A level-headed cricketer who is aware of his game’s limitations, he hasn’t been fazed by anything thrown at him during the World Cup

George Binoy in Townsville25-Aug-2012William Bosisto, the Australia Under-19 captain, was facing Bangladesh’s Soumya Sarkar in the quarter-final of the World Cup, when he saw the bowler ‘mankad’ the non-striker Jimmy Peirson, who was backing up earlier than he should have been. The next few minutes were fraught with confusion and tension as Bosisto spoke to Anamul Haque, to see if the Bangladesh captain would withdraw the appeal. He did not, and Australia were 33 for 4 chasing 172, their position worsened by an unconventional dismissal that is within the rules but perhaps not in the spirit of cricket.The Australian fans watching at Endeavour Park did not like it and voiced their displeasure. In a tinderbox of a quarter-final, it would have been natural for a teenager to get worked up and play a shot in anger. Bosisto said he did get worked up, but he did not do anything rash. Instead, the incident steeled his focus and Bosisto’s maturity came through during his conversation with the new batsman Travis Head.”Nothing different to what I would have told him if it had been caught behind or any other dismissal,” Bosisto said, when asked what he had told Head after the mankad. “Just about playing straight and bat for a period of time and establish a partnership.”Head scored 44 out of the 67-run stand but it was Bosisto who battled 134 balls for an unbeaten 71 to put Australia in the semi-final. That Man-of-the-Match performance was his fourth unbeaten innings in as many games this World Cup. Two of the first three were also compiled after Australia had lost early wickets during a chase. Bosisto was dismissed for the first time in the tournament by South Africa, run out for 40 with Australia four runs away from a place in the final and plenty of resources to get there.Bosisto’s batting is more gritty than it is aesthetically attractive, characterised by punches down the ground and shots square of the wicket played with economical movement. Among batsmen who’ve scored more than 150 runs in the World Cup, his strike-rate of 50.40 for an aggregate of 189 is the lowest. Bosisto is not fussed by it. He comes across as a level-headed cricketer who at quite an impressionable age is showing remarkable awareness of the strengths and limitations of his game and playing within those boundaries to lead his team to success in Townsville.”When you’re playing out in the middle, you want to be reasonably within your limitations,” Bosisto said. “I think at this World Cup, I haven’t really had to try too much audacious stroke play. I’ve just been required to be not out at the end and do it that way.”Despite having grown up during an age of aggressive Australian batsmanship at Test level, Bosisto’s not tried to over-reach himself too early and knows that there will be opportunities to develop his repertoire in the future. “Maybe growing up I’ve always tried to be a technical player, maybe my aggressive stroke play hasn’t come on like some of the younger generations that are brought up now, playing so freely right from the first ball kind of thing, like a David Warner kind of player,” Bosisto said. “But that’s certainly something that I need to work on over the next five-ten years to expand my repertoire, I suppose.”I know I’ve heard people speak about Justin Langer and Mike Hussey, two of my sort of idols. You know when they were 17 and 18, they were probably not far off, they just worked the ball around and maybe didn’t score as quickly as what they have when they’ve become older. They’ve just developed their stroke play, and as they got bigger and stronger it became easier to score more quickly.”

He plays within his limitations and there’s plenty of batsmen out there who get pretty 20s and 30s. That won’t get you too far, it might go alright in the IPL, but won’t go too far in Test cricket, don’t forget we’re producing cricketers here to play cricket for Australia at Test levelStuart Law on Bosisto

His coach Stuart Law is firmly in Bosisto’s corner. “He plays within his limitations and there’s plenty of batsmen out there who get pretty 20s and 30s. That won’t get you too far, it might go alright in the IPL, but won’t go too far in Test cricket, don’t forget we’re producing cricketers here to play cricket for Australia at Test level,” Law said. “And Will, as he progresses, will become a better one-day player and a better Twenty20 player as well, if he becomes a really good four-day player.”Law also rated Bosisto’s captaincy highly and if he had to pick out one criticism, it would be that it was over-aggressive at times, which was “a great thing” actually. “He’s got us over the line a lot of times, when we seemed to be in a bit of trouble,” Law said. “He’s just got a cool head under pressure. He’s been a gem to be around, he trains hard, one of the hardest trainers going around. He plays hard and that’s the way you should always play. It’s pleasing for me and Greg Chappell that we put our faith in him to lead this side and he’s led it with more than enough distinction.”Bosisto hasn’t been captain of Australia Under-19 for very long either, unlike his counterpart in Sunday’s World Cup final, Unmukt Chand, who’s led India since September 2011 and has 20 matches of international experience to date. Australia only settled on their captain two to three weeks before the tournament. In international matches before that, they tried Kurtis Patterson, Cameron Bancroft and Ashton Turner as captain.”It’s something that I love doing and I think it’s a good way to impose yourself on a game,” Bosisto said. “As a cricketer in the field, it’s sometimes hard to dominate I suppose, but as a captain you really get a chance to stamp your authority on the game with the way you go about your bowling changes and field placements.”There’s a number of leaders out on the field, Kurtis Patterson is one that you can go to, and we tend to bounce ideas off each other. I make the final calls but it’s great being able to bounce ideas off people. The more people throwing out ideas the more chances you’ve got of reaching the right outcome.”It’s good being able to captain such a strong side, often it makes your job easier when you’ve got such talented players who can execute the plans you ask them to. Often you don’t have to do a hell of a lot really. I suppose that’s the job of a captain, your role comes into play maybe when the things aren’t going so great, and you’ve got to try different things or keep the side up.”Bosisto’s earliest memories of cricket are of playing with his father at Jasper Green Reserve, a park down the road from his house in Perth, every morning before school. He’s on the opposite coast of Australia at the moment, preparing for the most significant match of his nascent career. Irrespective of Sunday’s result, Bosisto is in a great place for someone of his age, because being self-aware is half the battle. He needs to develop a few more gears but there’s time for that. Another calm, unbeaten innings at a strike-rate of 50 during a chase could be enough to win the World Cup.

On the surface, Sri Lanka’s chances are not promising, but they have drawn steel from their rivalry with Australia in recent years

Andrew Fernando in Hobart13-Dec-2012Though Sri Lanka may not rank as highly on Australia’s list of favourite foes, for most Sri Lankan fans, a victory against Australia is sweeter than any other. Australia were the arch-villains in Sri Lanka’s adolescence in international cricket, and those memories remain vivid, and attitudes entrenched, almost 20 years later.The only time Sri Lanka played a Boxing Day Test, the man who would become their greatest cricketer was called for throwing by an Australian umpire. Several months later, Australia declined to play a World Cup match in Sri Lanka, and were their opponent in the final – an occasion which unequivocally remains Sri Lanka’s most treasured cricket memory.Even beyond Sri Lanka’s coming of age, the taunts Murali endured in Australia fueled the rivalry, particularly when then prime minister of Australia, John Howard, waded into the debate. A decade of tactics aimed at mental disintegration also failed to endear the Australian side to Sri Lankan fans, whose own team often espoused a simpler, friendlier ethos, which seemed the diametric opposite of Steve Waugh’s abrasive, but outstanding approach.Times have changed. Ricky Ponting was the final remnant of that Australian era, but will not take guard in this series, and he had softened with the tide in any case. Murali is now a coveted commodity in Australia’s Big Bash League, while Lasith Malinga – the more modern evangelist for Sri Lankan heresy – reaps scalps with abandon in the same competition. Yet, a victory against Australia, particularly in their own country, will not rank far below their World Cup triumph and will be celebrated for years to come.On the surface however, the visitors’ chances are not promising. Australia may be stitching up the cuts endured in an epic tilt at the top ranking, but a seemingly unsettled top four hides a middle order deep in form at its most fetching, while the attack has begun to reclaim the ferocity – if not quite the magic – of its predecessors. Ponting will take some replacing, but a relatively fresh batting order will find Shaminda Eranga, Chanaka Welegedara and Nuwan Kulasekara a far less daunting assignment than the venom-tipped steel of South Africa’s fast men.A pace attack bereft of a single bowler with 50 Test wickets to his name, or even 20 appearances at the top level, may serve as the perfect opportunity for Shane Watson and Phillip Hughes to break in their new roles, and for each of the top four to tune up ahead of tours in India and England. Rangana Herath has emerged as Sri Lanka’s primary match-winner in the last 18 months, but Australian pitches will likely limit his threat, and as Kumar Sangakkara hinted ahead of the first Test, only a surface approaching a greentop in Hobart will dress the Sri Lankan attack with enough penetration to effect a win there.For Sri Lanka’s batsmen, the tour shapes as a hugely defining one, particularly on a personal level. This will be the last dance in Australia for the two latest inductees into Sri Lanka’s batting pantheon, and Sangakkara in particular has a chance to confirm himself as a modern great if he succeeds over the next month. Rumours have been floating of Tillakaratne Dilshan’s Test retirement too, while Thilan Samaraweera will also want to further erode a former-reputation as a home-track hero, before what looms as a largely empty 2013 for him, with Sri Lanka’s Test postponements and cancellations having left Test specialists with little to look forward to.”A lot of the guys will be very hungry to do well,” Mahela Jayawardene said. “It’s a big occasion for some of our guys, including myself. I haven’t played Tests in Melbourne or Sydney, for example, and it’s a great atmosphere. Those are incentives for the guys to lift their game and do well. Especially when you’re playing against a top side like Australia, you want to lift your game. It’s about pride. We aren’t just there to make up the numbers, we’re going to play a good game. Individually the guys will have to come up with a game plan on how they’re going to adjust. The bowlers will have to work out how to attack a really good batting line-up as well.”Sri Lanka have drawn steel from their rivalry with Australia in recent years, and have competed well in ODI series, even winning a three-match bilateral down under in 2010. They may not have the personnel in hand to shape up as a serious challenge to Australia, but if they can find that extra tenacity in their reserves like they have in the limited-overs series, perhaps they can lift their game as Jayawardene hopes. It is the only way they can break a 24-year old duck on Australian soil.

Plays of the Day from the first day of the second Test between Australia and Sri Lanka in Melbourne

Andrew Fernando at the MCG26-Dec-2012The poor stroke
Sri Lanka’s top order played several awful shots during their first-innings shambles, but Tillakaratne Dilshan took the prize for woeful shot selection when he was bowled in the seventh over by Mitchell Johnson. Eyeing a good length delivery pitched on middle and off, and leaden-footed, Dilshan brought his bat down in an ungainful swipe across the line and missed the ball by a distance as it nipped back in at him. Dilshan had been eager to aggress from the first delivery he faced, but even given his hundred in the first Test that was founded on positivity, it was a stroke whose rashness the “that’s the way I play” defense would struggle to survive.The anticlimax
When Johnson dismissed Prasanna Jayawardene and Dhammika Prasad with two consecutive lifters, Michael Clarke placed a leg gully, short leg and midwicket for Rangana Herath’s first ball, even taking pains to approach the tailender and ensure he knew those men were there for the duck-hook he had played several times in Hobart. The 61,000-strong crowd clapping Johnson on as he approached the crease might have expected another bouncer as well, but instead he delivered a length ball on off stump, which Herath tamely tapped onto the offside.The catch
Michael Hussey had snaffled a sharp chance at third slip to dismiss Angelo Mathews earlier in the session, but Matthew Wade’s take to send Kumar Sangakkara back eclipsed that effort for pure tenacity. Wade turned around in an instant when Sangakkara top-edged a pull off Johnson, and tore after the skied ball, heading directly towards the sightscreen. Despite his speed, the ball seemed to have got away from him, right until he put in a full-stretch dive to intercept it with the tips of his webbed gloves, about 10 metres from the boundary.The sequence
Sri Lanka’s only assured moments on day one were when Sangakkara was at the striker’s end, and he was at his most sublime in the 21st over, when he struck Mitchell Johnson for a trio of exquisite boundaries. The first was hit through mid-on, as Johnson overpitched on leg stump, before Sangakkara went back to square-drive Johnson between gully and point the next delivery. The best shot of the three was the last – nothing more than a firm push with the full face of the bat that raced back past the bowler and to the straight boundary.The overhead forehand
Shaminda Eranga attempted to bounce Hughes upon his arrival, letting one fly so high that it evaded Sangakkara’s reach and skipped to the boundary. When he bowled a similar length next ball, Hughes found a way to get off the mark with a stroke that was unconventional even for him. The ball was flying through about a foot above his head well outside off stump, but Hughes managed to middle it, bringing his bat down on the shot much like how a tennis player would on an overhead volley, and sent it to the boundary.

From DravidFan, United States of America
Someone referred to the “I” in Ganguly

Cricinfo25-Feb-2013DravidFan, United States of America
Someone referred to the “I” in Ganguly. Well, Ganguly is not Terrell Owens or the guy from the commercial who says “well, there is no V in team either” to the someone’s comment saying “there is no I in team”. However, Ganguly always felt he was royalty. I bet he still does. To me, Dravid, Laxman and Tendulkar are much more reliable than Ganguly ever was, not to mention being humble.That said, what Ganguly brought to the table was aggression, albeit the baggage. He never gave up his lunch money and assumed the fetal position to any sledging or other nonsense from anyone. That attitude has been sadly missing for ever, with the exception of Sunil Gavaskar who once famously pushed Chetan Chauhan out of the field when he was upset with Lillee.To me, Ganguly so far has been the best Indian left hander I have seen. Gambhir has potential, but ways to go. The point of this rambling is that Sourav has lost a bit of my respect when he spewed the lava about his teammates and I assume Dhoni when he said changing hairstyles. I gotta think that Dhoni is the reason Ganguly was dropped from the ODI team.Lastly, we all know at some point TDLK (Tendulkar, Dravid Laxman, Kumble) will all be retiring (I sure hope so) before they get unceremoniously paraded out. I seriously think Kumble is playing his last test series, given that he is giving up runs faster than the speed of ganges.India should follow Australia’s footsteps, have the juniors ready to go (will not happen without TDLK mentoring the juniors) and ease them and have TDLK exit one at a time.

Spin – both facing it and bowling it – has been a challenge for Australia on their previous tours to India. How well will they cope this time?

S Rajesh20-Feb-2013An Australian line-up with only four players who’ve experienced Test cricket in India before will attempt to achieve something that only three other sides have managed in 23 series since 2000. When England trumped India 2-1 in the four-Test series late last year, they became the third team – after Australia in 2004 and South Africa in 2000 – to win a Test series in India since 2000. Despite India’s Test fortunes being on a downward slide in the last 20 months, it’ll be a tough ask for Australia to replicate what England achieved: England had two high-quality spinners, and a settled and experienced batting line-up; Australia’s spin attack looks far inferior when compared to the Graeme Swann-Monty Panesar combination, while their batting line-up is still grappling with the retirements of two heavyweights, Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey.The India-Australia historical head-to-head shows two distinct sets of numbers, depending on the country hosting the matches. In Australia, India have struggled to notch up victories, losing five Tests for every one they’ve won. At home, though, they’ve won more than they’ve lost, and have been especially dominant in the last few years, winning ten out of 17 since the beginning of 1996.The average columns indicate that Australia tend to slip up in both aspects, the batting and the bowling, when they tour. At home against India, they average 39 with the bat and 29.49 with the ball; in tours to India since 1995, the batting average has dipped to less than 32, and the bowling one has gone up to more than 37.In these 17 Tests in India, Australian batsmen have scored more hundreds than the Indians – 16 to 15 (though their batsmen have also batted 28 more times). However, they’ve also been dismissed cheaply more often, getting out for 20 or less 178 times, compared to 151 for India.

Australia v India, in Tests

TestsAus wonInd wonDrawnBat ave-AusBat ave-IndOverall8238202335.4230.89in Australia40265939.0029.49in India4212151432.1532.42in India since 199517410331.5937.21Three teams have done significantly better than Australia when they’ve toured India, of which two are South Africa and England, teams you’d expect should also struggle to play spin. South Africa have won as many Tests as they’ve lost, and they’re the one team whose batting average is higher than the bowling one. For Australia, the bowling average is more than five runs higher than the batting average.

Overseas teams in India since 1995

TeamTestsWon/ lostRatioBat aveBowl avePakistan93/ 31.0034.0039.09South Africa125/ 51.0035.6731.58England123/ 40.7534.6035.12Australia174/ 100.4031.5937.21New Zealand130/ 50.0030.9345.79Sri lanka90/ 40.0034.2046.93West Indies60/ 40.0027.8344.03Zimbabwe40/ 30.0033.0164.08Australia’s susceptibility against spin was on display in their warm-up game against India A, and traditionally too they haven’t handled spin all that well in India. Since 1995, Indian spinners have averaged 29.05 runs per wicket against Australia in 17 Tests, their third-best against any team during this period. England and South Africa have the best stats against India’s spinners, but while England’s batsmen have performed relatively poorly against India’s seamers, South Africa have done well against them too. Australia’s stats against pace is pretty good in India, but they’ve succumbed to spin pretty regularly: 15 times India’s spinners have taken five-fors against them in 17 Tests.Almost half of those 15 five-fors have been taken by Harbhajan Singh, which explains his inclusion into the Indian squad despite not having lived up to his reputation in the domestic season. In 12 home Tests against Australia, Harbhajan has taken 81 wickets at 24.48. Anil Kumble was equally spectacular as well, with 62 wickets in ten Tests at 24.46, but in his absence, it remains to be seen if Harbhajan can be equally effective.Among the current Australian batsmen, Michael Clarke and Shane Watson are the two batsmen who’ve faced the Harbhajan threat in Tests in India. Clarke has the better stats against him, scoring 132 runs at an average of 44, while Watson averages 31. Both have pretty low scoring rates against him, with Watson scoring only 93 runs in 273 balls.Australia will also miss the experience of Ponting and Hussey, especially when it comes to handling Harbhajan. Ponting struggled against Harbhajan in 2001, but did much better thereafter, scoring 148 runs and being dismissed only twice. Hussey scored 136 off Harbhajan and was dismissed three times. In their absence much of the batting onus will be on Clarke, and though he scored a century in his first Test innings in India – which was also his debut – his overall numbers in India are disappointing: 686 runs in 19 innings at 38.11. Watson has done slightly better, averaging 40.09 in 11 innings.

India’s spinners and pace bowlers at home v each team in Tests since 1995

OppositionSpin-wktsAverage5WI/ 10WMPace-wktsAverage5WI/ 10WMWest Indies7924.027/ 06434.430/ 0New Zealand12727.148/ 25934.051/ 0Australia21029.0515/ 48236.572/ 0Zimbabwe4331.272/ 02737.291/ 0Pakistan9131.506/ 26735.165/ 1Sri Lanka7331.823/ 24836.082/ 0South Africa11832.615/ 05640.392/ 0England12034.847/ 16432.790/ 0

Clarke and Watson v Harbhajan Singh in Tests in India

BatsmanRunsBallsDismissalsAverageRun rateMichael Clarke132308344.002.57Shane Watson93273331.002.04While Australia’s batsmen have struggled against Indian spin, the visitors’ spinners haven’t made much of an impression on the Indian batsmen, either in terms of taking wickets or in terms of keeping the runs in check. The Australian spinners have conceded almost 42 runs per wicket, at an economy rate of 3.50 runs per over. Thus, the onus of taking wickets keeping a check on the runs has fallen on the fast bowlers, and they’ve done a reasonably good job of it. Among the bowlers in the current Australian squad, though, only Mitchell Johnson has played more than one Test, and his six matches have fetched him 21 wickets at 37.23.

Australia’s pace and spin in India in Tests since 1995

WicketsAverageEcon rateStrike rate5WI/ 10WMPace15733.782.8670.83/ 0Spin9041.733.5071.43/ 1Among the Indian batting lot, the pressure will be on Sachin Tendulkar and Virender Sehwag, both of whom have had poor spells of late. Tendulkar scored a commanding century in the Irani Cup and has an outstanding record against Australia both home and away, while Virender Sehwag has better stats in Australia than in India. The biggest contrast in numbers, though, is for MS Dhoni, whose home average against Australia is more than twice his away average against them.

Indian batsmen v Australia, home and away since 1995

BatsmanHome TestsAverage100s/ 50sAway TestsAverage100s/ 50sSachin Tendulkar1562.655/ 81555.424/ 7Virender Sehwag1040.151/ 51047.402/ 4MS Dhoni644.120/ 4718.690/ 1Murali Vijay262.501/ 0—All four venues hosting the Tests – Chennai, Hyderabad, Mohali and Delhi – have been pretty good ones for India: collectively they’ve lost only 13 out of 73 Tests at these grounds. Since 2000 they haven’t lost at any of these venues, winning 13 out of 21 Tests, and drawing eight; they’ve won five out of six in Delhi, four out of seven in Mohali and three out of six in Chennai. Australia, on the other hand, haven’t played a Test yet in Hyderabad, but have a losing record at the other three grounds, winning only two Tests out of 14, and losing six.

England do not lose too many Test matches these days

Andy Zaltzman25-Feb-2013England do not lose too many Test matches these days. But when they do lose, they lose properly. They go down hard, they go down fast, and they go down in a blaze of statistical ignominy. Since the Flower-Strauss era began, with an almost mathematics-defying innings defeat after collapsing to 51 all out in Jamaica three years ago, England have lost only five more Tests (which, to put their current travails in perspective, is as many as they lost in six weeks in Australia in 2006-07, or in two months against the West Indies whenever they played them in the mid-1980s). They have won 20, drawn 11, and risen to the top of the world rankings. But when they fail, they do not mess about with half-measures. They take a treble measure of neat cricketing vodka, and wash it down with a meths chaser.The ten-wicket Dubai splattering by a resurgent, skilful and determined Pakistan followed in the pattern of the 267-run clouting in Perth in last winter’s Ashes (do not let Australians persuade you that was in fact “last summer’s Ashes”, it was not; it was in the winter; after watching it, I went outside and had to put a woolly hat on; therefore it was winter; the Australians play cricket in winter; that is a fact). The sequence was partially interrupted by a fluctuating four-wicket loss to Pakistan at The Oval, a close game but one that nevertheless featured some historically inept batting by England. Prior to that, England had been clobbered by an innings by South Africa in Johannesburg, and by Australia at Headingley.All of these defeats have featured collapses of 1929 stock market proportions – displays of landmark batting uselessness in an era notable for its unusually persistent and increasingly dominant successes, and also for its dogged, match-saving rearguards. The Jamaica debacle was England’s third-lowest Test score of all time, and only the fifth time that ten Englishmen have failed to reach double figures in a Test innings; at Headingley, England had eight players dismissed for 3 or fewer in a Test innings for the first time in their history, registered 13 dismissals for less than five runs for the second time ever (the first was another 1880s scorebook-burning classic), and were dismissed in under 34 overs in an Ashes Test innings for the second time in 105 years; in Johannesburg, England failed to last 550 balls in their two innings combined for just the third time in over 100 years; at The Oval, all of England’s top six were dismissed for 17 or fewer in the first innings of a Test for the first time since 1887, none of England’s bottom six scored more than 6 runs in the second innings of a Test for only the seventh time in their history, and England lost their last seven wickets for less than 30 runs for the first time in over a decade; in Perth, they failed to last 100 overs in the two innings of a Test in Australia for the first time since 1903-04.Dubai was the latest outbreak of proper, unmitigated batting failure. England slunk to 42 for 4 in the first innings and 35 for 4 in the second ‒ the fifth-worst match performance by England’s top four wickets since the First World War. They then subsided to 94 for 7 and 87 for 7 – the first time since 1988 that England have lost their seventh wicket for less than 100 in both innings of a Test, and the sixth-worst match performance by England’s top seven wickets since the treaty of Versailles heralded 21 years of glorious peace for the world. (Those 21 years, of course, followed four years of war – giving Versailles an 84% success rate, and thus making it a better treaty than Bradman was a batsman. Arguably.)It is a curiosity that England’s rare failures are so cricketingly catastrophic. They have succeeded through collective excellence with bat and ball. They seem to fail with similarly impressive levels of teamwork.They have also tended to respond positively to their isolated failures. They may fall off their horse from time to time, but they get straight back on that horse, feed it a sugar lump, and then Knievel it over a row of buses. Each of their last four defeats has been followed by a victory. And a big victory – by and innings and lots in Melbourne in the Ashes, and at Lord’s against Pakistan, by 181 in Chittagong in the first Test after the Johannesburg blooper, and by 197 at The Oval after seeming to be intent on hurling the Ashes away at Leeds. They also followed the 51 all out schemozzle with 566 for 9 in the next Test.Certainly England were deservedly beaten in Dubai, and they were beaten like a naughty egg white in a 1970s police investigation. On the evidence of the Flower-Strauss years, from that beaten egg white, a deliciously crunchy meringue may grow in the Abu Dhabi Test. However, this admirable Pakistan team, only the second Pakistan Test side to contain (a) seven players over the age of 30 and (b) no one under the age of 25, is unlikely to be quite such compliant assistant dessert chefs as Australia were in Melbourne in 2010-11, or as a very, very different Pakistan team was at Lord’s 18 months ago.ExtrasThe more eagle-eyed Confectionery Stall readers among you may have noticed that I did not entirely predict the narrative and outcome of the first Test. My forecast of a one-nil series victory for England is now looking distinctly unlikely. At best. The two players I highlighted as the Ones to Watch did not adorn the match with scintillating brilliance. Azhar Ali adorned it with one solitary run, and Monty Panesar did not adorn it at all, other than by looking on lugubriously from the pavilion, wondering whether, given his glorious undefeated rearguard in his previous Test, in Cardiff in 2009, he might have been able to stem England’s collapses. In my minimal defence, I did write that England’s obviously imminent victory might not happen if they were “scuppered by the wiles of Saeed Ajmal”. At least seven true words out of 1100. That is by no means the worst performance ever by a British journalist. If I can indeed describe myself as a journalist. Which I certifiably cannot.Some stats: Saeed Ajmal became the first bowler to take ten wickets in a Test against England since Murali (twice) in 2006, and the first Pakistan bowler to do so since Abdul Qadir, who did it three times in 1987. England had lost 16 wickets to specialist spin bowlers in their previous three major series, at an average of 86 runs per wicket. In Dubai, Ajmal and Abdur Rehman took 14 for 186. They bowled very well. England batted very badly. Before the last Test, Ajmal had taken 21 wickets in UAE Tests at an average of 34.I did promise to write about India’s struggles in this blog. I have not done that. Many other people have done that. I may do it next time. Unless the struggles have been miraculously cured. Or become significantly worse.

Cricket’s turbulent last half-decade is chronicled here with an open-minded spirit of inquiry

Ashok Malik02-Mar-2013Asked for his assessment of the French Revolution of 1789, the 20th-century Chinese politician Zhou Enlai is reputed to have said, “It is too early to say.” Cricket buffs would respond similarly if asked about the long-term implications of the past five-odd years for their cherished game. The growing popularity of the T20 format, the invention of the IPL (and copycat leagues from Australia to Bangladesh), the seeming decline of Test cricket, the loss of certitudes in terms of technique and rigour, the limbo-like status of conventional limited-overs cricket, which seems trapped between the paganism of the IPL and the high church of the five-day contest – never has so much happened to cricket in so little time.It takes a brave man to attempt a biography of this period, and to write a first draft of history as it were. Samir Chopra, a professor of philosophy in New York by day and a passionate cricket fan (and ESPNcricinfo blogger) by day and night, attempts this with the honest, open-minded spirit of inquiry that defines the best sports fans. He writes of the IPL and its step-sibling, the ICL, the challenge these leagues – with their notion of private ownership of teams and team franchises, their ability to empower individual cricketers as free agents, and their capacity to permanently cripple the monopoly of cricket boards – posed and continue to pose to the established cricket order.Indeed, quite like in the case of Kerry Packer’s World Series Cricket and Australian officials, the BCCI won the battle with the ICL by incorporating it and its postulates. Of course, it did this not by surrendering to an individual media baron but by taking the template to its logical commercial and aesthetic conclusion (or absurdity):

“With the ICL, the franchise model has served to highlight the weakness of the nation-based structure of cricket in providing adequate employment to cricketers. And talk of the nation – and of loyalty to it – had, most importantly, also prompted talk about how franchises in a truly international league could put an end to nation-based cricket’s trading in the most problematic of 20th century obsessions, nationalism. The longer the IPL persists, the more successful it will be in raising the club-country question… raised by the ICL when it formed ‘national’ teams, and the more attention it will bring to national boards and the ICC and their claim to be the best guarantors of cricket’s future.”

As Chopra himself points out, the IPL has not entirely effaced nationalism. Indeed, in its conceptualisation as a cultural product and a business enterprise owned and promoted by Indians, it has merely provided the cricket-and-nationalism story another twist. Nevertheless, in giving cricketers the option to bypass old-mode international cricket altogether and to, by manoeuvring their way through the rules, become freelance pros, moving from one T20 league to the next, it has opened up avenues cricket did not have. An itinerant cricket professional, quite like an itinerant tennis pro or soccer star, is more of a reality today than ever before.Chopra examines the IPL franchise model, the top-down creation of a team identity rather than the organic, bottom-up evolution of such an identity from a neighbourhood, town or community, as in the case of established sports teams, whether in English football, American basketball or Australian Rules football. IPL loyalties are at an incipient stage. “Thus far,” Chopra writes, “fan rivalry in the IPL remains benign, for the atmosphere at IPL games is still more carnivalesque than gladiatorial. Older rivalries with their greater emotional hold will take over; the Delhi Daredevils fan returns to hoping David Warner will fail when he plays India. Perhaps this is unsurprising because such a fan is easily diverted by the cricket world’s other offerings once the short IPL season ends. This tenuous hold of the IPL franchise could prevent rabid fanhood, a blessing for the concerned Indian patriot and a curse for the IPL marketer. It could change if the role of franchises in Indian cricket is expanded…” That final half-sentence is pregnant with possibilities.How far can the franchise system go? In a section captivatingly titled “The escape of the franchise genie”, Chopra speculates upon the utopia/dystopia of an “internationalised IPL” with a “growth of franchises in test-playing countries and… in smaller, non-test playing ones”. In turn, this leads to a compelling question: Will such a broad-based international league – which would entail financial commitment and spectator interest in economies and geographies far beyond the subcontinent – remain an Indian product at all? Will such a hypothetical “internationalised” Indian Premier League be any more “Indian” than, say, the Indian Ocean?Cricket is a larger business than previously but in some respects it is also a smaller universe. Technology has brought the game closer to the viewer, literally. It has made the umpire’s job a nightmare. The internet and web-based media have led to such phenomena as ESPNcricinfo but they have also provided an avenue for emotion and petulance far removed from the ideal cricket sets for itself. In a fine last chapter (“Oh say, can you see? Final words”) Chopra talks of this brave new world of cricket, with its hopes and possibilities – such as watching the Ashes series of 2010 at his in-laws’ home in Cincinnati – and its fears: “If the desertion by players of tests turns from a trickle into a flood, the game might well and truly be over. But if cricketers still find the legend of test cricket an inspiration… then test cricket will prosper. But it will still need careful stewarding: the possibility of subsidising attendance at tests and the willingness to incur losses subsidised by other formats should be seriously considered.”Is this a wide-eyed appeal, a realistic proposal, the lament of a dying age, or the opening scene of cricket’s new normal? We don’t know. Chopra doesn’t either, but he asks the right questions, and has his heart in the right place.Brave New Pitch: The Evolution of Modern Cricket

Samir Chopra

HarperCollins India Publishers

ESPNcricinfo present the plays of the day from the third day at Headingley

David Hopps at Headingley26-May-2013Decision of the dayEngland’s decision not to enforce the follow-on brought much debate. They had a 180-run lead when they dismissed New Zealand for 174 (the follow-on figure was 150 because the first day was washed out), and until some last-wicket slogging brought 52 from five overs, they had taken nine wickets for 70 runs in 26 overs. Even after Neil Wagner and Trent Boult’s merry-making, they had still only been in the field for 43.4 overs.So why did they not follow-on especially with the risk of rain on the final day? The temptation is to suggest that England’s management had an eye on the Ashes. Absolutely no risk of overbowling their pace attack or, for that matter, Graeme Swann, who is not long back from an elbow operation, will be ta. There is also the fact that the follow-on is much more likely to go wrong for a four-bowler attack. But there was another reason – and it was that the pitch was still pretty flat as Alastair Cook emphasised with a blissful innings after tea.Ball of the daySwann’s three-wicket burst attracted most of the attention, but a delivery from Steven Finn also sticks in the memory. It was the first ball received by Tim Southee, cutting back steeply off a good length, and almost slicing him in two as he managed an inside edge. Finn, back on his full run, was approaching his best again – more good news for England.Anxiety of the dayNick Compton’s Ashes place is held to be under pressure, for all the protestations within the England camp that he has had a solid start to his Test career, and his anxiety was evident. He got off the mark to the first ball he faced, from Southee, with a dreadful shot – a foot-fast cut which sent the ball whistling behind square on the legside off an inside edge. He became ever more pensive and, even if you could advance a case that he had seen off the new ball, that he had played a team game by contentedly acting as second fiddle to Cook, and that Jonathan Trott was just as pawky, it was an unattractive, not to say limited, innings. The fact Compton had to await a New Zealand review for a clear bat-pad to forward short leg just added to his agony.Injury of the dayThe last thing New Zealand needed as they tried to recover self-respect was an injury to one of their pace bowlers. They suffered one all the same as Boult, who had taken the last two wickets to finish with 5 for 57, pulled out of the attack after aggravating a strained side after only two overs. Boult’s figures were his second best in Tests, outdone only by his six wickets against England in Auckland in March.

The confidence he has gained out of performing against the big names in the IPL has helped Ambati Rayudu climb to the top of his game once more, after a few troubled years

Amol Karhadkar29-Apr-2013Ambati Rayudu hails from Hyderabad and represents the franchise from Mumbai. But there’s something about the team from Bangalore that ensures Rayudu is in the headlines when playing against them.In 2011, his match-winning, unbroken partnership of 110 with Sachin Tendulkar against Royal Challengers Bangalore was followed by the master batsman asking Rayudu to join him at the presentation ceremony to share the Man of the Match award. Last year, his ugly spat with Royal Challengers’ Harshal Patel resulted in Rayudu being fined his entire match fee for the game.This year, again, Rayudu, the only regular without an international cap in the Mumbai Indians’ star-studded line-up, was in the thick of the action during Mumbai Indians’ high-profile duel with Royal Challengers. If his controversial run-out, which resulted in the Wankhede Stadium crowd booing Royal Challengers captain Virat Kohli all through the night, wasn’t enough, Rayudu waited and waited with his breath held before latching on to a skier from Chris Gayle just a few inches inside the boundary rope. It may not have looked as spectacular as some of the other catches so far in IPL 2013, but in terms of its impact on the game Rayudu’s catch was right up there at the top. No wonder then that as soon he had regained his balance after completing the catch, he burst into a wild, celebratory sprint. The catch turned out to be the catalyst for Mumbai Indians’ mauling of Royal Challengers.If one has to draw up a list of domestic cricketers for whom the IPL has turned out to be more of a boon than bane, Rayudu would feature at the top. His fall was as sharp as his rise as the next big thing in batting from the stables of Hyderabad. He went from being the most promising youngster around in 2002, to being discarded by both the domestic teams from the state by 2007, and joined the Indian Cricket League. And then came the IPL. Once Rayudu returned to the BCCI’s fold following ‘amnesty’ in 2009, he was signed by Mumbai Indians, then led by Tendulkar and coached by Robin Singh, both of whom rated him highly despite the middle-order batman failing to make optimal use of his phenomenal talent on the field. A decent debut IPL season in 2010 was followed by a better one: in 2011 he finished Mumbai Indians’ second-highest run-getter after Tendulkar.”IPL definitely worked for him in many ways. Once he started performing well against the international players and in front of big crowds, it made him really confident,” Sanath Kumar, who has been the coach of Baroda – Rayudu’s domestic team – for the last two seasons, said. “That is when he started believing all over again that he can come back and play for the country. During our numerous conversations, he always says ‘money will come and go sir, but representing the country is the main goal’. I am sure he is not very far from achieving the goal since he has been doing all the things right.”Once his confidence was restored, it reflected in his performances for Baroda. He gained in consistency, something that he had badly lacked for almost a decade prior to that. This ensured he became a permanent fixture in the India A squad over the last two years. And the big dream of the boy who had led India’s Under-19 World Cup team in 2004 was achieved ahead of last year’s twin Twenty20s against England, when he was named in India’s squad. Rayudu might not have played in the series, but the call-up rubberstamped the fact that he had risen to the top again after his falling away.Two years ago, during an interaction with this writer, Rayudu had mentioned Robin Singh was one of those people who stood behind him like a rock, even during his difficult days. “Robin has been the one who has been guiding me all these years,” Rayudu said. “He has been telling me to spend time in the middle. ‘You will eventually make many runs and you will personally be surprised with the runs that you get’ he says.” Now that backing is paying off for Mumbai Indians.Over the past four IPLs, Rayudu has played a role similar to what Rahul Dravid did for India’s ODI side a decade ago. From an opener to No. 8, he has been floated all across the line-up. He has also donned the gloves when the team was struggling to find a batsman-wicketkeeper.During this year’s edition, his role has changed again. The gloves are off but Rayudu is being utilised more at No. 6 with a decision being taken to use Kieron Pollard ahead of him. He didn’t seem to take much time to get adapted to his new role of a finisher, as his cameo against Delhi Daredevils showed – that was the first game in which he was slotted in at No. 6 this season.Rayudu has not really surprised himself with his performances, but he certainly has forced quite a few of those who had written him off earlier to have a rethink.

If you are a fan of Indian cricket, the Sunday game in Delhi would have made you very happy

Prithvijit Roy22-Apr-2013Choice of game
It was my dream to watch a good Virender Sehwag innings live and write an account of the day. I have watched matches in stadiums since 2005, my under-grad days, and it’s an addictive exercise. This was the first time I got to watch Sehwag in the flesh.Getting to the stadium
Since it was a marquee game, the stadium was packed. With all the security checks and general crowd mismanagement by the authorities, we missed the first three balls. I was heartbroken, because I had wanted to watch Sachin Tendulkar and Ricky Ponting walk in together. However, I was relieved to see that it was Dwayne Smith and not Ponting who had accompanied Tendulkar.Fan love
All the spectators watched Tendulkar’s entry with bated breath, regardless of the team they supported. Everyone must have cheered his defensive prod as much they did as his trademark straight drives or his vicious pulls to the boundary line. Shahbaz Nadeem became the darling of the crowd because he dropped a catch off on 37. It was only when Tendulkar was dismissed that you could make out the difference in allegiances.As the evening wore on and a cool breeze blew into the stadium, Rohit Sharma and Kieron Pollard made mincemeat of Delhi’s hapless attack.Key perfomer
I had already got my money’s worth from seeing Tendulkar bat. But I soon realised that was only the appetiser, because the main course was to be served by the artist and the butcher – Mahela Jayawardene and Virender Sehwag. From a spectator’s point of view, both styles were equally appealing. While you could hear a loud thwack when Sehwag struck the ball, it was only when you saw the ball race towards the boundary that you realised Jayawardene had made contact.My friends know I am an ardent Sehwag fan and he was indeed the showstopper yesterday, but in the years to come, perhaps, I will recall the razor-like precision with which Jayawardene manipulated the field. Who could believe this team was at the bottom of the table? I can proudly say I was a part of an evening crowd that watched one of the best batting displays. There were no slogs, no dilscoops or ugly hoicks. Just proper cricketing shots that struck a chord with the audience.One thing I’d have changed about the match
I’d have preferred to see Ponting bat rather than sit in his pads in the dugout.The comic relief
In between all the Sehwag-Jayawardene mania, Harbhajan Singh entertained us when he got hold of a kite that had floated down to the ground.Crowd meter
I usually try to get tickets for the East Stand, which has a better view, but this time I only managed to get seats in the West Stand. It was fascinating to watch all those mobile phone flashing across the stand to capture Tendulkar at the boundary line, the closest many fans would get to him. The good thing about players like Tendulkar and Harbhajan is that they acknowledge their supporters wherever they play, making it a point to wave to the crowd.Unfortunately my phone had got switched off, so I could not analyse the match with my friends who were watching TV, nor could I add a photo of Tendulkar on the boundary to Facebook to make them envious.Overall
As the match was drawing to a close, with Daredevils needing seven to win (and Sehwag on 91) David Warner became the villain of the day as he clipped a boundary and prevented Sehwag from getting a hundred before the match finished.Knowing that it would take us a long time to get out of the stadium, we hurried down from the third floor to the first so that it would be easy to make our exit. Seeing the floodlit stadium from the bottom up made me think how beautiful some of the innovations of this game are, like coloured clothing and day-night cricket. It has given the sport a wider appeal.