels his side deep into the competition.”Narine loves when the batsmen are looking to attack him,” Sammy said. “With the scoreboard pressure, and the requirement to score quickly in Twenty20, it gives him the edge with all his tricks up his sleeves. The more we progress and the more we play on these wickets, the more assistance it will give him. These are good signs for us going into the Super Eights.”Pallekele will be Narine’s next test. It has perhaps been the least spin friendly of the three venues so far, and he will likely have to rely on more of that guile when the West Indies move there for all three Super Eight matches. For now, Narine may get by simply on turn and variations, but in future, opponents will grow accustomed to him. If he maintains his devotion to the spinner’s art of the swindle, he might be on track to emulate the longevity he admires so much in his favourite cricketer.

Many people have said he should not be in the team, let alone captain, but Darren Sammy was at centre of everything West Indies did in the World Twenty20 final

Jarrod Kimber in Colombo07-Oct-2012People love to abuse, mock or belittle Darren Sammy. He is, after all, West Indies’ non-playing captain.Most people don’t think he should be in the side, and even those who do don’t think he should be leading it. He’s a punchline or a punching bag. His medium pace is very gentle and his wild slogging is rarely effective. In his World Twenty20 winning side he is only more naturally talented than Johnson Charles, Denesh Ramdin and Samuel Badree.Michael Holding, most cricket fans on twitter, and anywhere West Indies cricket gathers there are people that don’t want Sammy as captain of the side. Most of those people don’t want him in the side at all. He’s not good enough, he brings nothing to the side, Chris Gayle could do a better job and he’s taking the spot of someone better, is what they say. They say it a lot.Sammy has heard all of this. He’s just a nice guy. You could imagine him at a friend’s party, being holed up in the corner by someone who is telling him he should step down because he isn’t good enough. Every day he plays for West Indies, he simply does his best. Sometimes it is not good enough, but you can see how much he tries, see how much he wants it, and see that he is trying to build something for the islands and cricket team he loves.Tonight this barely-talented, slow-bowling guy who isn’t that good is the captain of the World Twenty20 champions.His innings was as far from pretty. He barely kept out yorkers, hit crazily across the line, mistimed almost everything and bludgeoned a couple of boundaries in the last over. He heaved West Indies to a score that Sri Lanka could not challenge. This was a captain’s innings.Off the field, Sammy has strolled around his tournament with a grin, always happy to chat, always smiling and never looking like a man under pressure. He is known as the “the unofficial nicest man in cricket”. Every press conference he has pushed unity of his many nations. He has done everything he can to keep his often-fractured team together. He is using this tournament to build something special. Something for the future. Something the people of the West Indies can be proud of.With the ball, he came on at a time when Sri Lanka had thrust Angelo Mathews up the order. Mathews can score quickly, Mathews can get your run-rate back on track, Mathews is a big-game player, and Mathews is a closer. Sammy brought up his fine leg, knowing Mathews would be tempted. Sammy tried an offcutter and Mathews fell straight into his trap, missing the ball as it moved further away from him off the pitch. Mathews was no longer the match-winner. In his next over Sammy let one run through and collected the wicket of the last recognised batsman. This was clever and gutsy bowling from a leader.Just having West Indies enter a tournament with a realistic chance of winning was a victory for Sammy. West Indies have not been travelling the world blazing all the teams they pass. They’ve played well at times against England, Australia, India and New Zealand. People have often talked up a West Indies renaissance before, but in the cold hard light of an international tournament it has fallen apart. To win this tournament you need luck, skill and timing.In the field Sammy used his bowlers brilliantly. His use of Badree was different than normal, but perfect for the situation. He got through cheap overs from Gayle and Marlon Samuels to give himself flexibility. He used Sunil Narine as a strike weapon and someone who could be kept as a saver. And he had Sri Lanka batting the exact way he needed them to bat. Nothing ever got away from him and, even when Kulasakera was hitting out, he just brought back Narine to finish it all and not let his players get nervous. His captaincy was directly responsible for Sri Lanka’s failure.West Indies were lucky to even make the semi-finals. New Zealand should have beaten them in their regular innings, but Narine was just too good and sent them to the Super Over. Then in the Super Over someone made a huge mistake. It was the only time West Indies truly looked like a team who wasn’t sure who their leader was. Samuels bowling the Super Over was just wrong, and was only undone by Samuels batting in the Super Over. A mistake like that, and the lack of cohesiveness out on the field while it happened, could have been enough for previous West Indies sides to lose their focus and play limply in the semi-final and fade away.Instead they played their most perfect game and smashed Australia in every way.Every single player on this team has a role. This is not a team of flashy show-offs who do solo missions. It is a talented team with a captain who trusts and manages his players the best way he can. In the final, they did not panic when they couldn’t score, they simply waited for their time. They did not panic when they couldn’t break through, they simply worked very hard. That is a team, and this team has a leader.In the final of the World T20, Sammy ended with 2 for 6 off two overs, 26 off 15 balls and a trophy. It doesn’t sound like non-playing.Sammy is the man no one wanted as a player. Sammy is the man who no one wanted as a captain. And Sammy is the captain who has given his team their first major ICC trophy since 1979.

Ricky Ponting offers a generous assessment of Michael Clarke as captain, and looks at the future for Australian cricket

Daniel Brettig20-Oct-2012Ricky Ponting laughs when asked whether or not he was a better captain of Australia than Michael Clarke. Eighteen months into the job, Clarke’s leadership has helped push the national team to a point where they can glimpse the world No. 1 ranking, a summit that will be achieved if they can defeat South Africa at home in November.When he gave up the captaincy, Ponting had said he hoped to give Clarke the best chance of putting his stamp on a new team, something the younger man has done. Irrespective of their relative merits as tacticians, Ponting and Clarke both need each other still, especially if Ponting can bat with the authority he showed against India last summer. While a little envious of the support network Clarke has around him as a result of the Argus review, Ponting is generous in his praise.”The thing I know about him, and it was similar to when I took over the captaincy as well, I think Michael’s been able to elevate his game to a different level,” Ponting said. “I think the way he played over the summer last year was very impressive, both one-day cricket and Test cricket. And when I took over the captaincy it was a bit of the same with me as well.”Certain players respond to that responsibility a little bit better and make everybody feel and look very comfortable. As players and captains you’re always judged on records, and what Michael has done as a captain and a player so far has been of a very high quality.”Clarke’s role as a formal selector as well as a captain is a dual post Ponting coveted during his time as a leader, and he had little doubt that the system brought in following Argus’ frank critique of the state of the national team had made a major difference to the team’s fortunes. Having slipped to as low as fifth in the world following the 2010-11 Ashes drubbing, Australia pushed back up to third with series wins over Sri Lanka, India and West Indies, plus two 1-1 results against South Africa and New Zealand.”If you’re looking to lead an organisation or a team well, you want to have total responsibility for what’s going on,” Ponting said. “I never had that, but that’s something I’d always asked for and it’s good to see that’s the direction the game’s going because I think it’s the direction it had to go.”I think there’s a lot of positive things that have happened around Australian cricket in the last 12 months. The way the selection thing is structured now with [the team performance manager] Pat Howard being involved, some really good and smart decisions are being made around giving players in our team the best chance possible.”Following the all change approach taken last summer, this one should bring a greater measure of stability, and Ponting said the team needed to consolidate its gains. There will be few excuses in terms of staff, structure or schedule, either for Ponting or the Test team as a whole, if they do not keep up their winning ways.”Absolutely, we don’t want to be taking any steps backwards,” Ponting said. “CA are going to give us everything we want and everything we need to be the best team we can be, and as players now we have to, one, understand that, and two, win games of cricket. We’re international players being paid good money to win games of cricket, and that’s what we have to do.”I couldn’t ask for anything better really than my lead-in, having a couple of months off after the Caribbean, then getting back in the gym and training hard for a couple of months before the Tassie pre-season stuff started. A couple of games under my belt now and Tassie’s got off to a pretty good start. I’ve a couple more Shield games to play yet and another couple of one-dayers, so there’ll be no excuses as far as I’m concerned about where my game will be by the time November comes around.”The winter brought an unfamiliar sense of peace and quiet for Ponting, as he returned home from the West Indies to enjoy the longest break of his international career. Now exclusively concerned with Test matches, Ponting said the winter’s experience had been foreign, but refreshing.”You’re definitely fresher but whether that means you’re better off cricket-wise is another thing. Something so foreign to me is not playing cricket continually,” he said. “One thing I do know is I’ve now got Test cricket only and only a few one-day games for Tassie through the course of the year, so I’ve had a pretty clear picture of what my career looks like. That can’t hurt. Also having a good break and some sort of pre-season for the first time in 20 years is a little bit foreign as well, but it’s been very enjoyable.”

Anil Kumble believes T20 cricket can engage the American public, provided cricket administration in the USA can be streamlined

Peter Della Penna23-Aug-2012Throughout the 1990s, if someone shouted out “Jumbo!” in New York on a Sunday afternoon, it could only have been meant for John Elliott. The burly 6-foot 7-inch, 300-pound offensive lineman plied his trade plowing over defensive fronts for the NFL’s Giants and Jets for 14 years, winning a Super Bowl with the Giants in the 1990 season.On this day though, the streets of Madison Avenue are screaming “Jumbo!” for a different man, one who was a super bowler in his own right, burrowing through the defences of batsmen an Indian record 619 times in Test cricket. The chief guest at New York City’s India Day Parade is Anil Kumble and the parade route is swarming with people waving Indian flags to celebrate India’s independence and pay tribute to their hero.”It’s been fantastic,” Kumble says of his visit to the city where he showed off the ICC World Twenty20 trophy to more than 100,000 people lining the sidewalks of the parade route. “It really goes to show the prominence of the Indian community in the United States and also the appreciation and affection that cricketers have in this country, more so because of the Indian population and the support the Indian community has in all businesses. In economy and knowledge, I think India has contributed a lot to the United States.”Two days earlier, Kumble was in Times Square to ring the closing bell at NASDAQ, the second time in recent months that cricket was making headlines in the US financial sector. In June, MS Dhoni landed at number 31 in Forbes Magazine’s annual list of the highest paid athletes in the world with $26.5 million, the first time a cricketer has appeared in the top 50. Kumble says that in order for cricketers to continue to rise and sit alongside some of the names whose global popularity and sponsorships consistently place them in the top 10 like Tiger Woods, Roger Federer, Kobe Bryant and David Beckham, cricket needs to break into the US market in a big way.”I think the easiest and the quickest way is if the United States takes up cricket,” Kumble said. “That’s the quickest way of seeing cricketers in the top 10. If cricket really flourishes in the United States, you don’t have a better country to market a sport than is done here. I just recently went to a baseball game, the Yankees, and every second step you had to pay something or you would get attracted to something. I don’t mind picking up that stuff. That’s the way it’s being marketed and I guess this is the right place for cricket. I’m sure it will happen.”The first match happened between the United States and Canada so cricket started here. But then I guess the other sports have taken over in terms of prominence, television, sponsorship, marketing and everything else. It’s only left to the expats. From whatever I gather from talking to various people, cricket is very fragmented in the United States. It needs to come under one umbrella and have a proper structure like other sports. T20 is probably the right format to start with. Once it comes under that umbrella and people start playing the sport in a competitive way across the nation then I think there will be a lot of interest. The only way you can develop any sport is if the local population picks up that sport and that’s the challenge.”Kumble, who was elected president of the Karnataka State Cricket Association in 2010, says he entered Yankee Stadium to take in the experience more from an administrative mindset, taking notes on how things are done in New York with the goal in mind to help improve the stadium and fan experience at cricket grounds in India.”Just from what I saw at the Yankees game, the entire spectator experience is what we need to take back in terms of the comfort level and the hospitality. The marketing part like I just mentioned, every step you take there is something new they’d like to sell the fans. There’s a lot of merchandise and memorabilia for the fans which probably is something I’m sure will pick up in India as well in the cricketing scene because that’s not there at the moment. It’s not there in India in such a way where any store you walk in you can pick up whatever you want of your favorite player.”I think you have some great stadiums in India as well. The new stadiums, especially the one in Pune is a beautiful stadium, the recently built Wankhede Stadium in Bombay, in Chennai they have remodeled the old stadium. All these new stadiums are really good. The challenge for us, yes we are now putting in permanent cushioned seats for the important prized tickets and there’s hospitality in Bangalore. So that’s something which we’ll certainly do and you’ll see a completely permanent seated facility in Bangalore very soon so the spectator will have a seat at any given point in time, a reserved seat. Here what was very prominent was that there was no obstruction. There were no pillars. It’s an open stadium so you get the feel that you’re actually very close to the action.”Kumble: “Cricket is very fragmented in the United States. It needs to come under one umbrella and have a proper structure like other sports.”•Peter Della PennaHowever, Kumble says the overall energy and excitment at cricket grounds in India, especially during Twenty20 matches, is second to none.”Of course a cricket game is immense. If you come to an IPL game or a T20 or an international match in India, it’s extremely noisy in India and I didn’t see that noise level up other than maybe a couple of home runs and then suddenly everybody goes up. Otherwise in India for every four in a Twenty20, you get about five home runs in an over and if Chris Gayle is batting six home runs. There was no comparison in terms of the noise level inside the stadium but I certainly loved the stadium atmosphere at Yankee Stadium.”The ICC World Twenty20 is less than a month away and although this will be just the fourth edition since its inception in 2007, it has quickly turned into one of the premier events on the cricket calendar. Kumble doesn’t think that fans should be worried about Twenty20 swallowing up Tests and ODIs, but believes that changes need to be made to keep all three formats healthy for the future.”I strongly feel all three formats will be unique. Yes there will be certain modifications and a little bit of tweaking in all three formats because after a while even Twenty20 will get boring. I don’t think it will throw Test cricket off the pedestal but Test cricket certainly needs to adapt and I feel going forward that day-night Test cricket is certainly on the cards and I’m sure it will happen in the next six to eight months, if not earlier. I’m sure it will happen.”I can’t really predict in 10 years what’s going to happen because 10 years ago nobody thought that Twenty20 cricket would take over the world. Nobody predicted that there would be a threat from Twenty20 cricket to the other forms of cricket. I don’t see it as a threat because the 50-over format is quite challenging as well. There is a chance for a bowler to make a mark and there is an opportunity for a batsman to build an innings as well in a 50-over format. In a Twenty20 it’s not there but in Tests it’s much longer. I think all three formats will survive.”