All posts by n8rngtd.top

India’s heavyweight middle order is full of flab, not muscle, as its record in the past three years shows

Sambit Bal at Lord's23-Jul-2007

Did India really deserve to save the Test? You could say their bowlers did,
for after a shocking opening session when they were affected as much by
nerves as by lack of practical knowledge about overcoming and using the unique
slope at Lord’s, they exceeded expectations. You could also hand it to Dinesh
Karthik, a young man thrust into a difficult job, who showed both skill and
heart, and Mahendra Singh Dhoni, who rose above his technical difficulties
against the moving ball to hang in there. India owes this draw to these unlikely saviours and the
benevolence of the weather.But there is a story within a story. India’s three fifties in this Test came
from the weakest links: Wasim Jaffer, who came to this Test on the back of three
failures; Karthik, who is not a opener; and Dhoni, who had batted like a
tailender in the first innings. In the end, to hold out for 96 overs was
creditable because it was always going to rain. In fact, it was a
surprise that it didn’t rain sooner than it did on day five. But what of the men who were expected to
deliver for India?India’s mighty middle order came up against England’s most enfeebled pace
attack in a home Test since 1993 and managed only 192 runs. That’s an
average of 24. James Anderson cannot be denied credit. He bowled with
intelligence and control but the conditions, while challenging, were never
impossible. The first-innings score of 201 was probably 150 short of what was achievable.Is it too early to make a reassessment of India’s batting strength? Wasn’t
it a similar story in 2002, when the Indian middle order collapsed twice to
lose them the Test at Lord’s, only to reveal its full splendour in the matches
that followed? That series, in fact, heralded a golden run for India lasting about 18 months. Now that they have the breathing space of a draw
behind them, can they not be expected to flower again?They well may, for far more unlikely things have happened in cricket. If
you’re a betting man, though, don’t put your money on it yet. This is a
batting order that has long lived on reputation; three years, to be precise.
Not since the tour of Pakistan in early 2004 has India’s middle order
earned the right to be termed mighty.Let’s dispense with the numbers first. In Test matches since that series, Sachin
Tendulkar averages 45.67, Sourav Ganguly 36.24 and VVS Laxman 33.70. But
even these numbers hide the reality for none them has failed to cash in
on weak opponents. Three of Tendulkar’s last four hundreds – including a career-best 248 – have come against Bangladesh, Ganguly has scored hundreds
against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, his only centuries since a stirring 144
against Australia at Brisbane in 2003, and Laxman has got a hundred against
Zimbabwe. Remove these runs and the story is dire. Tendulkar’s average dips
to 31.19, Ganguly’s to 29.40 and Laxman’s to 32.19.Increasingly it looks likely that this is what India’s once-glittering
middle order is capable of providing in demanding conditions: battling thirties
and the odd half-century. That’s what Tendulkar, Laxman and Ganguly provided
at Lord’s and that’s what they did against Australia, Pakistan and South
Africa in 2004-05, and against South Africa earlier this year. More than 20 Tests
in the space of three years is a long enough sample period to present a pattern and,
despite what the rest of this series might bring, it’s about time to bury
the myth about India’s middle order.India’s batting in recent years has been about two men. One of them
isn’t here. Despite his failure in South Africa, Virender Sehwag averages
46.89 in Tests since May 2004 and, incredibly, his average goes a couple of
points higher if you remove his Tests against Zimbabwe.The other is Rahul Dravid, who averages nearly 50 without his runs against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. India missed a big innings from him in South Africa. It was the first time since 2000 that he’d gone through a series without a half-century and it perhaps
cost India the series. In both innings at Lord’s he was dismissed without
getting in, which is not something that can be said about Tendulkar, Laxman and
Ganguly.Batsmen who get into the 30s can’t be described as out of form. But the failure to
push on from there must point to something. Has the process of survival
become so onerous that it is draining away the mental resources needed to
construct more substantial innings? Can the body no longer endure the
rigour? Is it a combination of both?Indian cricket would be living in denial if it fails to acknowledge the
decline. Cherish their golden years but don’t expect them to light up a wet
summer.Do you think India’s middle order still has the right to be termed mighty? Tell us here

For Sehwag, losing the vice-captaincy can be seen as either a slap on the wrist or a gauntlet hurled down

Anand Vasu and Siddhartha Vaidyanathan01-Dec-2006

Lost amid the din over Sourav Ganguly’s return to the Indian team was the removal of Virender Sehwag from the vice-captain’s post. Yet it’s a decision with greater long-term implications, involving as it does a player who should be in the prime of his career and who has the potential to be peerless in his time, but who is instead in a deep slump in form.There are, as always, two sides to the story but the story itself is a depressingly familiar one of miscommunication and mistrust. The case against Sehwag is of indiscipline, his defence is a deep-rooted sense of hurt and a bruised ego. Falling between the two are missed runs for the player and missed opportunities for his team.On the face of it this is a slap on the wrist for Sehwag. Rumours about an attitude problem – specifically that he did not stick to dietary and training prescriptions when away from the side – have been doing the rounds for a while. Indeed, his falling out with his coach Greg Chappell dates back to the latter’s early days, and the sacking of Ganguly – whom Sehwag was relatively close to – as India captain.The problems simmered and, in the months since, Sehwag has developed a reputation,
among certain sections of the team at least, as being way too detached
from the rest. He was perceived as lacking ambition – being satisfied with
one big knock – and perhaps content with what he’d achieved so far. Given his prodigious talent, it was felt he wasn’t pulling his weight . That, too, became an issue, along with his fitness.The immediate cause of his demotion, say top sources in the Indian board (BCCI), is the belief that he’s been leaking damaging and disruptive stories to sections of the media. Cricinfo has learnt that several people in the board felt it was unacceptable that Sehwag was talking to the press about things that should have stayed in the dressing room.”We know where these stories are coming from,” said a top BCCI official. “We wanted to send a clear message to all the players that such behaviour is not acceptable.”Another factor that probably came into play was, ironically, Ganguly. There was a real danger (since abated) of Rahul Dravid not being able to lead the side in the first Test, which would have left Sehwag leading a team including Ganguly. The fear was that Ganguly would then lead by proxy and with this in mind, the selectors named VVS Laxman as vice-captain.Yet those close to Sehwag say he’s been misunderstood and is nurturing a sense of hurt that he hasn’t been given his due status in the team’s brains trust. He believes Chappell has been talking about him – in not very complimentary tones – to journalists behind his back, and that’s where the trust broke down.Though he was appointed Rahul Dravid’s vice-captain, he was never in sync with the thinking of the Chappell-Dravid combine and found it hard to fit in. He believed he was being cut out of the planning and his inputs were not asked for.There was also the clash of cultures. Ganguly and Wright, especially the captain, gave Sehwag leeway, believing that treating him gently would bring out the best in him. Chappell’s has been the direct Australian approach, and Sehwag possibly felt that the straight-talking was not something a vice-captain should hear.There is a point of view that Sehwag is caught up in a mixture of boredom and insecurity, that he needs to be challenged, not threatened. That belief relies on evidence from matches when Sehwag has captained India, even at Port Elizabeth on Wednesday; he’s at his animated best, buzzing with ideas, several times more active and attentive on the field. That’s when he really seems to be enjoying his cricket.Having been relieved of the vice-captaincy, Sehwag can react in two ways. He could either retreat further into his shell, perceiving this as yet another slight to his talents. Or he could shake off the shackles that the vice-captaincy imposed on him, the expectations it bred in his mind, and concomitantly, the perception that they remain unrealised; he could leave all that behind and seize what lies ahead. What others see as a slap on the wrist he could see as a gauntlet thrown down by the selectors: Do you still have it in you? Only he can prove that he has.

The fifth round of the 2007-08 Ranji Trophy witnessed a thriller at Jhalawar’s Sports Complex, where hosts Rajasthan lost three wickets in a manic final over. Jamie Alter spoke to a few who where there

Interviews by Jamie Alter14-Dec-2007

Bist, Rajasthan batsman:It was very tense in the dressing room. I was batting well, and it looked like we could get there, but then I got run out. It was a very, very close call. In the last over, we needed nine runs…Pankaj went for a slog and got a thick inside-edge down to third man for a boundary, and we were like, , thats a relief.Aloke Bhattacharjee, square-leg umpire: Pankaj is a sturdy lad, capable of hitting the ball. This one was a big slog that ran down to third man. Rajasthan looked pumped up.Amol Muzumdar, Mumbai captain: Pankaj went for a hit and edged to the third man for a boundary, which really tilted the match. It put us under pressure.
Bist: We needed four from four balls. The second ball was a single, thanks to a fumble behind the stumps, which got newcomer Afroz Khan on strike. Bhattacharjee: Second ball, the wicketkeeper, Vinayak Samant, fumbled the collection and they ran a quick single. They got off on that missed chance.Muzumdar: My field was in and out, to ensure they didn’t get any more boundaries. We knew we had to restrict any boundary-scoring options.
Bist: First ball, an under-pressure Afroz worked the ball away but straight to the fielder. I didn’t even take my pads off, it was so tense. Bhattacharjee: The new man didn’t look all that comfortable as he faced up. He hit it to a fielder and they didn’t chance a run.
Bist: Next ball, Afroz got a very good full delivery, which he missed, and was bowled. He was devastated when he came back into the pavilion. Bhattacharjee: Oh that was a great ball, a lovely full delivery. That batsman played all over it. Knocked over the stumps. The ball to [from Hussain] Aslam was also very good, a well-directed delivery. The batsman had no chance of hitting it with a slog.Muzumdar: Afroz was cleaned up on the fourth ball. I wanted a length ball, but it ended up a bit full, but worked for us, so I was very happy. That got the team very pumped up.
Bist: We just told each passing batsman, don’t go for a big shot, rather wait and rely on getting singles. We can do this. Shamsher Singh came out, had a few words with Pankaj, and told me later that he was expecting a short ball. He stayed back, in anticipation, but the ball was fuller. He played across the line and somehow edged a single down to third man. The batsmen scampered one, but turned and went back for a non-existent second run. There was a fumble on the boundary but the second just wasn’t on. There was some confusion, they each turned back, and Shamsher was run out from a very good direct hit.

Bhattacharjee: It was a genuine edge, and you could tell the pressure on their faces. They just turned and ran, and Shamsher was out by some distance.Muzumdar: He edged it to third man, they ran one and tried the second, but a direct hit from Sahil Kukreja was spot on, which was really great for us. It lifted the mood further. That’s when I called everyone together and said, come on, we can do this.
Bist: We were now nine down, with one ball to go, and three runs to get. At this time we said just tie it somehow. Mohammad Aslam was the last man in, and he was a bit nervous. He wanted a single, somehow, but Hussain again bowled a good yorker and Aslam was bowled, just trying to defend. We were in shock. It was very hard to digest. Bhattacharjee: Before anything, I must tell you something. You could really see the tension across Amol’s face. But he kept his cool, and called his players together. He infused confidence in them, told them that could win this. It was very inspiring to see. Aslam had no clue about that last ball; it just beat him for pace. Another lovely yorker. What a match, and what an over. Just think about what was must have been going through young Murtaza’s mind, with hardly any experience. He bowled an excellent over, and mixed his deliveries very well. In all my years of umpiring I’ve not been involved in a match like this. There was a good crowd on days one and three, but it’s a pity not many turned up on the final day.Muzumdar: A lot of the guys were in their first or second seasons for Mumbai, and for Murtaza it was just his second season. I had to keep my cool. I made sure everyone was thinking of a victory. It was important for us to maintain a winning tempo. If you think of losing the match, you can mess up. I’d told Hussain to bowl a length ball, which we had decided before he started his run-up. I didn’t want him to edge it for four. I had my fielder in, and the ball was fuller than anticipated, but luckily he missed it and it shattered the stumps. We just erupted in celebration, such was the feeling. It was really something special. To win a match like that, it was really amazing.

Bad hair, near-naked cheerleaders, Harold Pinter, brassy impresarios, fishing trips, lots of lolly… and some cricket as well

Osman Samiuddin31-Dec-2008

Shot of the year
Kevin Pietersen’s switch-hit, the human in the evolution chain to the reverse-sweep’s ape: As opposed to the shot Mike Gatting made infamous, Pietersen’s requires pre-meditating and changing grip as well as stance, making it riskier still. Most notably, he did it in an ODI against New Zealand in the summer, in Durham, twice hitting Scott Styris for six. The second went over the right-hander’s long-off. Even the MCC took notice, promptly concluding it wasn’t against the laws of the game.Ball of the year I
Anything bowled by Ajantha Mendis, but if pushed, one ball stands out. First Test wickets, or runs, are remembered usually only by the player himself but Mendis’ first in Tests will live on. It was the flicker, the carrom ball; pitched on middle, on a length, it left Rahul Dravid completely unsure of what to do, before zipping off, turning away and clipping the off bail. Set the tone for the series.Ball of the year II
Mohammad Ashraful’s wonderfully disguised delivery to AB de Villiers during the first Test in February in Mirpur: it bounced first at his own feet, then , a little closer to de Villiers, who, completely bamboozled by now, top-edged a pull back to Ashraful. If you fly over Dhaka, it is said you can still hear them laughing.Cricket headline of the year
“Pinter: Cricket is better than sex” (The , days after the death of playwright Harold Pinter). Perhaps, and it definitely lasts longer.Catch of the year
The league may not be recognised, but nobody will argue that Justin Kemp’s catch in the second ICL final doesn’t deserve recognition as one of the finest seen in recent years. Mohammad Sami was rightly expecting a maximum from a smash towards long-off. Kemp, however, sprinted across, leapt as if to pluck out a shooting star, twisted and caught the rocket, all at once, before falling over just inside the boundary. So unbelievable was it that the Lahore Badshahs didn’t believe it, subsequently sparking a bust-up.Clash of the year

Australia-India? England-South Africa? South Africa-India? South Africa-Australia? Nope. Stanford v Lord’s. New money v old power, Yanks v Brits, Bacon n’ egg ties v Armani suits, 20 million dollars v millions of years of tradition, a helicopter v the sacred Lord’s turf. Stanford’s shopping trip to Lord’s to buy English cricket was the heavyweight clash of the year. Even now no one is sure who won. Or whether there was a winner at all.Controversy of the year
Race, power, money, monkeys, s, culture clash, poor umpiring, icons: The surprise of Sydneygate was that it didn’t spark off WWIII. At its heart was something Harbhajan Singh said to Andrew Symonds, in a Test marred by diabolically poor umpiring. He was banned for three Tests, the BCCI and India screamed murder, threatened to call off the tour, appealed; the decision was overturned, Steve Bucknor was removed. Cue pained debates on sledging, race, power, monkeys, s, culture clashes, umpiring and icons, and precious little on India losing three wickets in an over, to a man KP might call a pie-chucker, to lose the Test.Debutant of the year
Twenty-six wickets in his first three Tests against the best modern-day players of spin; 48 wickets in 18 ODIs, including a six-for on essentially a cement track in Karachi against the best modern-day players of spin, all at an average of 10. A strange grip, no stock ball, more variety than Murali has wickets, and a nice smile; welcome to cricket, Ajantha Mendis.

Makeover of the year
If cricket was Pamela Anderson, then the IPL was Pam post-op. It wasn’t bad before but it’s never been sexier since. Liquor barons, cheerleaders allergic to clothes, film stars, big money, big businessmen, music, noise, lights, and a marketing campaign to match any. There were also some pretty handy cricketers playing some pretty handy cricket, but that was almost besides the point.Spell of the year
Ishant Sharma’s hour-long torment of Ricky Ponting on the fourth day in Perth set the tone for both players’ year: Sharma confirmed himself as the best young fast bowler going, and Ponting, though never out of form, was never the perky intimidator. The duel was fascinating, nine overs of the most intense examination. There was pace, bounce, movement, accuracy, heart, near-misses and close things. Finally, as his spell neared an end, he brought about Ponting’s, with one that rose sharply and caught the edge. A star was thus born.Costliest hook of the year

The one Andrew Symonds used while fishing, having skipped a team meeting to do so, the day before an ODI against Bangladesh. The price? His place in the squad for that series, and more importantly, the one against India that followed. As punishment, CA officially placed him in the saloon for last chances, which, given his preference for an ale, he may not mind so much after all.Over of the year
Actually 10 balls bowled by Andrew Flintoff to Jacques Kallis at Edgbaston, but they produced more threat than some bowlers do over an entire career, and more quality cricket than do some Test series. Two sharp yorkers, one lbw appeal that Stevie Wonder would’ve given out, bouncers hellbent on rearranging Kallis’s face. The 10th was another yorker – quick, swinging out, against which Kallis had no chance. The sightscreens weren’t great apparently but were Kallis’ bat a wall and the ball a balloon, Flintoff’s will still would’ve forced it through. Loud and clear it was announced: Three injury-marred years after another special over to Ricky Ponting at the same ground, Freddie was back.Most embarrassing thing of the year about the Stanford Series I
EnglandMost embarrassing thing of the year about the Stanford Series II
The English press complaining about pitches, poor lights and Americans. In Antigua. While being paid to watch cricket.The Muntazer Al-Zaidi Public Service Award of the year
To Harbhajan Singh, for slapping Sreesanth at the IPL, and thus doing what all batsmen who have come across the breakdancer have presumably wanted to do. Funnily enough, the Annoying Prat Formerly Known as Sreesanth has been less annoying since. The spirit inspired a copycat attempt at the end of the year by the Iraqi shoe-throwing journalist after whom the award is now named.The AWOL cricket gripe of the year
Player burnout: Funny that, how no player spoke of being overworked despite schedules more crammed than Dolly Parton’s bra. Last year windows for rest were being sought desperately; this year the panes shifted, and windows to cram in more and more games – and more ways to make more money – were created.

Timeliest comeback of the year
Stephen Harmison, disenchanted with international cricket, suddenly rediscovered his fire in the summer. It had nothing to do, of course, with selection for the Stanford series and a potential million-dollar payoff, or the India tour and a possible route into the riches of the IPL. Just like the late Anna Nicole Smith’s marriage to that old whatsisname had nothing to do with his fortune. By the end of it, England had won nothing in Antigua and Harmison looked likelier to become a roving ambassador than to end up in the IPL.The “Oops I Did It Again” Award of the year
One drugs scandal is generally enough for most sportsmen, but three in two years? Mohammad Asif should’ve been on thin ice after the 2006 Champions Trophy scandal but he skated on. The folly of the PCB’s lenience then came back to haunt them this year, when first Asif was detained at Dubai airport for possession of an illegal recreational drug. Soon after, it emerged that he had tested positive for nandrolone again, this time during the IPL. Thus became Pakistan’s brightest star it’s biggest disappointment.The worst advertisement for Test cricket this year
The Bangalore Royal Challengers. They were a Test side, everyone groaned. No they weren’t. They were just a crap team. The Mohali Test between India and England was a close second.The best advertisement for Test cricket this year
Test cricket has never been as rowdy as when Virender Sehwag is at the crease. He resurrected his career with a resolute Adelaide hundred but he lit up the year with two outrageous innings. A triple hundred against South Africa at better than a run-a-ball in Chennai was easily the fastest triple ever, managing to enliven what was otherwise one of the year’s dullest Tests. The second capped off one of the best: A ludicrous 68-ball 83 that really made impossible nothing, letting India chase down 387 at the same venue but on a very different pitch.The most audacious match-winning innings of the year not played by V Sehwag
This year Graeme Smith confirmed his status as one of the best last-innings batsmen ever, leading South Africa to victories in four countries. He started with a 79-ball blitz against the West Indies in Newlands in January, his 85 fairly hunting down a tricky 186. Sixty-two came in a dicier 205-run chase in Dhaka. But the glory lay first in a monumental unbeaten 154 at Edgbaston, chasing 281; a blistering 108 in Perth in the second-highest chase ever; and a calming 75 at the MCG to seal the series. No longer the cocky kid, in 2008 Smith became a man of indomitable will.Streak of the year
Once a more solid Imran Farhat, Gautam Gambhir became a smaller, less puffy-chested Matthew Hayden this year. No batsman was more difficult to remove: in 16 innings his lowest score was 19, and only once did he bat for less than an hour – that was for 55 minutes. He didn’t dawdle either, crossing 50 nine times, and always scoring three runs an over.Bradmanesque streak of the (last 2) year(s)
Shiv Chanderpaul: 13 Tests, 1467 runs, six 100s and ten 50s in 23 innings, and at an average of nearly 105. We are not worthy.Late cut of the year
It will happen, it will happen, it will happen, it will… actually it won’t. So went the saga of this year’s Champions Trophy. Nobody knew, least of all hosts Pakistan, whether it would happen, until the day it was postponed. It was a cruel, devastating and poor decision.Comeback of the year

On the back of a sensational domestic season, Simon Katich forced his way back into the national side two-and-a-half years after last playing for them, and this time as opener. By a troubled year’s end, he was one of the few rocks in an uncertain batting order: Four hundreds and over a thousand runs, each of which suggested you would have to kill him to get past him. No less obdurate was Neil McKenzie, who also came back as an opener for South Africa four years after last playing for them. He helped Graeme Smith to all manner of opening records and himself to over 1000 runs, and three hundreds.

Career-saving hundreds of the year
This was a vintage year. Andrew Strauss saved himself in March with 177 in Napier, having averaged 27 over his previous 14 Tests (and made a duck in the first innings). Paul Collingwood went into the Edgbaston Test against South Africa with 92 first-class runs in nine innings, having been dropped for the previous Test. He responded with a hundred that should have won the game. Rahul Dravid averaged 31 over two years and 19 over his last ten Tests before he made 136 against England in Mohali . Career-saving perhaps, but ugly as sin all the knocks. “If he was batting in your front garden, you’d draw your curtains,” David Lloyd quipped of Collingwood recently. Had any of these been played in your front garden, you’d move house altogether.Most bizarre selection of the year
Darren Pattinson. Who? Yes, precisely. Nothing more left-field was seen until Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave the world a Christmas message on the UK’s Channel 4.Most overworked officials of the year
Reg Dickason, the freelance security expert, clocked up more air miles than Simon Taufel as cricket met the harsh realities of today’s violent world. If he wasn’t scoping out Karachi and Lahore – more than once this year – it was Chennai and Mohali, before heading all over the world to report back to players. Followed closely by the PCB’s lawyers, who slapped more lawsuits than were slapped in all of the US.The Inzamam-ul-Haq Award for figure of the year
Jesse Ryder. The boy may be fat but the boy can most definitely bat.The Lalit Modi Award for services to cricket
Lalit Modi. Obviously.Quiet champion of the year
How many people noticed the work of Hashim Amla this year? Quietly, unnoticed, and with a lovely, old-world dignity (and quirky technique), Amla went about ensuring South Africa barely felt the lack of runs from Jacques Kallis. Over a thousand runs from that crooked back-swing, with three elegant hundreds, meant South Africa always built on the fine starts their openers gave. Other contenders were, unsurprisingly, also South African: Ashwell Prince, AB de Villiers, Paul Harris, and Kallis with the ball.Retirements of the year
The quietest but loudest “Just one more things lads’ was how one of Indian cricket’s most significant figures quietly announced his retirement. Sourav Ganguly signed off with a bang, however, with 324 runs at over 50 against the men he riled the most. No better way of saying he could’ve played on.
The least noticed The most famous red top since Archie Andrews, and less notably, one of the finest allrounders of the modern age, Shaun Pollock wrecked West Indies in his final Test, in January. That was his first Test in almost a year, though his team have hardly, in the year since, missed the only South African with 400-plus Test wickets.

Most statistically satisfying Stephen Fleming’s actual batting was far sexier than his career numbers suggest, but if he had failed to finish with an average of 40, it would’ve been cricket’s greatest injustice since Bradman’s 99.94 and Inzi’s 49.60. Fortunately, two typically smooth innings (typically, not hundred either) ensured he didn’t.
The biggest shoes to fill Those left behind by Anil Kumble and Adam Gilchrist. Both were among the biggest game-breakers their country – and cricket – has seen. Who will be the more difficult to replace: A wicketkeeper-batsman who made 33 international 100s at a strike-rate not far from 100, or a grim-faced leggie with over 600 Test wickets? Will make the search for the next Beefy look like a walk in the park.

Lamest excuse of the year
Ricky Ponting citing the spirit of cricket, and his obligation to try and bowl 90 overs in a day, to defend his tactics on the fourth afternoon of the Nagpur Test. Australia needed a win, and India were in trouble, whereupon Ponting turned to those renowned threats Michael Hussey and Cameron White to make up time. Was avoiding a suspension more important than the win? The worst excuse since the dog ate my homework.The batsman to bat for your life of the year
If ever there was a man for a crisis this year, it was < Kevin Pietersen, Mr 911. Each of his five hundreds, and a 94, came when England in serious strife. First was a 129 at Napier with England 4 for 3; the Kiwis were pummelled again for 115 at Trent Bridge – handy, with his side 86 for 5. The Lord's hundred against South Africa was the most comfortable, Pietersen steadying only a slight wobble, but the 94 at Edgbaston came with England effectively 21 for 4. His next hundred was in his first Test as captain, and in Mohali, he came in at 2 for 1. All he was missing was a cape, some tights and a mask.Haircut of the year
Ishant Sharma, because he got one.Finish of the year
The touch he’s in, Shivnarine Chanderpaul could get 36 off the last over to win it, so 10 off two balls against Chaminda Vaas in Trinidad was never going to be a problem. He drove a boundary first before flicking a full toss over midwicket to finish, as coolly as you’d flick the ash off a cigarette. Kamran Akmal wasn’t far behind in stealing 17 off Jerome Taylor’s last over to seal a thrilla in… er… Abu Dhabi.Captain of the year
MS Dhoni and Graeme Smith were very good, and Mahela Jayawardene always is, but there was only one captain this year. Shane Warne proved that genius remains in all formats and that old dogs learn new tricks. As performer, he was undimmed: his bowling was magic, as 19 wickets for the Rajasthan Royals – joint second-highest in the IPL – testifies. There was the odd batting cameo, as Andrew Symonds will tell you. But his captaincy sealed it: A gambler’s touch complementing the sharpest mind. One-over spells, surprise bouncer barrages, no coaching BS, and his players loved him. On rolled the “best Australian captain that never was” debate.Fruitless search of the year

How many men does it take to replace Warne? Australia tried six spinners this year alone, and by the end, none had really convinced. In 13 Tests, Beau Casson, Stuart MacGill, Nathan Hauritz, Jason Krejza, Brad Hogg and Cameron White took 38 wickets at over 50 each. How many men? How long is a piece of string?The return to terra firma of the year
Once he had only Bradman in his sights; now Michael Hussey’s horizons have shrunk to include other, more mortal, batsmen. Mr Cricket started the year averaging 80 and, having scored an even 900 runs at the comparatively derisory average of 37.50, ended it at 60. This included four ducks in the year, after getting none in his first three years, and the grand total of 10 runs in the last four innings of 2008. How the mighty have fallen indeed.

Australia’s head selector has been a target of criticism lately, but he’s not going to let that get to him anytime soon

Peter English03-Jul-2009In the past year Andrew Hilditch went from being an occasional shadow in the background at Australian training to a derided chairman of selectors who was responsible for the team falling apart. Not since Trevor Hohns sacked Steve Waugh from the one-day team in 2002 had the country’s cricket kingmaker turned into such a target for the masses.Hilditch was photographed walking his dog when Matthew Hayden was failing to save his career at the SCG in the first week of January, in the last Test of Australia’s first home series loss for 16 years. As the criticism peaked and the results bottomed, Hilditch did not consider stepping down from the role he has held since 2006.”You don’t know me very well,” he said. “I like to win everything and I’m as competitive as everyone else, but I’m a realist. So when things aren’t going so well, as a selection panel, we have to stick to what we’re doing. I’m expecting more ups and downs. If people aren’t expecting ups and downs in a developing side, that’s unrealistic.”Hilditch, 53, is not as accessible as Hohns was during his long term; he doesn’t divulge information on upcoming teams and won’t discuss the first-Test squad during an 18-minute interview below the team dressing room. He arrived in England this week and has already been under attack from an Australian newspaper for not attending the opening tour game.”I’m not sure about copping it along the way, I don’t read any of the press,” Hilditch said of the past year. “It’s not relevant to what the selection panel is doing. Our biggest concern, and what I’m trying to achieve, is to get Australia through a transition period and emerge in two to three years’ time, hopefully, at or near the top of world cricket still.”In general terms, it’s been a great year as far as findings are concerned. It was never going to be easy, it would be ridiculous to say otherwise. We’ve lost so many great players, two or three who win games by themselves.”Since the 2008 India tour, Hilditch and his panel have made some bad mistakes, particularly around spin bowling, and not recognising Hayden’s decline and Brett Lee’s struggles towards the end of the year. Hilditch is now overseeing an unbalanced Ashes squad, which carries one specialist slow bowler, Nathan Hauritz, who has done nothing to threaten England, and a bits-and-pieces allrounder in Andrew McDonald. The thigh injury to Shane Watson, the reserve batsman, also upsets the team’s plans in the lead-up to Wednesday’s first Test in Cardiff.One of the major criticisms of Hilditch and his panel, which includes David Boon, Merv Hughes and Jamie Cox, is that they don’t take risks. Hilditch, Boon and Cox were cautious opening batsmen and Hughes is best known as a larrikin fast bowler with a wet tongue. With Hayden, the panel waited for him to retire rather than pushing him, and they were slow to act on Lee and Andrew Symonds when they were held back by form, fitness and personal issues.

“What I’m trying to achieve, is to get Australia through a transition period and emerge in two to three years’ time, hopefully, at or near the top of world cricket still”

Hilditch dismissed the accusations and said the panel had “broken down barriers” by giving more young players opportunities. “As far as selections go, I don’t think we’ve been conservative, to be frank,” he said. “As far as what we are trying to achieve, bringing young players on, some of the stuff we’ve done includes bringing people from nearly grade cricket into Australia A. We are very concerned about the future, that’s where we’re trying to hit.”Whenever Hilditch’s selection judgments are questioned, his lack of focus is raised. He juggles the cricket duties with his partnership in the Adelaide-based law firm Griffin Hilditch. Throughout his state and national playing career he was always studying or working full-time and has no plans to alter his load.Cricket Australia has completed a review of its player pathway, from state to international level, and one of the proposals was a full-time chairman of selectors. Hilditch’s role is considered part-time and his annual retainer is around A$100,000.He made submissions to the report and supports all the recommendations, but insisted he hadn’t thought about whether he could do the job if it became officially permanent. “As chairman of selectors, I’m just really passionate about what I do,” he said. “That’s a really lucky position to be in.”I don’t feel terribly stressed and I feel extremely fortunate to be contributing to Australian cricket. I’ve done most of my time voluntarily and I enjoyed that process. If it continues that’s great, because I’m very fortunate, but I’ll see what happens.”However, he is certain that if any of the selectors are given a heavier load it will not mean they attend every tour match. “Unfortunately there’s some perception at the moment that I should have been at the first county game [against Sussex], but that’s got nothing to do with whether I’m a full-time chairman,” he said. “If there’s a full-time selector he’s not going to be at every game.Hilditch is much friendlier with his players than the decision-makers three decades ago, opening himself up to more criticism•AFP”We’ve got a captain, a coaching staff, a bowling staff. It’s also, to be fair, pretty naïve to think that way. In a modern society we work on vision as much as anything else. I reviewed all the footage from the first game as soon as I arrived here. We all do that constantly. We’re not going to make selections on what I see here [against the England Lions].”He feels his law partners – he specialises in insurance claims and writes for industry publications – should have more of a problem with the time he devotes to his work than those at the cricket. “I’ve had a lifetime of combining both those things together,” he said. “Whether it’s a good or a bad thing, it makes me tick. I find as much time as I need.”While he disputes the views of him as a conservative selector and lawyer, he rates his 18-Test career harder than any critic of his current role. “I was extremely fortunate to play for Australia,” he said. “There are lots more players more talented than me who haven’t done that. As far as everything else, I’m probably going to be stuck with that.”He was vice-captain on the 1985 trip to England, which Australia lost 1-3, but after scoring 119 and 80 in the first Test in Leeds he was out of the team by the end of the year. “I just really enjoyed the tour and I played some pretty poor cricket,” he said. “And let Australia down. I remember that part of it.”The first half of the 1980s was unhappy for the country’s cricket, with rebel tours, mass retirements and a distinct lack of direction from the selectors. Hilditch is much friendlier with his players than the decision-makers three decades ago, opening himself up to more criticism.”It’s an extremely close relationship,” he said. “Certainly a relationship nothing like what I would have enjoyed in my playing time. Things have changed for the better. We’re unbelievably close to the players, which makes the process a bit more difficult. People might say we are too close, but I actually like it. We have a good understanding of the personalities of all players, which is a really important part of selection which nobody else is ever going to know.”

Graeme Smith announced his return to form in typically ebullient manner and, if he is consistent, Rajasthan are bound for the final four

Karna S05-May-2009Rajasthan got what they wanted from this game. The team has spoken about the need for consistency in the batting; Graeme Smith, who averaged 13 before this game, got among the runs today and his new opening partner Naman Ojha looked pretty solid too. Smith had not been himself for a while; he had a quiet last three games against Australia in the ODI series and flopped in the first seven here in the IPL. Today, he announced his return to form – good news for South Africa as much as Rajasthan – in typically ebullient manner.Watching Smith bat is not the most joyful act. There is nothing graceful about his batsmanship but it almost mirrors his steely mind that is so evident and celebrated in his captaincy. A tough and hard captain doesn’t usually conjure up visuals of lyrical batting; as Allan Border grew into his captaincy, he seemed to get more crab-like in the crease. It was almost a fight within himself. Smith can be a power hitter but he is not your flowing Yuvraj or Gilchrist. Everything about him suggests force; muscle over wrist, batsman over bowler, mind over matter.It begins with his stance, and how he tries to bring the bat down – a deliberate, almost very conscious, move to get it straight down, as if he is almost willing himself to get it right. It doesn’t seem to be a natural movement. More often than not, the straight drive goes to mid-on. He has a mean flick shot but even there he has turned that graceful movement to something hauled off the assembly line. Young boys are not going to fall in love with the game after seeing him bat but his peers will admire his guts and want to play as tough as him.Today offered more evidence of his tough and calculating mind. He was about to take first strike but once he saw it was the offspinner Ramesh Powar who had the ball, he asked Naman Ojha, the right hander, to do so and go after the bowler. With Ojha getting off to a flier, Smith didn’t have to worry about runs or preserving his wicket. He was not in great form when he started off, the ball meeting the edge more than the middle, but he fought on.The field setting for him was perfect, Mahela Jayawardene stationed at short mid-on to catch the error from the bottom-hand powered drive down the ground. And it almost worked: Smith hit one hard and Jayawardene almost pulled off a blinder to his right. Once let off, though, Smith broke away. He hit four fours in the next eight balls, which included his favourite flick and a slap past point, and charged along to unfurl powerful sweeps and carved drives before he holed out to long-on. The pitch helped him; it was faster, the ball came on nicely to the bat and he prospered.Later, Jeremy Snape and Darren Berry spoke about how delighted they were with Smith and Ojha’s partnership. “They played proper cricketing shots. Smith has been very professional in his preparation and it was just matter of time before the runs came. This was the strip on which he played the Test against Australia and was feeling good ahead of the game.” The strong-willed Smith is back and, if he is consistent, Rajasthan are bound for the final four.

Mark Ramprakash has ruled the shires for five years but is now reaching the end of his long playing career. He talks about the past, present and future

Interview by Sam Pilger31-Oct-2009″So often when my name and career are spoken about it is in a negative manner. I actually have
to keep reminding myself that I am really very proud of what I have achieved in the game.”Having turned 40 in September, Ramprakash recently published his autobiography , which is his counter-attack to redress the balance and take control of his legacy in the game.Don’t expect any Trescothick-style soul baring. Ramprakash does not allow you inside his head to see the anguish he must have felt at failing to fulfill his enormous potential in Test cricket, and there remain traces of bitterness at his belief that a succession of English coaches failed to exploit his prodigious talent properly.But it would be wrong for Ramprakash to be defined solely by his Test career. He could have scuttled away from the game long ago but he has relentlessly accumulated runs for Surrey and become only the 25th batsman in the history of the game to score a hundred first-class centuries. His is a career to be celebrated now, not pitied.While admitting he can come across as aloof, in person Ramprakash proves good company, charming and expansive and seemingly no longer tortured by earlier failures. He believes he is now a contented man, ready to assume an elder-statesman role in the game and to reflect on his life in cricket so far.How have you achieved such longevity?

I suppose I have good genes, but above all else it is an overwhelming love for the game. The
players who started at the same time as me have retired a long time ago because they don’t have that same love. My experience has kept me going as well because eight times out of 10 when I go out to bat I’m not feeling as good as I would like, I am not middling the ball, the feet aren’t moving; but experience helps you deal with it.How has the county game changed in the last 20 years?

When I started, the bowling was faster. Back then there was an amazing conveyor belt of West Indians, so every team would have a bowler who could bowl at 90mph. Now there are few bowlers who can push you on the back foot. With the slow pitches, too, it can be very, very hard work for the bowlers.And how would you assess the present quality of spin bowling?

In my formative years there were a lot of spinners, like Vic Marks, Eddie Hemmings, Nick Cook, obviously Phil Edmonds and John Emburey, David Graveney himself. It is very hard to be a young spinner now because you get lashed around with short boundaries, quick outfields and big bats. We have to nurture the spinners more.Does “Bloodaxe” still lurk within or is he long gone?

Angus Fraser gave me that name because when I was younger I was ambitious, and if things weren’t going my way, I would get frustrated. But as you get older you learn more about yourself, and I have been better behaved in my 30s. I have always walked a fine line between being very competitive and it boiling over.

“The selectors have said to me the door is always open but it appears to be closed. People say to me all the time, ‘Ramps, how come you’re not being selected, you have scored over 6000 runs in the last four years and averaging over 90?’ It seems unfair”

Who have been the biggest influences on you as a player?

My idol was Viv Richards and I remember him approaching me once in the pavilion when we were playing West Indies. I was upset at how things were going and he told me: “You have got everything as a player but there is clearly something missing.” I asked him what and he just said: “Belief.” That was so perceptive without even knowing me. To hear him say that was powerful but it didn’t
sink in for five years. I had a lot of self-confidence until I was 21 but after a tough start in Test cricket, my confidence began to ebb away and then it came back years later.In your book you say: “An encouraging word [from the England coaches] would have made
all the difference but there was no support, no communication.” How much did that hinder you
as a Test player?

I don’t want to make excuses for not playing well for England. I had lots of opportunities,
I tried my best at the time, so I am happy in that knowledge. But, if you look back and analyse it and compare the set-up of the England side in the early 1990s to now, there are big differences in the way new players are welcomed and integrated. I was just left on my own to get on with it but now
England are aware of the pressures and they do everything to help new players.Did you ever seriously think you might be recalled for the fifth Ashes Test at The Oval this summer?

No, because the selectors did not seem open to the idea of recalling me. And that was disappointing. After being dropped in 2002 I went back to Surrey, continued to work hard, scored runs and developed as a person but the selectors’ impression of me is stuck in the past and I have been tagged unfairly. They are out of date in their opinions, they talk about me as if it is 1995 and I have not had success at Test level – but I have. The selectors have said to me that the door is always open but it appears to be closed. People say to me all the time, “Ramps, how come you’re not being selected, you have scored over 6000 runs in the last four years and averaging over 90?” It seems unfair.But you have said you wouldn’t swap winning for the chance of playing another Test? Really?

Yes, that’s true, I wouldn’t swap it because I had such a wonderful time on . I had done cricket for 20 years, so going on the show took me out of my comfort zone. It will stay with me for life.Did you look at Jonathan Trott making a century at The Oval and think you could have done that as well?

He played with a calm assurance you rarely see in a debutant, so credit to them for choosing him. What it does say about Trott is, he has done his time in county cricket, which often gets criticised. I would have loved to have had another go myself. I was ready.Was it a shame the selectors chose a South African-born player in Trott and not someone nurtured in England?

Yes. All English supporters want English players to play for England and by that I mean someone either born here or who has come through the education system. I have heard it mentioned in football as well. There is talk that [Arsenal’s] Manuel Almunia might play for England and plenty of supporters come on the radio and say: “No. He’s Spanish.”Ramprakash with partner Karen Hardy on : “going on the show took me out of my comfort zone”•BBCAfter England’s batsmen scored only two centuries in the Ashes, how can they improve and make bigger scores?

I am a big fan of Ravi Bopara. He is going to be a very good player but I never really fancied him at No. 3. He is at the start of his career, so batting three puts him under pressure. I would have eased him in at five or six. I am a big supporter of Ian Bell too. Technically he is good and there is more to come. Paul Collingwood’s place is under discussion with Trott playing so well.Which county player would you tip to break next into the England side?

When the selectors look at county cricket it is important everyone starts from a level playing
field. Michael Carberry has played extremely well for Hampshire, scored a lot of runs, but his
name was not mentioned to play at The Oval. It would appear that it is a good time to play for
Warwickshire. I am not suggesting that there is anything unfair going on but you have a selector in Ashley Giles who is also a county coach. That is a position England have to be careful with because it can lead to accusations of favouritism.You called the treatment of Monty Panesar “scandalous”…

Yes. Monty has six five-wicket hauls in Test cricket and he has won Test matches for England, yet all I seem to hear is what Monty can’t do. I don’t believe other players get treated that way. There is a lack of understanding of spin bowling. This was reinforced when Adil Rashid performed so well in the first one-day game against Australia but was left out of the following matches. There are other players who can have lengthy poor patches but somehow they seem to be in the ‘In Club’ in the England set-up and continually get to play.What changes would you like to see at county level?

One radical idea, which I don’t see happening, is to create nine regional teams and pair counties together, so you could create a London side from Middlesex and Surrey, pair together Essex and Kent, while creating a Manchester side, a Birmingham side and so on. You would produce a strong competition, one in which you would have to perform at your best in every game.How much longer will you go on playing?

I know I have two years left on my contract but enjoyment is a big thing for me at my age and it hasn’t been very enjoyable lately with Surrey bringing up the rear and losing a lot of games. No longer playing cricket is a scary thought, without a doubt. It has been my life since I was 17, so being without it and dealing with the transition will be difficult. Going into a career in coaching could help.

Michael Bevan looks back at his early years and at a Test career that never took off

Interview by Richard Edwards02-Dec-2010″I probably lacked a little belief that I could play it the pull, even though a first-class average of 60 would suggest that it shouldn’t have been a problem”•Getty ImagesWhat are your early memories?
Playing representative cricket against all the other states for what was really a minnow ACT [Australian Capital Territory] side. Back then I was more of a fast bowler than a batsman. I didn’t really start taking batting seriously until the age of 16, when I injured my back.Did it hamper your development, coming from the country’s smallest state?
Given that I always wanted to play for Australia, I knew I would have to change states at some stage, but
that problem was really solved for me when I was included in the Australian Under-19 side and then picked for the Australian Academy in Adelaide.What are your memories of your first-class debut for South Australia?
We were playing against Western Australia at the WACA in December 1989 and I spent my first two days in the field basically chasing leather and standing at cover watching Geoff Marsh [who scored 355 not out] smash cover-drives past me. I did manage to score a hundred in my first innings, though. The wicket was like glass. It’s not like that now but back then the ball was still swinging after 80 overs, so it was an unusual experience playing and missing regularly when you were nearing your hundred.Allan Border’s retirement handed you your international chance in 1994…
AB had called it a day and I suppose you could say that I was the first player to take his place in the Australian side, and for a 23-year-old they were pretty big shoes to fill.How was your first tour, to Pakistan?
Travelling over there was a new experience, but I was pretty excited to be making my Test debut and playing with some of the legends of the game. I scored 80 in my first innings and had a good series. It was probably the best I’d hit them in Test cricket, even though I had a pretty dubious start. I remember taking strike against Wasim Akram for my first ball and he nearly took my head off. After that I did pretty well and I’ve no doubt it was because the wickets and the reverse-swing in Pakistan were similar to what I had been used to at the SCG. In the end we lost that first match by one wicket after Heals [Ian Healy] fumbled a stumping and the ball ran for four byes. He was distraught walking off afterwards.You played two matches of the Ashes series after that Pakistan tour and were then dropped. Was that hard to take?
Funnily enough, being dropped from the Australian team in an Ashes series was probably the first time I had learnt anything about myself and my game, and I actually improved as a player after that. Looking back now,
that was obviously a good thing, but starting that Ashes series so poorly was a real low because I couldn’t work out why I wasn’t performing.You joined Yorkshire soon afterwards. Did playing county cricket help your game?
Generally speaking, I would say yes. As a batsman it gives you a great opportunity to spend a lot of time in the middle and there’s no substitute for that. I always enjoyed playing county cricket because it was a touch more light-hearted than playing domestic cricket back home, so I definitely took a lot of positives from my experiences in England.Was that light-hearted environment a reason why England struggled to beat Australia during that time?
Look, I’m not sure about that but what I did notice is that the first five matches of every summer were the toughest – those matches were probably tougher than most of the Shield matches we played because the bowlers were fresh, there was a bit of juice in the wicket and there was a bit of rain around. One of the problems that the English domestic game had to get a handle on was that by the middle of summer, with so many flat wickets, the new ball being replaced after 100 overs and the one-bouncer rule, life was very tough for a lot of the bowlers and a lot easier for the batsmen.

“I never saw myself as being just a one-day player. It’s just a tag I was given and have to live with. I guess when I first started I hoped I would play 100 Tests, but obviously it didn’t pan out that way. In the end I think I was dropped from the one-day side too soon”

You had such a great record in England but struggled in the Ashes. Why was that?
I played two Ashes series and in both of them I did particularly poorly. I think I averaged over 50 against West Indies and over 60 against Pakistan but against England I averaged 8 and 13, so there was no in-between for me at that point. It’s hard to put your finger on why that might have happened but, while playing in the Ashes is something that every Australian cricketer looks forward to, from a personal perspective it was a pretty challenging time and ultimately it’s always hard to enjoy it when you’re going through that kind of trot.A lot of people blamed your failures at Test level on a weakness against the short ball. Was that fair?
I couldn’t work it out at the time because I’d never really had an issue with it in the past but the more it happened, the more of an issue it became. I don’t think I helped myself. I probably put too much focus on trying to play it well and gave it too much priority. I probably lacked a little belief that I could play it, even though a first-class average of 60 would suggest that it shouldn’t have been a problem. I think in the end that my problems at Test level were more psychological than anything physical or technical.Which Australian captain did you most enjoy playing under?
Steve Waugh was a good captain and a good leader, although very different from Mark Taylor or
Ricky Ponting. Steve wasn’t a big communicator, which is quite strange for a leader, but he believed in leading through action. He set such high standards and wanted to achieve such great things. He also took a genuine interest in his players and was empathetic to players who were struggling, which is the way he built his trust and respect.Mark was completely different. He was comfortable in his own skin, extremely astute as a tactician, he was a great communicator and really knew how to get the best out of the players. He was probably the
most well-rounded captain that I played under.Did you ever see yourself as a one-day specialist?
I never saw myself as being just a one-day player. It’s just a tag I was given and have to live with. I guess when I first started I hoped I would play 100 Tests, but obviously it didn’t pan out that way. In the end I think I
was dropped from the one-day side too soon. I was left out because I think my role at No. 6 had been diminished by virtue of us having so many great players – I was simply required less.”Steve [Waugh] wasn’t a big communicator, which is quite strange for a leader, but he believed in leading through action”•Getty ImagesWas there a time when you thought you could win a match as a “finisher” for Australia from any position?
I felt it was my job as a No. 6 batsman to be there at the end when we were either chasing runs or setting totals. Quite often when you go in and your side is in trouble, the last thing on your mind is winning. You try to survive, hang around and keep an eye on the run-rate so that it’s still manageable. In one-day cricket the pressure comes from the run-rate and the scoreboard and they’re the factors that you need to cope with. You need to choose the right gameplan, minimise risk and make the right decisions.What was your best innings?
A lot of people remember when I hit a four off the last ball against West Indies to win a match at
Sydney in 1996, but I prefer a knock I played against New Zealand in 2002 in the domestic series at the MCG. We were under the pump and were looking as though we were going to miss out on the finals. They got about 240, we were 6 for 80-odd and I got 100. Chasing a large total like that under that sort of pressure was a really enjoyable, satisfying experience.Any regrets?
I haven’t watched much cricket now that I’ve finished. I’ve just sort of moved on. I would love to have
played more Test cricket, but then again it was one of the best learning experiences of my life. It wouldn’t make sense for me to harbour any grudges about what happened in the past.

A stats review of IPL 2011, and how it compares with previous editions

Madhusudhan Ramakrishnan30-May-2011Chennai: unparalleled consistency across seasons
While most teams have struggled for consistency through a single season, Chennai have not only been dominant from start to finish of one tournament, but have also been exceptional across all four editions of the IPL. They lost a close final in the inaugural season to Rajasthan and made the semi-final the following year where they lost to Bangalore. In 2010, they beat fancied Mumbai Indians in the final before going on to lift the Champions League later in the year.Aided by a perfect home record this year, Chennai won two consecutive games in the knockout stage against Bangalore, who had been the form team of the IPL going into the final week. Chennai’s approach was much more conservative at the start of the innings when compared to most other teams, but their strategy of retaining wickets for the late overs proved to be a masterstroke. The powerful middle order ensured that Chennai scored a remarkably high number of boundaries in the end overs. They scored nearly 58% of their runs in the last six overs in boundaries (544 out of 939) at a run-rate of 10.33. On the bowling front too, Chennai were superb. They conceded less than eight runs per over overall and managed to stay quite economical in the last six-over period too (economy-rate 8.58).Chennai’s win-loss ratio of 2.20 in IPL 2011 was comfortably the best among the top four teams. Bangalore and Mumbai finished with 10 wins and six losses while Kolkata were third, with eight wins and seven losses. Chennai preferred batting first and won eight times when they did. They did, however, chase down a highly competitive target in the vital qualifier game against Bangalore which ensured that they would not need to play the second qualifier before the final. Overall, across the four seasons, Chennai have a win-loss ratio of 1.54 which is better than that of Mumbai (1.26) and Bangalore (1.00). Although Mumbai have been the better bowling side with a better economy-rate and average, Chennai’s all-round strength has proved to be crucial to their consistency across all seasons.

A balanced edition in most aspects

The average runs per wicket in IPL 2011 was very similar to that of the previous IPL tournaments that were played in India (2008 and 2010). However the run-rate (7.72) was slightly lower than the figures for those seasons (8.30 and 8.12). The 2009 IPL, which was played in South Africa, has been the most bowler-friendly edition with the lowest average and run-rate among the four seasons. In the early part of IPL 2011, chasing had proved to be the better option and nearly every team except Chennai employed the strategy. Overall, teams won 40 games chasing and 32 batting first. The ratio of wins chasing to wins batting first is lower only than the first season when teams won 36 times while chasing and 22 while batting first.Despite the fact that a huge number of fours and sixes were hit, the boundary-run percentage in IPL 2011 has also been surprisingly low. The figure of 54.29% is slightly lower than IPL 2010 with only the low-scoring IPL 2009 ranking lower (50.85). IPL 2011 also witnessed the most centuries (6) and the most fifties (89). Overall, though, the number of fifties per match (1.28) was lower than IPL 2008 (1.534) and IPL 2010 (1.533) and higher than IPL 2009 (1.22).Another notable feature of IPL 2011 was the lack of huge team scores. There were 14 scores of 180 or more which is lower than IPL 2010 ( 21) and IPL 2008 (16). On the other hand, there were nine scores less than or equal to 120 (20 overs played), which was the highest number of such scores across all four seasons. While IPL 2009 had eight such scores, IPL 2008 and IPL 2010 had just three and one such score respectively.

Conservative start and strong finish
The table below shows the performance of teams across different phases of the innings while batting first and chasing. The lower run-rate in the first six-over period in IPL 2011 clearly indicates a slightly more conservative approach. Apart from Bangalore, who had Chris Gayle in stunning form through the latter half of the tournament, no other team managed to dictate terms in the beginning of the innings consistently. In the middle-over period, the scoring rate has been lower than IPL 2008 and IPL 2010, but the average is much higher which points to the strategy of preserving wickets to help in accelerating in the end overs. In IPL 2011, chasing teams found the going better at the start of the innings, but did not manage to do as well in the middle and end of an innings. The run-rate in the end overs of the second innings (8.67) is second only to IPL 2008 (9.22), a season in which chasing teams have had the best record.

Gayle’s incredible numbers
Not only did Gayle make a mockery of the previous record for the most sixes hit in a season, he also ended up scoring more than 600 runs in 12 innings with two centuries and three fifties. In the matches he played, Gayle scored nearly 33% of the total team runs, and is on top of the list of batsmen with the highest percentage of team runs in IPL 2011 (top run getters for each team only). Virender Sehwag scored 24.48% of the runs for Delhi before an injury ended his run in the tournament. The eventual champions Chennai had many contributors, with Michael Hussey leading the way with 22.17% of the team runs. Shaun Marsh, who topped the runs tally for Punjab in IPL 2011 with 504 runs, scored 35.26% of the team runs in IPL 2008. Matthew Hayden and Sachin Tendulkar had the highest percentage of team runs in IPL 2009 and IPL 2010 with figures of 29.68% and 23.72% respectively.

Middle-order batsmen shine
While the top six wickets in IPL 2008 and IPL 2010 scored at nearly eight runs per over throughout, the same was not true in the just-concluded edition. The top order scored slower than in previous seasons (with the exception of 2009), but maintained a good average. The first three wickets did, however, post more fifty-plus partnerships than they did in the previous years. The middle order had a much higher scoring-rate than the top order in IPL 2011, but the rate was still much lower than the two previous IPL seasons played in India.

Spinners prove vital
While the role of pace bowlers has remained quite similar across all four seasons, the same is not true of the spinners. Spinners came to the fore in IPL 2009 in South Africa and were highly responsible for curtailing the scoring-rate in the middle of the innings. In 2011, fast bowlers averaged just over 28 at an economy-rate of 7.80 which made it their most successful year after IPL 2009, when they averaged just over 26 at an economy-rate of 7.65.Rahul Sharma was the standout spinner in IPL 2011 with 16 wickets at a superb economy-rate of 5.46. Daniel Vettori, Shane Warne and R Ashwin also returned excellent figures throughout a season in which spinners had a tremendous impact. Ashwin was consistently employed by MS Dhoni in the first six-over period and proved his worth in the final when he dismissed the dangerous Gayle in the first over of the innings. Overall, the average and economy-rate for spinners in IPL 2011 were bettered only by the corresponding figures in IPL 2009.

There isn’t much new that you can write about a man who gives up so little about himself

Ashok Malik01-May-2011In 2000, as the 20th century drew to a close, commissioned a poll to identify the five top cricketers of the previous 100 years. An electoral college of acclaimed cricket specialists voted unanimously for Don Bradman and near unanimously (90% votes) for Garry Sobers. After that the field spread out. Jack Hobbs made it, a tribute to his longevity and mastery of run-scoring over decades. Among contemporary players only Shane Warne made the cut. Viv Richards was the most recent batsman on the list.What if were to do another poll, to identify the five leading cricketers of the past 110 years (1901-2010)? Would there be any changes? It’s a fair bet that either Hobbs or Richards would surrender place to Sachin Tendulkar.In 2000, Tendulkar didn’t deserve space on that pedestal. He had scored thousands of runs but not done enough to live up to the promise he had shown as the finest teenaged batsman of all time. There was the massacre of Warne in Sharjah, the fourth-innings hundred against Pakistan in Chennai, the mighty scores in the World Cups of 1996 and 1999. Yet beyond that one had to go back to his early years, to the tour of Australia in 1991-92, for a standout sample of Tendulkar exceptionalism.The past decade has changed all that. Within months of the list, in March 2001, India won a famous victory in Kolkata, turned their cricket fortunes around, and finally discovered the team and work ethic Tendulkar deserved. The great man responded as only greatness can, and has just completed the most meaningful decade of his career. Today he matches Hobbs for durability and hunger, and Richards for destructive strokeplay in all formats of the game he has made available to himself.What of Twenty20, it will inevitably be asked, since Tendulkar plays only domestic and not international Twenty20 games. Actually this makes the comparison with Richards even clearer. The West Indian superstar played some of his most compelling innings for Somerset, especially in cup finals in the English county season. He made Somerset one of the world’s most gifted limited-overs sides in the early 1980s. Tendulkar does likewise for Mumbai Indians in the Indian Premier League.It is apt then that among the better essays in this collection is one by Peter Roebuck, part of that magical Somerset team of a quarter century ago. In “Classical and Complete”, Roebuck sets Tendulkar against Richards. As he writes, “Contemporaries often wished that the Antiguan possessed a little more of Tendulkar’s calm and constancy. Current commentators regret that the modern champion lacks the West Indian’s ability to grab the moment and shake it till it submits.”Roebuck places Richards (and Sunil Gavaskar) in the context of the 1970s and 1980s. India’s original Little Master was the “post-colonial warrior”. For Richards, his cricket “was personal”. “Always it was about something: a neglected island, a scorned people, a disdained colour, a patronised county. Always there was a certain wrath. Repose was not his temper.”

Wedded to his art, with no known political views, little by way of controversy and few even mildly indiscreet public statements there’s only so much you can write about Tendulkar. Indeed, to write about him is more an act of worship than an argument. This book – Tendulkar book – operates within that constricting framework

In contrast “Tendulkar has never been an avenging angel”: “[He] is comfortable in his own skin and country and team and colour and creed. Richards came to cricket with causes, for Tendulkar cricket is the cause.”Ironically that one assessment also tells us why any book on Tendulkar – biography, set of appraisals, anything – can never rise above a certain pitch. He has been wedded to his art, has no known political views, has hardly been involved in any controversy worth the name, and has made few even mildly indiscreet public statements. There’s only so much you can write about Tendulkar. Indeed, to write about him is more an act of worship than an argument.This book – Tendulkar book – operates within that constricting framework. Even so, it produces some eminently readable pieces. Osman Samiuddin on Pakistan’s relationship with Tendulkar, and Makarand Waingankar on Tendulkar’s early years in the hard, edgy school of Mumbai’s cricket are recommended.Mike Coward (“Adopting Sachin”) writes on the Australian appreciation of the man but is a trifle more reverential than one would want. Also, there’s a notable absence: how does “Adopting Sachin” match up to “Adopting Mr Very Very Special”? Years ago I was stopped by a tour guide leading a multi-country group on a climb up the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Halfway into the sky, with a bunch of cricket-agnostic Americans and Europeans and Japanese waiting, he discovered I was Indian and began discussing VVS Laxman. There’s an essay there, but perhaps Coward’s saved it for another time.This book has some great lines, but few better than Suresh Menon’s “Batsmen, like detectives in a murder mystery, look for means, motive and opportunity.” It comes in a sardonic yet meaningful look at how numbers (10,000 runs, 15,000 runs, 100 centuries, whatever) have chased Tendulkar almost as surely as he has chased them. It pits him against two Australians who provide the bookends to his career – Allan Border and Ricky Ponting – and has an interesting take on how cricket culture down under cherishes genius despite statistics, and how cricket culture in the subcontinent cherishes statistics despite genius.Amid copybook prose, there is also cross-batted inelegance. In an otherwise fine piece that begins with an account of that day in March 1994 when Tendulkar was promoted to open the innings in a limited-overs international in New Zealand, R Mohan manufactures a horrific line: “[Tendulkar’s] batting was probably as safe as that of a virgin at a convention of eunuchs.” Ouch.The biggest disappointments, however, are the essays by the contributors who shared a team huddle with Tendulkar, particularly by two thinking men, Sanjay Manjrekar and Rahul Dravid, who have batted with him. Dravid offers a teaser, writing of how Tendulkar mastered Shane Warne, and of how he fought off a pace attack on a tricky Trinidad pitch in 1997. Regrettably, he pulls his bat out of the way after that.Some day Dravid – Fry to Tendulkar’s Ranji, or maybe Morris to his Bradman – must make amends. Till then, we have our copies of .Sachin: Genius Unplugged
edited by Suresh Menon
Westland, Rs 599