All posts by h716a5.icu

There are No.11s who have been known for their incompetence with the bat, but Chris Martin’s lack of skill is legendary

S Rajesh01-Dec-2008
A familiar sight for Chris Martin, as his stumps are splayed yet again © Getty Images
There are No.11s who have been known for their incompetence with the bat, but Chris Martin’s lack of skill is legendary. In the second Test rout against Australia in Adelaide, Martin lasted eight balls in two innings, and was bowled without getting off the mark on both occasions. It was his sixth instance of bagging a pair in only 45 Tests, which is already a record, two clear of the second-highest.There are more dubious batting records that Martin can claim ownership to: in 45 Tests, he has only scored 76 runs – that’s 1.69 runs per match, almost half the number of wickets he takes per match (3.24). His average of 2.17 is the lowest among batsmen who have played at least 20 Tests.Martin also easily takes the title of worst No.11 batsman: in the 61innings he has batted at that position, his average is 2.30 (which is marginally higher than his overall average since he hasn’t scored a single run in the four innings he has batted higher), more than a run lower than the second-placed Maninder Singh of India.

Worst No. 11s in Tests (Qual: at least 25 innings at No. 11)

BatsmanInningsRunsAverageDucksChris Martin61762.3023Maninder Singh30643.369Dilip Doshi361174.3314Neil Adcock351004.348BS Chandrasekhar751644.4319Fidel Edwards33914.559Bruce Reid28734.865Jim Higgs27644.924Alf Valentine461284.9211Lance Gibbs711834.9410Phil Tufnell441075.3511Devon Malcolm491725.3714Venkatesh Prasad26725.536Paul Adams301235.856Henry Olonga261046.118Of the 65 innings Martin has played, he has remained unbeaten 30 times, which means he has been dismissed on 35 occasions, 25 of which were before he got off the mark. As a factor of dismissed innings, Martin’s percentage of getting out without scoring is a whopping 71.43, which again gives him the top spot, more than ten percentage points clear of Pakistan’s Danish Kaneria.

Highest duck factor as a % of completed innings (Qual: at least 15 ducks)

PlayerCompleted inningsDucksDuck %Chris Martin352571.43Danish Kaneria382360.53BS Chandresekhar412356.10Danny Morrison452453.33Phil Tufnell301550.00Devon Malcolm391641.03Glenn McGrath873540.23Merv Dillon652640.00Fidel Edwards411639.02Courtney Walsh1244334.68Martin is still 18 ducks short of equalling Courtney Walsh’s world record, but the rate at which he’s going, you’d expect him to get there pretty quickly. At an average of 1.8 Tests per duck, which is his current rate, Martin will equal Walsh’s record in his 80th Test, 52 fewer than the number Walsh needed to amass his 43 zeroes. Clearly, if the baton passes to Martin, he will – given his current batting prowess – be the rightful owner of that record.

Chris Gayle’s stated lack of interest in the traditional form of the game has obviously been adopted as the team mantra

Fazeer Mohammed25-May-2009Things are going very much according to plan for the West Indies cricketers in England. Chris Gayle’s stated lack of interest in the traditional form of the game has obviously been adopted as the team mantra if the general absence of fight in the two one-sided Tests is anything to go by. Then just to reassure us that almost everyone wearing the burgundy colours is on board with the captain’s enthusiastic preference for the Twenty20 stuff, we had the edifying spectacle of a swift batting capitulation under a brilliant blue sky in Sunday’s one-day International in Bristol.Given that not much energy and effort have been expended so far in the month since their arrival in the country, other than to try and stay warm, the Caribbean side should be all primed and ready for the real action – at least as they see it – when they take on Australia in their opening match of the ICC World Twenty20 on June 6 at The Oval in London. Already I’m feeling sorry for Ricky Ponting’s side and wondering if they’ll recover psychologically from the imminent hammering in time for the first Test of the Ashes series a month later in Cardiff.Really, there’s no other way to interpret the absence of thought almost from first ball to last of the 38.3 overs that the West Indies occupied in scratching together 160 runs on a good pitch in brilliant sunshine. Normally you would characterise the manner of most of the dismissals as either thoughtless or inept, from Gayle being bowled in Graeme Swann’s first over attempting a second consecutive six off the spinner to No. 10 Sulieman Benn swiping needlessly with the very capable Darren Sammy at the other end and more than 14 overs still available.However, given that most of these same players showed admirable fighting qualities over the past 18 months, especially a few weeks ago right here in the region against the same opponents, you just have to assume that there were other priorities occupying their precious time. At the very least, they must be saving themselves for something bigger, and it is unlikely that the something bigger is Tuesday’s final ODI at Edgbaston.Jerome Taylor’s successful attempt at running himself out after he drove a delivery to Andrew Strauss at short extra-cover was probably the icing though on a very tall cake, comprising layer after layer of careless, sorry, distracted batsmanship that involved even the usually resolute Shivnarine Chanderpaul, who sliced an attempted pull to short third man.Dwayne Bravo, fresh from his exertions on behalf of the Mumbai Indians in South Africa at the same time that the West Indians were being humiliated at Lord’s and Chester-le-Street, was well on the way to upsetting the general trend of play with a typically flamboyant and adventurous half-century. But his dismissal – bowled in Paul Collingwood’s first over – gave the lifelong Sunderland supporter an appetite for Trini wickets that was further satisfied by the removal of both Denesh Ramdin and Kieron Pollard.

For those of us here at home pondering overnight about the dilemma of trying to follow so many big sporting events taking place simultaneously, the West Indies’ swift collapse also eased those concerns considerably

Just on that point of Sunderland, maybe they were as distracted as so many others in England by the drama of the last day of the Premier League season and were channelling all their collective positive energy in the direction of the Stadium of Light up in the North-East where fellow West Indian Kenwyne Jones was trying to ensure that the team in red and white stripes got the required result at home to Chelsea?No wonder Collingwood was batting in a hurry, his unbeaten 44 racing England to victory with 14 overs to spare and the sun still high in the late spring English sky, leaving the Man of the Match and others worried about the plight of either Sunderland, Newcastle United, Middlesbrough or Hull City in seeking to avoid the drop into the Championship Division to find a television and sweat over the second half of their respective games.And, of course, there was the small matter of the grand finale to the Indian Premier League. How could I forget? After all, from captain to whoever is the cook, it is this well-remunerated vupping fiesta that has won over the hearts and minds of most of our cricketers, and with that match also reaching the halfway stage down in Johannesburg just as England were completing victory in the West Country, there would have been more than enough time after the boring post-match formalities to follow the action at the Wanderers and see if the Royal Challengers Bangalore were able to reach the target of 144 set by the Deccan Chargers.For those of us here at home pondering overnight about the dilemma of trying to follow so many big sporting events taking place simultaneously, the West Indies’ swift collapse also eased those concerns considerably, more so when Taylor sprayed two wides in his first three deliveries at the start of the England reply to confirm that there was no spark in the visitors’ camp to ignite a miraculous fightback.Yes, it took England fully 36 overs to take that unbeatable 1-0 lead, when it seemed that they would have accomplished the task in 20. But to all intents and purposes the match was over as a contest from the moment Bravo perished in the 28th over of the day, releasing those of us still hooked on West Indies cricket from the moral obligation to stay to the bitter end, especially with so much else going on.In that sense, our boys did us a favour.

Sachin steers the ship home, but is this really a Twenty20?

Abishek Maroli23-Mar-2010The game
This game had two stalwarts of Indian cricket pitted against each other. Sachin v Sourav. Need I say more?Team supported
I’m fairly neutral when it comes to the IPL. I don’t support any one team because it’s the only tournament where I can just enjoy the high standards of cricket without the accompanying patriotic tension. However, for this particular match, I had promised a friend (and a devout Mumbai Indians supporter) that I would root for the home team.Key performer
Without a doubt, Sachin Tendulkar. From making the right bowling changes, to setting perfect fields, which seemed impenetrable, to batting like the genius he is, Sachin was as good as two players in the side.One thing I’d have changed
Shikhar Dhawan’s wicket had just fallen, breaking a very threatening partnership. The in-form Saurabh Tiwary had come out and the very first ball he faced, there was a huge appeal for lbw. I’d have liked it if the umpire had given him out, since Tiwary later narrowed the run-ball gap decisively.Face-off I relished
The second over of the game made for interesting viewing. Zaheer Khan bowled an excellent line to Chris Gayle, which the latter couldn’t bludgeon away. There was visible tension between the two, with glares being exchanged. Zaheer went on to take Gayle’s wicket off the final ball of the innings.Accessories
Just a whistle (plenty were available outside the stadium), and my excessively loud voice!Wow moment
Sourav Ganguly catching Tiwary. Just before that, Ganguly had been fielding in front of the stand I was in and was being booed for not acknowledging the crowd’s support for him. The catch was a brilliant one and the entire stadium, our stand especially, applauded.Player watch
Ganguly, Angelo Mathews and the lesser known Harpreet Singh fielded at the boundary closest to us. Mathews waved and was generally applauded. Not Ganguly, though, as mentioned earlier.Shot of the day
There were two, on either end of the batting spectrum, that made the cut for me. The first one had to come off the blade of the Tendulkar: a signature straight drive off Ishant Sharma; the ball sped to the boundary faster than anyone could say “Citi Moment of Success”. The other one came from Tiwary. The shot was all muscle, and the ball flew past the bowler’s head faster than it had arrived, and through the air past the boundary rope. It set the tone for the rest of Tiwary’s brief stint at the crease.Crowd meter
The ground was packed like it was an Indian version of Noah’s ark and all the people of Mumbai had come there to be saved from their arduous daily routines. The noise was deafening and the support unwavering.Hardship factor
During the second innings drinks weren’t too easily available, and the Mumbai heat was taking its toll on everyone.Entertainment
There were a number of popular English and Hindi songs played throughout the first innings. These, along with the anthems of the teams, kept the crowds entertained. However, the sound system was mere decoration for the duration of the second innings, when absolutely no songs were played. The home team was batting and the crowd expected music. Was this the Brabourne Stadium’s idea of electricity conservation?Banner of the day
This one echoed the tune from a popular song from a recent Hindi movie, :”Give me some sixes / Give the bowlers pain / 200 was not a fluke / Why don’t you do it once again?”TV or stadium?
To watch the game in the stadium was a commercial-free delight. On TV, we’re constantly bombarded with ad after ad, in between overs, at the fall of a wicket, and the most recent disaster, in-over adverts. Watching live, I was able to watch players talk to each other, the slight field adjustments for different batsmen, the team huddle at the fall of a wicket, and so on. I must say, it was truly spectacular.Marks out of 10
6. Having watched the Mumbai Indians v Rajasthan Royals game at the same venue about a week before, my expectations from this match were high, but a total of 155 meant I missed the hard-hitting fun of Twenty20. There was no doubt, though, that the quality of the cricket was excellent, and the same can be said about the atmosphere. However, a nail-biting finish was missed.

At tea on the opening day at Durban, England were looking short of options and short of ideas, but six overs into the evening session, there was a very different complexion to proceedings

Andrew McGlashan in Durban26-Dec-2009Rarely has creating something out of nothing seemed quite such an appropriate phrase. At tea on the opening day at Durban, England were looking short of options and short of ideas, but six overs into the evening session, there was a very different complexion to proceedings. All of a sudden it was the tourists who ended in the happier position.That’s how quickly Test matches can change. The value of adding two wickets to any scoreline was highlighted as a pair of batsmen who looked set to reach hundreds, Jacques Kallis and Graeme Smith, fell within 17 balls of each for 75 apiece. But it was the manner of their dismissals – Kallis caught at slip pushing forward against Graeme Swann and Smith run out in a horrendous mix-up – that made the turnaround so much more unlikely. All throughout the day, it was England’s quicks who had looked like causing the problems.The feeling persists that England have picked a team to hang in during this series, rather than take it by the scruff of the neck – once again, they opted to play the extra batsman in Ian Bell rather than strengthen the bowling with Luke Wright or Ryan Sidebottom. But if that is the plan, so far it is paying dividends. They managed to escape Centurion with a draw and have now clawed back their position at Kingsmead to such an extent that it was South Africa who were relieved when bad light closed in.”When they were 160 for 2 and then all of a sudden you take three big wickets it puts it right back in our favour, and we feel as if we’ve finished the day quite strongly,” said the pick of England’s bowlers, Graham Onions. “But the way we bowled and fielded I thought we deserved that little bit of luck that came our way. We hung in there during a tough period when the ball wasn’t doing a great deal.”Batting had been hard work against England’s three frontline pacemen, especially during the first hour when Onions, James Anderson and Stuart Broad were outstanding. But in energy-sapping humidity they couldn’t carry on forever and had to be rotated in short spells. Andrew Strauss had to turn to his other options with Swann coming on inside the second hour. Even Jonathan Trott was handed an over before lunch, and had another exploratory spell ahead of Onions in the afternoon session.Still, it’s dangerous to jump to early conclusions and crucially for Strauss the scoring never ran away from England. In the first innings at Centurion, England showed an ability to dry up the run-rate when not taking wickets, which is a priceless commodity for a captain who doesn’t possess the strongest strike options. Helped by the early stranglehold offered by two new-ball blows, the first 14 overs brought a measly 18 runs and South Africa’s run-rate didn’t push above three-an-over all day. Which meant that, as and when England could somehow fashion a breakthrough, they would be right back in the match.After tea it came from that man, Swann, who has never been far from the action in the early stages of this series. In conditions similar to Centurion, which suited pace far more than spin, he cleverly came round the wicket and pushed one across Kallis that was edged to Paul Collingwood at slip. Yet, the next scalp was the one that really changed the balance of power when Smith and AB de Villiers were involved in a Pietersen-Trott style piece of running, which resulted in the South Africa captain departing, although only by a matter of inches.”We weren’t 100% sure,” Onions said, after Alastair Cook had sprinted for the stumps and broken the wicket with ball in hand. “Then when it goes up to the changing rooms, you’re looking up there hoping. We were just thinking, this is a key part of the game. If he was not out, how would it have finished?”But it was very good thinking by Alastair. He was going to throw it at AB’s end – but eventually he thought: ‘No, I’m going to try to get Smith out’. He could quite easily have thrown at the stumps, missed them and he could have been a foot out.”Onions then capped an impressive personal day, in which he had been handed the new-ball duties ahead of Stuart Broad, and built on Cook’s swift work by trapping JP Duminy lbw, moments before the players left the field. At Centurion, Broad’s first spell had wasted the hardness of the new ball, despite removing Graeme Smith for a duck, but here Onions set the tone with an opening burst of four overs for two runs.”Throughout my short career I have generally taken the new ball, but obviously coming into a squad with Jimmy and Stuart, they are the opening bowlers and I have no problem with that, ” he said. “I was very pleased to open today and it’s a little bit of pressure which I thrive on.”If Onions can set the right tone again on the second day, England have a chance of restricting South Africa to a first-innings total of less than 300. Any such achievement would set up this Test match beautifully.

Between them, New Zealand and Sri Lanka have made seven semi-final appearances in five World Cups since 1996. When the whole world is watching, they raise their game a notch

Sidharth Monga in Colombo28-Mar-2011The World Cup does something to these two teams, two teams that are not financial drawcards in an immensely closed-world cricket family. It does something wonderful to them, for they keep putting in inspired performances at world events, and often feature in the last two or three matches of these tournaments. Between them, New Zealand and Sri Lanka have made seven semi-final appearances in five World Cups since 1996, the year when Sri Lanka announced themselves as world-beaters. In the last five World Cups, New Zealand have missed the final four only in 1996 and 2003, and Sri Lanka in 1999. This is the second successive World Cup semi-final they are playing against each other; hardly ever are they miserable in other world events either. Except for Australia, no other big team has that good a record over the last 15 years.While the other bigger teams are often at the risk of being bogged down by expectations, or jaded and tired thanks to their tight schedules, or in certain cases not good enough, Sri Lanka and New Zealand often find their best cricket in World Cups, playing freely and purposefully. When the whole world is watching, they raise their game a notch; in New Zealand’s case, against much stronger opposition.There is often a message to be sent out. At least for Sri Lanka, who are still not considered a big team by many accounts. For England, Australia and South Africa, they are still the sideshows; whenever they invite Sri Lanka for a home series, it is usually before or after the main event of their home seasons, in a slot that is otherwise kept for Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. It is not that there is some discussion in Sri Lankan team meetings to this effect, but the feeling remains among the team.Mahela Jayawardene agrees. “What I see is we have produced some extraordinary players,” he told ESPNcricinfo. “Yes, maybe we haven’t got the recognition, which is true. But it hasn’t deterred us or disappointed us. We have played consistent cricket for the last 15 years, ever since 1996; 1999 was probably the only time we didn’t do ourselves justice, but since 1996 everyone who has played for Sri Lanka has played with a lot of pride and passion. We have carried that through.” He agrees to there being the extra motivation at world events. That while their other good performances can go unnoticed, on the world stage they get the attention they deserve.New Zealand’s rising to such occasions is perhaps a bit more complex. They cannot claim to have enjoyed the kind of natural talent Sri Lanka do. They have a limited pool of players to draw from, which is further crippled by recurring injuries to some of their best talent. Except for 1992, when they became a threat only once Martin Crowe’s team started dominating in the league stage, they have never been favourites. As cricketers, they seem to like it when nobody gives them a chance, when people have to be proved wrong.And they don’t get to the semi-finals by just winning one knockout game, as the argument this time may be. In 1999 and in 2007, they went through rigorous league stages and Super Sixes / Eights and were genuinely one of the four best teams over those World Cups. Even in this World Cup, they beat Pakistan in the league stages, the only team other than New Zealand to have beaten two title contenders so far. Leading into this World Cup, though, New Zealand were sleepwalking through whitewashes at the hands of Bangladesh and India, at venues the World Cup would be played at.Somehow, as they have done in the past, New Zealand have found enough fire and will to make their sixth semi-final in 10 World Cups. There is nothing tangible that explains the transformation. Yes, the coach has changed, but to put it all down to John Wright and Allan Donald would be to do injustice to the players who have put recent disappointments behind them. As Daniel Vettori said, “Look, John [Wright] has been fantastic for us. The players took the blame for those losses, and I think they should get credit for the wins as well. It has to be a combination of the two.”Tomorrow one of these proud teams will bow out. It is a stage that should ideally get the best out of them. Sri Lanka once again will want the world to look at them when everybody is so engrossed in the other semi-final that they have to request journalists at press conferences to refrain from asking questions about the India-Pakistan game. New Zealand have even more people to prove wrong, for once again they are massive underdogs. More so than against South Africa, because Sri Lanka are likely to neither relent nor break. And they are at home.Whatever the result be, it is good to see the unusual usual suspects in the final four once again.

He can take wickets and he can give the batsmen lip. What’s not to love?

Osama Siddiqui27-Oct-2011Choice of game
I’d always wanted to watch the opening day of a Test match, and with Pakistan’s second Test against Sri Lanka being held in Dubai, where I live and work, I took the day off and made sure I was there.Team supported
As a Pakistani, it was only natural for me to be supporting Pakistan. I hoped they would get to bowl first because I believed that was my best chance to see some exciting cricket. Dilshan won the toss, elected to bat, and the Pakistan bowling line-up duly delivered.Key performer
Umar Gul, without a doubt. He shook the Sri Lankan top order with three wickets in his first five overs. His sensational new-ball spell set the tone for the rest of the innings, and though he took no further wickets, the damage had already been done. He also dispelled any doubts about his match fitness by bowling close to 20 overs in the dayOne thing I’d have changed
I would have picked a third seamer for Pakistan. The choice to include two specialist spinners, Saeed Ajmal and Abdur Rehman, might end up being vindicated, but today, with the conditions offering some assistance to the seamers and Sri Lanka at 73 for 5, Pakistan really missed the pace and energy that Aizaz Cheema or Wahab Riaz would have offered them.Interplay I enjoyed
The 65th over of play was an absolute cracker. It was after tea and Sri Lanka’s ninth-wicket partnership was beginning to frustrate Pakistan. Misbah-ul-Haq had just replaced Ajmal with Rehman, and Junaid Khan looked like he was warming up to replace Gul, who walked up to Misbah and requested one more over.Gul’s first ball to Herath hit him on the pads, and the fielders and the crowd went up in an almighty appeal, which was turned down. Gul turned around and gave Herath a earful. The crowd, loving the aggression, turned the noise up even further; Gul, seemingly spurred on by the crowd, kept the verbal barrage going. Herath’s strike partner, Chanaka Welegedara, came up and had a word, only to get his own share of abuse. As Gul finally returned to the top of his mark, the crowd could sense the battle in the middle was heating up. Herath took a single off the next ball, bringing Welegedara on strike to face some fiery short-pitched stuff. The first delivery was, incredibly, hooked for six, and the remaining ones safely if not utterly convincingly negotiated. It would be the last over Gul would bowl in the day. He had quite clearly given it his all and the crowd let him know his efforts were appreciated.Wow moment
Pakistan’s catching in the morning stood out for its assuredness. After the catching in the second innings of the Abu Dhabi Test, it was remarkable to see the first four catching opportunities offered today being comfortably snapped up. Unfortunately Pakistan soon reverted to type: Sangakkara was dropped by Taufeeq Umar before he had reached 30, and Herath by Younis Khan off the first ball he faced.Shot of the day
Although there was some brilliant strokeplay all around the wicket from Sangakkara, the shot of the day had to be Welegedara’s pull shot off Junaid Khan right before tea. It was positively thumped for four, and the crack literally reverberated around the stadium. The fact that it came completely against the run of play with Pakistan well on top and Junaid in the middle of another probing spell from around the wicket made it even more remarkable.Banner of the day
The only ones I saw were the ones I was holding up! Despite my best efforts I remained unsuccessful in catching the cameraman’s eye with a “Who needs Amir and Asif when you have Junaid and Gul” poster, and one offering some freelance consultancy to the PCB.Marks out of 10
An 8. I do wish more people had turned up to watch than the few hundred in attendance. There were moments when the crowd really got into the game. Had it been 10,000 people making noise rather than a few hundred, it would have made for a truly memorable experience.Overall
The day lived up to all that I had hoped for and I thoroughly enjoyed the cricket. I especially loved the ebbs and flows through the day and the battles within the game that seem to be a luxury afforded only to the longest format of cricket.A very well-informed British gentleman of Pakistani origin was next to me in the stands. He was here especially for the Test match. As he took his seat, Junaid had just bowled the first ball of the 12th over from over the wicket to Dilshan and had had a leg before-appeal turned down. “He needs to go around the wicket if he wants to take a wicket,” my new neighbour said. The very next ball Junaid went around the wicket, and with the last ball of the over, bowling from around the wicket, he dismissed Dilshan.

The recommendations of the Argus review are beginning to be put in place. Pat Howard, Cricket Australia’s general manager, talks about achieving these goals

Interview by Daniel Brettig23-Jan-2012″When backs have come to the wall, people have stood up at different times and performed. I think overall there’s encouraging signs throughout the team”•Getty ImagesImprove the skills of the Australian team
Mickey Arthur deserves a lot of credit and he’s also fortunate to have some good assistant coaches who are drilling in some skills. Obviously Steve Rixon as a former head coach – we’re lucky we’re getting a complementary skill set together with all those guys. They’re delivering on the basics and giving very good messages. It’s great to have a plan and work on it but also to address skill-sets. The players have a fantastic work ethic and I think between all those guys they’ve come together to really focus on that.We’re aware the coaching team is working a hell of a lot with the players around specific feedback and training smarter. More than anything, a little bit of stability helps. The team went through a bit of transition, but there was a real focus and steadfastness about the senior leaders and the senior coaches, and as a consequence, I think the Australian players have been challenged and have really stood up and executed their skills particularly well.The Argus review was the start of that challenge. I think the players deserve a mountain of credit for how they’ve embraced stepping up to that level. It hasn’t been a seamless series – at times the team has been in a bit of trouble. When backs have come to the wall, people have stood up and performed.Improve the selection function
Some of the changes came in with the last team. Andrew Hilditch is a very good man and brought in some stuff with his team, but John Inverarity’s introduced some new talent to the team. What I liked was all the bowlers they looked at played in the Australia A game, and Ben Hilfenhaus bowled very well. They trialled some younger players but had faith in all of them and used them at different times due to injury or opportunity. I think the management of those guys has been very good in terms of keeping them close to the team. At the same time, the players have performed, and first and foremost the credit goes to those guys actually delivering in the middle of the pitch. They’ve embraced the competition for places. I think that’s one of the biggest things – we all believe in the talent, not only in the 11 or 12 playing, but also those players in and around the side as well. Performances and depth will allow that really healthy competition.The focus is that Arthur is communicating with the guys in the team, and Inverarity is spending time with those guys outside the team. We’re always looking for improvement, looking for growth, but I think the first two months in the role have certainly been encouraging.Improve the culture of the Australian team
I try to stay out of the dressing room as much as I can, but from what I’ve seen and in discussions with the captain, the culture of the team is extremely positive at the moment. And I think you saw that at the end of the game [in Perth] – it is a positive change room; a change room with a lot of character in terms of the ability to fight and to perform. Obviously winning helps, but it wasn’t that long ago that we had the Hobart game, and the guys have bounced back from that. The players deserve a lot of credit for how they’ve approached this summer, and as a consequence, I think that culture is building, that belief is coming.You need sufficient skills to be within the frame, obviously. No one is picked if they don’t perform to be recognised for their core skills. But then the selection panel [also] considers their contribution to the team, the effect those players are having on the team – are they coming from winning teams? All those things are important to assess what impact those players are having. And obviously John being able to sit down with the players to hear about who the good leaders are in other teams and getting feedback can add so much to your selection decisions.Ricky Ponting has spoken about the value people add outside their core skill. Be it their fielding, be it their character and the sort of leadership they produce, and how much they give to a side. To me, it is fantastic to see players supported [by each other]. You see David Warner score a hundred and the batsman at the other end [Ed Cowan] comes up and embraces him because he sees him as an important part of the team. Inverarity talks about adding to the pot more than you’re taking out, and he looks for those characters that add to that team environment.

“I think Michael [Clarke] deserves all the accolades that he’s got all series in terms of his growth. I think it has been an extremely positive summer for him to be able to assess himself and be able to look back at the end of the series”

Improve leadership around the team and define roles more clearly
There were some 360-degree reviews of some of the leadership group in one of the earlier series, and we don’t believe we’ll do it every series, but we will review it at least on an annual basis to get feedback from the group, and that was done not only on a player basis but also testing on coaches that come through. I was tested when I was employed. So we have a nice base on those guys who’ve come through and the strengths and weaknesses of not just the guys on the ground but those who mix and interact with the guys on the ground. We’ve got a fairly consistent approach to it that is used corporately.I think Michael [Clarke] deserves all the accolades that he’s got all series in terms of his growth. I think it has been an extremely positive summer for him to be able to assess himself and be able to look back at the end of the series. We sit back and preview and review series, so I think it has been a wonderful start to his captaincy the last six months, and there’s some really positive things happening in that regard.Improve the coaching function
I feel as though Mickey and I have a very good relationship. We work pretty closely, it is really positive. We get on very well and once we’ve been in training in the Indian series he’s very much put a real stamp on the first series in which he’s had the ability to make an impact. The remit was about hitting the ground running, and you’d have to say Mickey’s done a wonderful job there.[The coaching staff] answer to Mickey and we’re very fortunate to have some guys who have been very good players in their own right. And obviously Steve’s CV as a coach is fantastic and he’s had international success as a head coach himself. So in terms of being able to build the team to move forward, I think Mickey’s starting to get a really good framework.Everybody’s got their goals and their key performance indicators, and they’ve all got to achieve them by certain timelines, and that’s all got to match up to the goals of CA as well. The team knows that one of the big things for us is about performance and being the No. 1 team in the world in all three forms of the game, and driving that through behind cricket’s mandate for being Australia’s favourite game. We’re all aligned. Everyone, be they players or management, wants the same thing. They want Australia to win, to perform, and they bring to the table lots of ideas about how we can improve.”Inverarity talks about adding to the pot more than you’re taking out, and he looks for those characters that add to that team environment”•Getty ImagesApproach to injury management, particularly pertaining to fast bowlers
We have changed the mandate for what we look for out of different series. What we have done well, and the selectors and the coaches and the medical staff have worked really hard on, is having Mitchell Starc and Ryan Harris there around the Test team. They were coming into the squad in Sydney, bowling in the nets in Melbourne. We wanted these guys in and around because we knew the workloads had been very high for the likes of James Pattinson, and we had to make sure players were ready to go. Part of it is mitigating injury and part of it is making sure the next guys are raring and ready to go. We know players will be injured, and one of the positive things we’ve got out of this summer is we’ve got a lot of bowlers we believe in, and we actually believe there’s a couple more.Provide a single point of accountability for the performance of the Australian team
I don’t see myself as looking over their shoulder. I see myself as enabling that performance. We’ve all seen there’s a lot of talent there, and making sure that talent gets an opportunity is really important.I’m not taking credit for any of this. The players have done a wonderful job, and I’m very happy with how the selectors and the coaches have stepped in and really hit the ground running. You don’t want to paper over the cracks. You want to assess and review, but obviously winning the India series is a step in the right direction, and all the players’ comments have been fantastic. They’ve talked about continuing to win, being No. 1 in all three formats as a goal.

Players, former ICC CEOs and other colleagues agree Dave Richardson has what it takes to guide cricket’s governing body through tough times

Nagraj Gollapudi10-Jul-2012The meeting was held at the coffee shop of the Sandton Sun Hotel in Johannesburg. The two men were not strangers, though they hadn’t met before: Malcolm Speed, the ICC chief executive at the time, and Dave Richardson, the former South Africa wicketkeeper who was now representing the South African Cricketers’ Association (SACA) and was vocal in his opposition of the ICC on player issues. Richardson thought he was there because Speed wanted to talk things over in person. In reality, the Australian wanted to make a job offer.”In personal settings David could be quite shy and it takes a bit to get to know him,” Speed says, remembering that first meeting in 2001. “I wanted to talk to him about coming to London to work for the ICC. I could see he was clearly interested but he was sceptical about moving his young family. But I thought he was the man for the job and that, with a bit of prodding and patience, he would be interested in doing it.”Speed was looking at Richardson as the ICC’s general manager of cricket. He had had a word with Ali Bacher, the former managing director of the South African board, who said that despite Richardson’s background as a former international cricketer, he might be better suited to the commercial side. “Because in South Africa, after he had retired he got involved with quite a few companies revolving around the commercial aspect,” Bacher says.Richardson took over as the ICC chief executive on July 1 this year, having seen off a heavyweight contender in David Collier, the highly experienced CEO of the England board. Did Speed see Richardson going on to occupy the seat he had himself once held at the ICC?”He had the potential to do that because he was very well qualified as a cricketer, and professionally he was very well regarded throughout the cricket community,” Speed says. “The most impressive thing about him is, he is a very honest, straightforward man with good values. He has worked hard during his time at the ICC to put himself in a position where he can be appointed as the chief executive.”Bacher has no doubt about Richardson’s credentials. “He has never been there for the ego trip,” he says. “He is a very solid individual. He will do a very good job at a time when world cricket is divided.” Honesty and integrity, Bacher stresses, are qualities that the head of the ICC needs, and Richardson’s character is above board. When he was in office, Speed had asked Paul Condon, the then head of the Anti-Corruption and Security Unit, to vet Richardson, considering he was South Africa’s vice-captain.From kit to suit
By his own admission, Richardson feared he would never play international cricket, having grown up in the apartheid years. He made his international debut on the wrong side of 30 but eventually went on to play 42 Tests and 122 ODIs, keeping wicket for seven years. Much of his career was under the captaincy of Kepler Wessels, first at domestic level and then for South Africa; towards the end he was vice-captain to Hansie Cronje.At 38, he decided it was time for Plan B. A trained lawyer, Richardson knew what he wanted to do after he retired from the game.In the early 1990s, Bacher once assembled the South African squad at Kingsmead in Durban to talk about the future. Richardson, Bacher remembers, was sitting in the back row, and raised his hand towards the end of the meeting. “Dr Bacher, can I be brutally honest?” he asked, before going on to convey the message that the South African players were not being looked after properly from the professional and commercial point of view.It was the first hint of his penchant for negotiation. Bacher took up the matter with the South African board and soon enough player contracts were issued, with monthly retainers. “They had finanicial security for the first time, and there were other financial incentives, like win bonuses,” Bacher says.

“David’s strengths are that he is forward-thinking and is keen to make the game even better than it is for not just the players but the spectators too. So he is prepared to look at new ideas that will make the game more attractive without losing the essence of the game”Sunil Gavaskar

Andrew Hudson, the former South Africa opener and currently chairman of selectors, credits Richardson for nurturing SACA in its infancy. “In those years players were just happy to play, but he had the foresight to see that players had rights as well and that we would get our fair share in terms of player pools. He was instrumental during the negotiations. That was the start of profit-sharing, in terms of players getting a good deal,” Hudson says.He describes Richardson as a man serious about what he was doing, one whom players could trust. It is the sort of respect Richardson consistently evokes. But his journey to the upper echelons of the ICC has called for patience. When Speed finished his tenure and Richardson applied for the job in 2008, he didn’t quite get it – he was put in charge as acting chief executive till the recruitment committee finalised their choice from the shortlist, settling on Haroon Lorgat.”I was very impressed with his maturity at the way he accepted the board’s decision and just continued with his job,” Lorgat says. “After a couple of months, I recall him coming up to me and saying, ‘I’m glad you got it and not me because I can see there are a few things for me to pick up and learn.’ So he now believes he is far more qualified to take over the job.”Among the things Lorgat did early in his tenure was send his senior executives on professional management learning programmes. In 2009, Richardson attended an in-depth business management training course at the London Business School.The players’ CEO
Traditionally the role of the chief executive has been one subject to the balance of power among the ICC board members. Richardson, Speed says, has always remained an apolitical man in highly political situations. He has been vital to smoothing the introduction of various rule changes, especially in one-day cricket. A look at the most critical decisions involving the ICC over the last few years will reveal Richardson’s involvement: amending the laws on chucking, the setting up of the Elite panel of umpires and match referees, the Oval forfeit issue involving Darrell Hair against Pakistan, the Monkeygate scandal in Sydney, and more recently the DRS. Richardson has been the first man his bosses have got on the phone with and dispatched to broker solutions.Richardson’s manner is described as not confrontational. He listens to the other side but remains firm in his own decision-making. His leadership in shepherding the DRS process, its general management and improvement, has been exceptional – to the extent that, save for the BCCI, there are very few in world cricket administration who don’t now acknowledge the value of the DRS.Sunil Gavaskar, the former Indian batting legend, who has served with Richardson on various ICC cricket and technical committees, describes the South African as earnest. “David’s strengths are that he is forward-thinking and is keen to make the game even better than it is for not just the players but the spectators too,” he says. “So he is quite prepared to look at new ideas and innovations that will make the game more attractive without losing the essence of the game. He is also a good listener who will accept another person’s point of view if he is convinced.”Gavaskar remembers an instance of Richardson using his skills of persuasion to argue the case for one bouncer (over shoulder-height) per over in limited-overs cricket, back in 2001. “There was a former skipper who was adamant that allowing a bouncer per over meant that 50 deliveries were unscoreable, and felt that it would mean negative cricket. David gently asked him how he would like his country’s pace bowlers to be hammered by tailenders who were promoted up the order as pinch-hitters. These same pinch-hitters would not dare come on the front foot in a Test match against the same bowlers for fear of the bouncer. The dissenter thought about it and agreed to one bouncer being allowed in limited-overs cricket.”Rahul Dravid is another who has seen Richardson in two avatars: from being opponents, the two now sit together on the MCC’s cricket committee. “He can see both sides of the coin and has that unique advantage,” Dravid says. He remembers an example from Richardson’s early days as an administrator, in 2002. Back then the ICC was asking all member boards to make player contracts mandatory. The Indian players found themselves at loggerheads with the BCCI over the terms of those contracts. Dravid and Anil Kumble were leading the player-board talks and met Richardson to put their point of view across. “He understood our point of view well and willingly heard us,” Dravid recalls.Malcolm Speed, the man who first recruited Richardson into the ICC, says the new CEO shouldn’t chase after popularity•Getty ImagesThat is a big advantage Richardson has over his predecessors, Speed and Lorgat: he already has the players and umpires on his side as they feel he can understand and sympathise with them. “Be impartial, be strong”
At the ICC’s executive board, things are more about politics than sport. Both Speed and Lorgat grew used to coming out of meetings with frustration written on their faces. Will Richardson, who has always worn a sunny smile so far, stand a chance in the face of the inevitable politicking? “All he can do – and he does this well – is, he needs to treat everyone fairly, to be honest in his dealings,” Speed says. “He needs to be impartial, and he will need to be strong.”Both Lorgat and David Morgan, the president between 2008 and 2010, think that for the ICC to function effectively as an influential parent body, it is essential the corporate governance model be uniformly adopted top-down. Lord Woolf in his independent governance review in February this year stated the need for restricting the ICC’s executive board to make it more independent and less dominated by the bigger countries, and also recommended a re-examination of the rights and benefits of the Test-playing Full Member nations, calling for measures to increase transparency in dealings by the ICC and its members. Richardson, Morgan says, needs to keep the flame of the Woolf report burning. “One does not have to implement every last detail of the review, but it is important that the review be kept as a live topic.”According to Speed, a good ICC CEO needs to be a leader, a good manager of people, an excellent listener; he needs to be prepared to make hard decisions and follow up on them, be someone with good judgement, who is prepared to work within the political confines of the game, and is respected by the people with whom he is in contact with; also, intelligent, patient and with a sense of humour. “Richardson ticks all those boxes,” Speed says.Richardson has handled adversity with patience in the past. And he will do well to listen to the man who offered him his first job at the ICC. “Don’t try to become popular,” Speed says. “Don’t worry about what the media say, or think. Just do your job without fear or favour.”

Somehow, the pulsating, tenacious Pakistan side which had won three successive World Twenty20 games failed to turn up

Abhishek Purohit in Colombo01-Oct-2012Even during the previous act, the stage had been set for the main show. Pakistan and India flags, the former more numerous, had begun to be waved in the Premadasa stands by the innings break of the Australia-South Africa game. The anticipation of the fans rose further with every Shane Watson boundary.Minutes before the start, gave way to wild cheering. gave way to wilder cheering. It was clear which team had more support at the ground. Yet, somehow, the pulsating, tenacious Pakistan side which had won three successive World Twenty20 games failed to turn up. In its place, the Premadasa witnessed a stop-start, dull group that retreated further after every forward step it took.Nothing captured Pakistan’s state of mind better than Mohammad Hafeez’s 28-ball 15, a hesitant, even clueless, stay that sucked all life out of what had been a stirring start. Pakistan were 26 for 1 after two overs. It was nearly impossible to think at that stage that they would add barely a 100 more runs. But Hafeez kept defending and defending without intent for no conceivable reason.The nature of T20 demands that the scoreboard keeps running, but more than that, and probably more than most other sides, Pakistan are the kind of team who feed off run-making momentum. They also tend to panic that much more when the runs are squeezed out. Even as Hafeez kept blocking, Shahid Afridi, Nasir Jamshed and Kamran Akmal fell in trying to force the innings along.The move to send Afridi at No. 3 might itself be debated, but it was a gamble the team management took, knowing well that it could have lasted just one ball. His fall might even be attributed to himself, but even during Afridi’s short stay, Hafeez played five dots and managed two singles.Hafeez comes across as a well-meaning man and is probably the best one to lead Pakistan across all formats once Misbah-ul-Haq eventually goes. He has the air of someone who wants to be in control of his team and also wants to give the impression that he is in control. Probably because he never quite got the backing of the selectors and the team management for much of his career, he supports his players, and also wants to give the impression that he is doing so. Throughout the tournament, he has staunchly defended everyone whose place has remotely been questioned, be it Afridi, Umar Gul or Shoaib Malik.With a Twenty20 international strike-rate of 109.75, though, it is Hafeez’s position as opener that should come under question. Pakistan have four openers in their squad for the tournament, and purely on the ability to make an impact, Nasir Jamshed or Kamran Akmal deserves to partner Imran Nazir, with Hafeez dropping down the order.It is not that Hafeez has not made runs in the tournament. He has a couple of forties against New Zealand and Bangladesh. But those knocks were support acts, while Nazir and Jamshed went berserk at the other end. Today, with Nazir falling early and the experiment with Afridi failing, Hafeez needed to ensure the initial momentum was not wasted. He left that to Jamshed and Kamran, both of whom fell trying to attack the part-timer Yuvraj Singh.It was now even more crucial that Hafeez carried on, having spent so much time on the wicket, but he fell instead to a nothing shot against another part-timer, Virat Kohli, trying to dab a delivery to off from outside leg stump.It has been said about Hafeez that when he withdraws into a shell, he remains in it for a while. His diffidence carried itself into the field. He is usually such an active captain, ordering fielders around, snapping instructions, waving his arms, selflessly giving himself the ball in the Powerplay. He was the sixth and final bowler to come on today, as late as the 13th over, by which time Pakistan’s chances had almost evaporated.There was no way you could directly blame Hafeez for Pakistan’s below-par fielding and dropped chances, but his diffidence seemed to spread through the team. They hardly looked like a typical Pakistan side, which would have waited like a big cat ready to pounce on the slightest opening. Hafeez, though, did not think there was anything wrong with Pakistan’s demeanour on the field.”Today, India played better cricket than Pakistan, there is no doubt,” Hafeez said. “Kohli was excellent tonight, but I don’t think there was anything missing as far as our body language was concerned. We really wanted to win the game, but unfortunately we kept losing wickets at regular intervals, so we couldn’t come back after the first ten overs. We were looking for a few early strikes when India batted, but once we couldn’t get those wickets early on, India got on top of us.”Even towards the end, that man Afridi, demonstrative and energetic as ever, clapped vigorously, trying to drum up passion among his team-mates. But Pakistan simply hadn’t turned up at the Premadasa.

South Africa’s easy series win over New Zealand was proof of their strength in depth and a relentless commitment to maintaining focus

Firdose Moonda in Port Elizabeth14-Jan-2013Less than ten minutes after South Africa had completed back-to-back Test wins at home for the first time since beating Bangladesh 2-0 in 2008, they were already thinking of the next challenge. It was not that remarkable that Lonwabo Tsotsobe, who was not part of the Test squad, was bowling on the St George’s Park practice pitch in the immediate aftermath of the victory, but it was surprising that all the members of the coaching staff were with him.Gary Kirsten, Allan Donald and Russell Domingo along with Paddy Upton and fitness man Rob Walter were all out with Tsotsobe. That left perhaps only the logistics officer Riaan Muller in the change-room to welcome back the successful unit. Maybe there is nothing to that, but it perhaps explained a word that became commonplace during South Africa’s quest for the No. 1 ranking: “processes”.Over the last few series, celebrations have become less exuberant because every achievement is being contextualised as being part of something bigger. After their victory in Perth, which clinched successive series wins in Australia, some of the players flew home immediately. Those who stayed behind had a fairly measured time at a local pub. After the Newlands win, they dispersed immediately, and the same will happen after Port Elizabeth.Family time is prioritised, especially for coach Gary Kirsten, whose youngest child is just over a year old. He has transferred that philosophy to the rest of the squad. In doing that, he has also given them perspective, which will be much needed because of the overwhelming fashion in which they dealt with New Zealand.South Africa would always have expected to win this series. They may not, however, have thought victory would come as easily as it did. In both matches, New Zealand followed the same pattern of rolling over and being heavily defeated. South Africa had to change almost nothing. Even when they made a forced change to their starting XI, it virtually had no effect on the final result.What the captains said

Graeme Smith: “If you play two Tests and win both by an innings, you’ve outplayed the opposition considerably. Every headline talks about complacency but we didn’t do that. We operated as a really good professional outfit. It would have been really easy to idle along in this series but the bowlers bowled at good pace and intensity and batsman have got runs. The bowlers are just relentless and people are backing each other up. It’s nice to know that we are in that space where we want to keep pushing on and doing well. And it was also good to play our own grounds after a long time away.”
Brendon McCullum: “I’ve never been challenged like that consistently from a group of bowlers. They give away no scoring opportunities. South Africa have got a lot better from when we played against them in March. They’ve managed to keep consistent team and game plan. I really think we came up against a team at the absolute top of the cycle of performance. They never let us get into the game.”

For many, that was proof of South Africa’s depth, and even for others, for whom it wasn’t, it did reveal some positives. Fringe players notching up results against a struggling New Zealand may not be an ideal shop window for what lies in South Africa’s cupboard. But it allowed the likes of Rory Kleinveldt and Dean Elgar to settle on the international stage without the pressures that come with playing in a more competitive outing. Even if neither go on to record streams of success, they have been given the best opportunity to do so because of this experience.Blooding talent was one of the aims of this series; applying themselves ruthlessly was another. South Africa managed both. In the past, they have been known to play to the standard of the opposition, even when it required slumping to it, rather than to their own potential. In this series they did not allow that haze of mediocrity to descend, except for a few overs after tea on the second day of the first Test when New Zealand were given some freebies.The brutality was evident most in the bowling. New-ball spells that were accurate and hostile continually asked questions of the New Zealanders’ technique outside the off stump, and revealed that they had not worked out the art of leaving. Dale Steyn found more swing than he had in the last year and with him moving the ball at pace, New Zealand had a dual challenge.Steyn’s return to his best took the spotlight off Morne Morkel, who caused problems of his own by creating pressure. He was the most economical bowler among the seamers, conceding marginally fewer runs than Steyn. Since the last time Morkel played New Zealand in March 2011, where he took the only six wickets to fall in the second innings of the Wellington Test, he has been more consistent and more destructive. Previously Morkel could be erratic, now he is as miserly as he is mean and that will be key to South Africa’s future success.While the bowlers caused frenetic action, the batsmen were able to restore calm immediately afterwards, showing South Africa’s ability to divorce one part of a match from the other. Alviro Petersen was the first to do that, with his serene century after the madness of the first session in Cape Town, and Hashim Amla delivered one of his typically calm knocks in Port Elizabeth.South Africa’s top four did what New Zealand’s could not. They created situations for their middle order to play with freedom rather than rescue them from impending disaster. Presenting the opportunity is different from taking it, and AB de Villiers led in the creativity stakes along with Faf du Plessis, and then Dean Elgar followed suit.When South Africa review the series, they will conclude that everybody had a good run. If this was a final school examination, everyone would have passed and obtained the necessary points to reach the next level, but obviously not every series will be this easy.South Africa host Pakistan in two weeks for three Tests, and then play them in the United Arab Emirates later in the year, before the home series against India and Australia. What they can take into those challenges besides reputation is form and confidence.The win over New Zealand gave South Africa their fifth consecutive series victory. In that period, they have only lost one match (to Sri Lanka in Durban) and won eight. They are dominating, but will only continue to do so if they are able to maintain the same standards they did against New Zealand and the same refusal to slacken.