All posts by n8rngtd.top

Australia’s careful handling of Phillip Hughes conveys how desperately they need him to bloom into a batsman of quality, and longevity

Daniel Brettig06-Dec-2012Reborn. Renewed. Rejuvenated. Ready. Really?Phillip Hughes’ recall to Australia’s Test side to face Sri Lanka has been accompanied by plenty of noise to the effect that it will be a new man who takes guard in Hobart next Friday. To borrow Radiohead’s words, Hughes is fitter, happier, and should be more productive.Since the humiliation of last summer’s corresponding Bellerive Oval match, when Hughes completed a quartet of near identical dismissals at the hands of Chris Martin on the way to being dropped, the 24-year-old has gone on something like a journey of self-discovery.He stood back from the inaugural Twenty20 Big Bash League in order to work on his long-form methods, signed up to play for Worcestershire in England, and worked assiduously with his long-time mentor Neil D’Costa. While at Worcester, Hughes forsook New South Wales to move to South Australia, where Adelaide’s cosiness sat more neatly with his Macksville upbringing.All these moves resulted in runs, though spread across three formats, and what appears a more expansive game that features a better range of scoring strokes right around the ground. He even survived a brief but spicy spell from Dale Steyn when playing for Australia A against the South Africans at the SCG. The national selector John Inverarity feels that Hughes is now “cherry ripe” to play, having made a “compelling” case for Worcestershire and South Australia.But a closer glance at how Hughes has fared in first-class matches – the only truly relevant measure when pondering his readiness for the Test team – reveals a record not so much dominant as mildly presentable. Including the 158 he struck for South Australia against Victoria at the MCG during the Adelaide Test, Hughes’ batting digits are as follows: 1,135 runs at 40.54 in 16 matches, three centuries.They are hardly the sorts of numbers to have international bowlers quaking at the sight of the diminutive Hughes, nor the kinds of figures that suggest a quantum leap in the left-hander’s game. Instead they reflect a gradual improvement over the course of a year, after a dire home summer in 2011-12, both for Australia and NSW.At the time of Hughes’ exit from the Test team, numerous sage observers reckoned that he would need a good two seasons of consistent run-making and re-evaluation of his approach to be ready for a return to the international arena. Inverarity himself appeared to be of that view, and has often stated his preference for young players to be given a consistent run of matches for the one team rather than shunting them up to a higher representative level the moment they show evidence of a spike in batting or bowling form.Nonetheless, Hughes is now back into the Australian squad little more than 12 months after he left it, and in circumstances heavy with meaning. By replacing Ricky Ponting in Australia’s top order, Hughes may be seen as the embodiment of the team’s batting future. Of all the young players vying to be elevated to the national team, Hughes’ desire for runs and long innings is the most fervent, as demonstrated by his notching of 20 first-class centuries before his 24th birthday.But Hughes’ readiness for the major tasks to face Australia in 2013, first a tour to India then dual Ashes series away and at home, will remain open to question until he faces both opponents. The selectors’ curious decision to keep Hughes away from the line of fire during the South Africa series has already stirred plenty of debate, raising as it did questions about how ready they think he is to face the world’s best teams.

There can be little doubt that given the lack of standout batting options around the nation, Inverarity and his panel know they have to give Hughes the very best chance to develop into a Test batsman of quality, and longevity

The use (if not abuse) of Rob Quiney in Hughes’ stead was explained by the coach Mickey Arthur before the first Test in Brisbane with the reasoning that Australia needed a team of men, not boys, to face up to Graeme Smith’s team. “I wouldn’t want to disrespect any nation, but against a nation like South Africa right now, and we’d probably do the same against England and India, you want an experienced head to come in,” Arthur said. “You can’t blood a youngster against a team like South Africa. We want a guy who is very confident in his ability, a guy who knows his game backwards, and a guy that has got a little bit of experience. That gave Rob the nod.”How that reflects on Hughes is a matter for plenty of discussion, but there can be little doubt that given the lack of standout batting options around the nation, Inverarity and his panel know they have to give Hughes the very best chance to develop into a Test batsman of quality, and longevity. By holding him back until Sri Lanka’s arrival they are giving Hughes the chance to settle into the team, much as Ponting helped Michael Clarke to bed down as captain by resigning his commission ahead of tours to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, before the more difficult assignments against South Africa and India.Ponting’s sense of timing in relinquishing the captaincy proved to be exemplary, and the selectors will hope that they have done similarly right by their new No. 3 batsman. For his part, Hughes must continue the upward curve of the past year under the public gaze of the same television cameras that chronicled his unhappiest of Hobart Tests last year. Australia’s Ashes hopes may depend on it.

The IPL auction unabashedly displays cricket’s new-found financial muscle. As one owner put it: “the money doesn’t matter” – to these people price is merely a figure, not an obstacle

Freddie Wilde25-Feb-2013A cool $800,000 has already been spent within five minutes, as Michael Clarke is being introduced as the third player up for auction. But then, just before bidding commences, a member of the Pune Warriors entourage waves across the room to someone. Richard Madley, the auctioneer, stops his introduction and melodramatically peers over his glasses in the direction of the man and exclaims: “Don’t wave at your friends! That’ll cost you $25,000 every time you do so!” This is met by haughty laughter from all corners of the glitzy Chennai function room. They were laughing with, rather than at.The Indian Premier League has been in existence six years now; captains, owners, advisers and assistants have been playing the same game for long enough to share some common ground. Even the auctioneer himself, Madley, has been involved since the very first auction in 2008. He still, to this day, apparently says his life’s greatest moment was declaring the sale of MS Dhoni to the Chennai Super Kings for 1.5 million US dollars at that first auction.Anyhow, four hours and fifty minutes later, a hand wave less than $12 million had been spent on 37 players from six different countries. Glenn Maxwell was this year’s big winner, being brought by Mumbai Indians for one million dollars. The services of Ajantha Mendis, Abishek Nayar, Jaydav Unadkat, Thisara Perera, Chris Morris, Kane Richardson, Dirk Nannes and Sachithra Senanayake were all acquired for figures in excess of half a million. Even Luke Pomersbach, a man with just one international cap to his name, fetched $300,000.For the team owners and captains the auction is a time to fine-tune squads, solve injury problems, plug gaps and add to the brand image of the franchise. As one owner put it: “the money doesn’t matter” – to these people price is merely a figure, not an obstacle. This lavish demonstration of wealth, power and influence is totally bizarre and grotesque.As Glenn Maxwell’s fee cruises past Ricky Ponting’s and brushes aside Michael Clarke’s before settling comfortably on the too perfect and showy one million, the heart of the cricketing purist is twisted in frustration. When Kane Richardson becomes one of the biggest buys of the day, Vernon Philander’s name card has long since been discarded in the unsold tub, which nestles next the Pepsi-can-lectern that Madley is stood behind. This isn’t fair the purist within you cries. This isn’t right. But then as the day goes on and Thisara Perera’s price leaps from $100,000 to $350,000 in a matter of seconds, and then $350,000 to $500,000 and $500,000 to $600,000, you let out a laugh. A stifled ‘what the f**k is going on?’ kind of laugh.Madley churns out numbers at a ferocious rate as the auction bats are poked up in the air by franchise owners like proud school kids with a new toy. The price leaps, jumps and skips from figure to figure; sale after sale exceeds your estimations. More bids, more money, more players. Advisers of all owners hurriedly speak on the phone – a quick check up with the accountant one would expect – a wave of the hand gives the go ahead for yet another ludicrous $25,000 raise. You laugh again now. ‘This world is mad’ you think to yourself as Fidel Edwards quadruples his year earnings in less than 30 seconds. ‘Absolutely mad.’It’s not enjoyment, but it’s not hate either. It’s a reluctant and growing sense of twisted pride: cricket is worth something, in fact, it’s worth a lot of something; that’s cool. This exclusive, arrogant, crass show is cricket’s luxury brand. The owners are probably wearing jewellery twice as expensive as the players they’re bidding for. The sudden wealth injection into cricket has been damaging to many aspects of the sport, and this is well documented. But the annual IPL auction is when cricket flaunts its scary potential and for a brief while you allow it, you tweet about it, you enjoy it and you embrace it.

Plays of the day from the match between Sunrisers Hyderabad v Royal Challengers Bangalore

Mohammad Isam07-Apr-2013The wicketThe last time Hanuma Vihari bowled in a Twenty20 game was more than three years ago. So when he had Chris Gayle caught behind off his first ball, it should have been a bigger surprise to Vihari himself than to his team-mates, the fans and commentators. Leaving aside the surprise element, it was a good enough first ball to dismiss a batsman of Gayle’s quality.The grooveThere could have been a run-out in the 14th over of Sunrisers Hyderabad’s innings. Vihari had pushed the ball to mid-off from where the throw from Gayle had him short by a few inches. But the bails took time to get off the groove on which they were set, saving the batsman from the long walk back.The 100% effortVinay Kumar is an agile fieldsman and he gave a good account of himself when he slid full length near the backward point rope and saved a certain boundary. That was not all. He picked himself up, sprinted to where he had pushed the ball and arrowed in a throw to Arun Karthik’s* gloves as Amit Mishra was caught several inches short of the crease. It was at par with Gurkeerat Singh’s catch earlier in the day, given the dramatic nature of both efforts.The pick-upRoyal Challengers Bangalore were getting out of the woods through their captain’s will. Virat Kohli had put together a fourth wicket partnership, and began to ascertain his dominance, smashing Ishant Sharma out of the ground. It went 95 meters deep into the stands, a shot oozing with Kohli’s natural confidence.The golden armKumar Sangakkara had used Vihari for one over very successfully, but Ashish Reddy too turned out to be a one-hit wonder. In his only over, he got rid of the dangerous Kohli off the last ball. Reddy showed good reflexes to take a low return catch, but surprisingly that was his last ball of the match.* April 7 7.45pm The wicketkeeper’s name has been corrected

Trumper the cricketer was a genius, Trumper the man touched Australia’s collective soul

Ashley Mallett28-Jun-2013The cricketing gods must have shed a thousand tears that cold, grey Sydney Monday morning of June 28, 1915 when they knew the greatest batsman of cricket’s golden age was nearing his end.The much-loved Victor Trumper died that very morning, after battling a kidney disease, as the clock struck ten. It would herald a period of great sadness at a time when thousands of young Australians were being killed in the horrific Gallipoli campaign. Trumper’s death at the age of 37 stunned the nation. Australia’s most brilliant and charismatic batsman was gone. Within hours, news of his death was emblazoned on placards that read “Great Cricketer Dead” at news stands throughout Australia and in London.An illustrated weekly, the , was full of the news from Gallipoli, from the epic landing and subsequent operations in the Dardanelles. There were pages of photographs of gallant ANZACs who had given their lives or had been wounded. A single-column photograph and 19 lines was all Trumper was given, but it was a touching tribute:

“Victor Trumper was the greatest batsman Australia had produced and its most accomplished in the history of the game in any country. The solid qualities of Tyldesley and Hobbs, the magnificent skill of Hill and Darling, even the wizardry of Ranjitsinhji, paled before a wonderful grace and orthodox poetry of motion that lifted batting to a standard that had not entered into the dream of those who imagined they had seen all that cricket had to offer when Grace and Shewsbury or those already mentioned had been at the wicket. He was a modest, good-living young man. His courage in his illness was the natural revelation of the Christian character.”

A correspondent with the , “Not Out”, wrote:

“The war hits us hard; but this blow has a sadder touch than any we may have felt when other heroes of the athletic world have died on the field of battle. Trumper’s name in cricket will never perish. He was the artist of cricket from toes to finger-tips. He was a man of bright, winning personality, upright and generous to a fault, as was recognised by those responsible for placing the proceeds of his testimonial match under trustees, for himself, and after him for his widows and children. I cannot conceive of him having had any enemies, for he was a spotless youth in character and habits. May the turf rest lightly over his grave.”

Trumper’s funeral took place on Wednesday, June 30, 1915. It was one of the largest and most impressive ever afforded a sportsman in Australia. The cortège left Trumper’s Chatswood home. The Reverend EH Cranswick of St Paul’s Church of England, Chatswood, read the service and subsequently delivered a singularly appropriate eulogy at the graveside at Waverley Cemetery. Hundreds of cricketers past and present marched four abreast with Trumper’s body from Chatswood to Fort Macquarie, where it was met by hundreds more.The cortège comprised a four-horse hearse, four carriages, and a floral carriage. Victor’s body was placed in a solid oak casket with handles, after his remains were removed from St Vincent’s Private Hospital. He was interred in the Church of England section of the Waverley Cemetery.Neither his wife, Annie, or his mother, Louey, attended the funeral. They were far too distraught. The chief mourners were Victor’s father, Charles; his two brothers, Charles and Sid; his uncle Thomas; brothers-in-law W Briggs and George Smith; and T Love, James Kelly, G Love, J Kavanagh, V Kavanagh and H West.Thousands of people stood in silence as the cortège passed and hundreds of others – men, women and children – wept openly. Men from all walks of life joined the procession, sportsmen from throughout Australia journeyed to pay their last respects.

By a lovely mix of consummate skill and a humble nature, Trumper proved that a good guy could also run first. Trumper the man touched the collective soul of the Australia people

A veteran cricketer of Goulburn, William Walsh, was at Trumper’s funeral:

“The waters were calm, glorious sunshine overhead and the blue sky flecked by fleecy clouds. The coffin was borne from the hearse to the grave by Monty Noble, Tibby Cotter, Hanson Carter, Syd Gregory and another. I was subsequently informed it was Warwick Armstrong, although I failed to recognise him. They were all his worthy allies in the contests on the various cricket fields of the world, and it was fitting that the final post of honour should be allotted to them. Clem Hill was absent, but we all felt he was there in spirit, for he had a high regard for Victor. Hill, the world’s greatest No. 3 batsman of the time, said of Trumper: ‘As a batsman I was not fit to lick Victor’s boots.’As the coffin was lowered, Monty Noble showed much emotion, and so did Warren Bardsley. The scene was pathetic and I think appealed to most of us as a practical sermon of life. All the mourners have gone home and I am alone looking out over the ocean.”

Victor suffered from a condition that was called Bright’s Disease. Noted on his death certificate and under the heading, Cause of Death, are the words: “uraemic convulsions… nephritis”.Neville Cardus wrote: “The death of a cricketer before age has fallen on him is sad: it is even against nature. Well may he look down on the fields from his chill hall of immortality, far removed from the jolly flesh and blood of his life, and cry out: ‘Another day in the sun and wind and I am not there, I am not there.'”By a lovely mix of consummate skill and a humble nature, Trumper proved that a good guy could also run first. Trumper the man touched the collective soul of the Australian people. According to Cardus, Trumper was sheer beauty in full flight, whereas Don Bradman, who years after Trumper had passed, took over the mantle of Australia’s greatest batsman, was consumed by making runs and being ruthlessly efficient at his craft: Trumper the eagle; Bradman the aeroplane. Trumper could tear an attack apart but upon reaching a hundred he looked about for a bowler deserving of his wicket. Bradman was so ruthlessly different. He built his innings on the bones of an attack that was crushed and broken in spirit.We all know of Bradman’s amazing Test average, 99.94, and alongside Bradman’s figures Trumper’s statistics pale into seeming insignificance. In 48 Test matches Trumper scored 3163 runs at an average of 39.04. He hit eight centuries, with a high of 214 not out against South Africa at the Adelaide Oval in 1910-11, and 13 half-centuries. The figures don’t reflect Trumper’s mastery of batting on uncovered wickets which were laid bare to rain, then a searing sun. When those steamy, muddy surfaces started to dry out they were called “sticky dogs”.Bad pitches were a challenge and a joy to Trumper. In January 1904 he scored 74 out of Australia’s total of 122 against the wiles of Wilfred Rhodes and George Hirst on such a sticky dog. Rain and sun had taken its toll on that MCG wicket. Rhodes took a match haul of 15 for 124, but it was Trumper’s genius with the bat on that wicket that enthralled everyone.Bradman never really understood Trumper’s genius. He would ask the likes of Alan Kippax and Arthur Mailey why they thought so highly of him. “How can you speak so glowingly of a batsman who averaged 39?”Cardus saw both Trumper and Bradman at their best, but he maintained that you could not compare a batsman or a bowler purely on figures alone. Perhaps it was Cardus who could have best answered Bradman’s question. “I am concerned with Trumper as an artist, not as a scorer of match-winning runs,” he wrote. “You will no more get an idea of the quality of Trumper’s batsmanship by adding up his runs than you will get an idea of the quality of Shelley’s poetry by adding up the number of lines written by Shelley.”It is now 98 years since Trumper was laid to rest. But his name lives on and will do so as long as the game of cricket is played. The cricketing gods loved Trumper above all others, for whenever he strode handsomely to the wicket the crowd rose as one to applaud and even the blades of grass seemed to bow respectfully in the wake of the great man’s entrance, becoming a rolling sea of green, nature’s own version of a Mexican wave.

A few more runs on the board more quickly and a few more overs to bowl England out and Australia might almost have had a sniff of victory at The Oval

Brydon Coverdale at The Oval25-Aug-2013There are times when conservatism kicks in naturally. For Michael Clarke, that time arrived late on the final day at The Oval. Later than it would have for Ricky Ponting, or Alastair Cook, or MS Dhoni. It came gradually. Fielders had been stationed around the bat when Nathan Lyon was bowling, men in close on both sides, a slip and a leg slip. Slowly but surely, as the wickets didn’t come with the rush that he desired, Clarke moved his men back. And back. And back.By the time Shane Watson came on for his first over of the match, the fours were flowing, Kevin Pietersen was nearing fifty, and the last hour was approaching. Five men went back to the boundary. Then six. No slips. For the first time in a long time, captain Clarke was playing not to win but to draw. Such an approach is not his default setting. If it was, he would not have set England a gettable target, he would have told his men to bat for safety and then reassess.In Mohali in March, when India were chasing 133 in a minimum of 27 overs, Clarke pushed unsuccessfully for victory. He could have used delaying tactics, slowed his bowlers down, taken time over his fields. That he did not, that he moved the Australians through their overs quite normally led to a situation in which Australia actually bowled nine overs more than were required. It is just possible that they might otherwise have salvaged a draw.But there, a draw was of no value to Australia, for the series would stay alive only with an Australian win. At The Oval, there was no such series to play for. The urn was gone. Parity could not be achieved. But still there were reasons for Clarke to gamble. His men had not experienced a Test victory since the first week of the year. They had suffered seven losses and one draw in that time. If there was any possibility of giving the team the chance to win, it was worth taking.3-0, 4-0 does it make a difference? Not in any material sense. Clarke could have been the first Australian captain to lead his team to four defeats in an Ashes series without a win, but that is a manufactured statistic. Other Australian squads have lost Ashes contests 5-1 or 4-1. Others – as Clarke well knows – have lost three Ashes Tests by an innings at home. 3-0, 4-0, this was never going to plumb those depths.And so it was no surprise that Clarke tried to manufacture a result, tried to force a match that looked like petering out to a draw into a new direction. He sent Watson out to open with David Warner, installed James Faulkner and Brad Haddin as pinch-hitters, and gave Ryan Harris and Mitchell Starc licence to attack. Not all of those moves paid off. With hindsight, perhaps Chris Rogers might have picked the gaps in the field more effectively than others who tried to clear it.A few more runs on the board more quickly and a few more overs to bowl England out and Australia might almost have had a sniff. By giving England the lure of a 4-0 victory, they enticed enough shots to claim five England wickets. It is difficult to imagine most captains in Clarke’s situation allowing the opposition such a chance. Dismissing a team in one session is a remarkable goal but that Australia attempted it in search of that elusive win was in many ways admirable.It was also symptomatic of Australia’s wider approach. Day in, day out, their Test batsmen play at balls they should leave, lack patience, and try to force things. And when that risk-taking behaviour fails, they are inclined to go for double or nothing, chase good money with bad, as gamblers call it. The pay-offs can be great but the losses crippling.England and South Africa are not the world’s best teams by accident. Often they play for safety first, victory second. England certainly did on a dour day three at The Oval. Clarke often talks about consistency; his men will become a better side if they can adopt a little of that mentality in their general approach to Test cricket. On a day like this, such an approach was of little value to Australia. Clarke’s gamble was necessary at The Oval.”That’s the way I’d like to see cricket played,” Clarke said after the near-loss. “I’d certainly like to lead the Australian team playing in that type of manner. I think we had nothing to lose, obviously 3-0 down. And to me, even if you’re not 3-0 down you’ve got to try to do everything you can to win the Test match. There’s obviously the risk of losing and that was there today as well, but I think it was what we had to try and do.”One team is going to win and one team is going to lose. That’s the way I’ve always played my cricket. I try to win every game. Today there was a risk we might lose but I’m not scared of that risk.”At least, not until Pietersen gets going. Then, even Clarke finds within himself an ounce of conservatism.

Plays of the Day from the first ODI between Pakistan and Sri Lanka in Sharjah

Andrew Fidel Fernando18-Dec-2013The riposte
Lasith Malinga’s first ball to debutant Sharjeel Khan was a well-directed bouncer that the batsman tried to duck but copped on the shoulder, sparking an appeal from behind the stumps. Smelling easy blood, Malinga pitched the next one short as well. Sharjeel, though, had been waiting for it. Quickly he shuffled back and connected with an unflinching hook, sending the ball high over deep square leg to strike the top of the stand. Malinga tried a yorker next but Sharjeel had anticipated that as well, moving across to flick it to fine leg, and another four in the over completed Sharjeel’s counter-punch that let Sri Lanka know he wouldn’t be messed with, debut or not.The fortunate waste of time
Ahmed Shehzad was desperate to stay at the crease when he was given out lbw in the seventh over, but given he had been in line with the stumps when the ball hit his front pad, he needed his partner’s approval to justify using a review. Sharjeel wasn’t sure and as the pair talked, the umpires counted the seconds. Eventually Shehzad asked for a review, only for the umpires to tell him he had taken longer than the allocated 15 seconds to request one. Shehzad argued that decision for a further 30 seconds, but thankfully for Pakistan the umpires did not budge. The ball had been hitting the stumps and had Shehzad been allowed the review, it would have been wasted.The pliable captain
While they had preserved their review while batting, Pakistan found a way to squander it in the field, somewhat amusingly. Shahid Afridi slid one across Dinesh Chandimal to hit him on the pad, and when he was turned down he turned immediately to Misbah-ul-Haq and gestured furiously for a review. Behind him wicketkeeper Umar Akmal was suggesting the ball would have missed leg stump, but Afridi was being so adamant and Pakistan were so far ahead in the match that Misbah agreed to ask for a review, like a parent indulging a child. Even before the final decision was given, though, other members of the team began ribbing Afridi for wasting a review, and when Akmal was proven right by the projection, Misbah led the teasing himself. Embarassed, Afridi hid his face with his hands.The attempted piggyback
Perhaps because Mohammad Hafeez was running so well between wickets, Sachithra Senanayake contrived to make life tougher for the batsman in the 15th over, when he climbed halfway up Hafeez’s back at the non-striker’s end. Sharjeel had defended a Senanayake delivery on the leg side, and Hafeez took two paces forward before his partner called “no”. Senanayake, meanwhile, had moved to field the ball, but before he could bend down to pick it up Hafeez moved into his way and bent slightly over. The much taller Senanayake ended up somewhere near Hafeez’ shoulders before they disentangled themselves, and both men returned to their places laughing.The catch
Hafeez had taken a good catch on the leg-side boundary to dismiss Tillakaratne Dilshan, but Sohaib Maqsood completed a better grab to send Lahiru Thirimanne back in the 30th over. Afridi tossed one up to Thirimanne, who got low and swept it powerfully square, without getting a lot of elevation. Maqsood had some ground to make but the ball was travelling at great speed. He had moved quickly to his right and eventually made the catch seem more comfortable than it was, taking it around his ears.

Bangladesh picked a lone specialist seamer for the first time in a Test, but their choice of Al-Amin Hossain over the more experienced Robiul was puzzling. The focus seemed more on containing runs

Mohammad Isam04-Feb-2014

Seam will play a role – Chandimal

Dinesh Chandimal suggested Sri Lanka’s seam bowlers would have a vital role to play on the slow, low surface in Chittagong. Bangladesh chose only one frontline seam option for the match, but Al-Amin Hossain had the best economy rate of bowlers who delivered more than five overs on the first day.
“As a player, I feel that it’s hard to get runs off the seamers,” Chandimal said. “So we’re looking forward to doing the basics with the ball. It’s similar conditions to Galle, so we have these kinds of pitches back home.”
Chandimal and Angelo Mathews had been dismissed late in the day, and putting his own form down to the fluctuations international cricketers must endure, he suggested Sri Lanka aimed to bat out most of day two.
“Bit disappointed because I played a rash shot and Mathews also got out. But still we have Kithuruwan [Vithanage] and Dilruwan [Perera], so they are going to get more runs tomorrow. It’s difficult to bat in these conditions, but we’ll hope for 200 runs – that might be a good total.”

On many occasions, the short-term in a five-day game is given more priority. Presented with a situation where his bowling attack hemorrhaged 730 runs in the Mirpur Test, the Bangladesh captain Mushfiqur Rahim cut down on attacking options in the Chittagong game, thereby underselling his team’s ability.Even on the opening day, it was apparent that wickets were going to be hard to come by. Al-Amin Hossain was the only pace bowler in the attack, the first time Bangladesh were playing a Test match with a single front-line seamer. Spinners Abdur Razzak and Mahmudullah were included in place of Robiul Islam and Rubel Hossain to keep the runs down, probably string together dot balls and hope the batsmen make mistakes.It was strange to see Robiul serve drinks on a ground where he has taken 16 wickets at an average of 20.87. He was the Player of the Series in Zimbabwe three Tests ago and in the Mirpur Test before this he had created enough opportunities to remain an automatic choice.By only including Al-Amin, Mushfiqur has confused the status quo among the pace bowlers. Here is an understudy, without the full physical and technical build-up, being asked to bowl long spells and do a holding job, when he should have had the support of another hardworking pace bowler at the other end.The explanation, through Mahmudullah’s press conference, was that the lack of swing or bounce in the Chittagong wicket encouraged that decision. But Al-Amin, to his credit, did what was expected of him. He made few attempts to drag Kumar Sangakkara out of his driving area, but swerved some deliveries away from the left-handers. He had the openers on a leash by varying his length quite regularly.Nevertheless, it was quite difficult to understand why Robiul wasn’t picked as the team’s leading seamer when his record and form says enough. But a less experienced, more vulnerable pace bowler was chosen ahead of him, because the team management wanted Al-Amin’s control rather than Robiul’s wicket-taking ability.When Razzak walked off with a strained left hamstring after just four overs, Mushfiqur was a bowler short against the might of Sangakkara and Mahela Jayawardene. They duly put on a sizable stand of 178. Mahmudullah, as expected, was insipid. He bowled short to Sangakkara and got punished, but later accounted for Jayawardene against the run of play. To be fair to a middle-order batsman who bowls spin, it is quite harsh to expect him to do a specialist spinner’s job despite taking 12 wickets in his last game, a first-class Bangladesh Cricket League match.He said the new ball spun more than the older one, but he didn’t hold an opinion on the pitch just yet.”It is a little tough to make predictions about this wicket,” Mahmudullah said. “We have to see what happens tomorrow. We hope that there will be spin. This morning it spun for a while with the new ball while it didn’t during the middle period and then later with the new ball. We have to work hard tomorrow so we have to start well. If we can take two early wickets, we can capitalise on that.”On the second day, Bangladesh will depend on Shakib Al Hasan’s dipping flight and ability to extract turn. Sohag Gazi too will have to bowl a less flat trajectory.Mahmudullah said it was the team’s tactic to bowl to cut out runs. “It is not defensive, just a different tactic. They are good players of spin, so it becomes necessary to contain the runs. Then you wait for them to make a mistake.”There were times when we did miss the length. Sometimes when the ball doesn’t turn, spinners get frustrated. We did bowl a few bad balls but when we regrouped, the discussion was to contain the runs. We came back well at the end of the day,” he said.Sri Lanka’s vice-captain Dinesh Chandimal said they too were surprised that Bangladesh picked only one seamer. But unlike Angelo Mathews, Mushfiqur doesn’t boast of fast bowlers topping the speed guns and moving the ball in barren conditions, or spinners who can regularly break partnerships. There could be an attempt to keep Robiul’s axing within the same mindset but it was far too defensive to drop your best fast bowler.

Plays of the day from the IPL match between Chennai Super Kings and Delhi Daredevils

Abhishek Purohit21-Apr-2014The early blow
Delhi Daredevils were hampered as early as the first over of the match. They opened with JP Duminy’s offspin but ended up losing a fast bowler. Nathan Coulter-Nile dived at square leg to stop a clip from Brendon McCullum and immediately felt his hamstring. It was so bad that he immediately hobbled off the field, leaving Dinesh Karthik to ponder over how he would fill in the fast bowler’s quota of four overs.The rebuffed reprieve
Sitters are being dropped regularly this season. McCullum popped one straight and slow to Duminy at short extra cover in the fourth over. It came in around chest height, Duminy reverse-cupped his wrists and put it down. McCullum is not one to get even remotely careful after a reprieve. He promptly jumped out and had a heave at the next ball. The outside edge went straight and slow to a very short third man, who held on.The stunners
The first three Daredevils wickets were down to the brilliance of Faf du Plessis and Suresh Raina. Batsman after batsman tried to clear the off-side infield, and their mishits were snapped up by the sharp duo. Raina started the slide when he made ground and tumbled at cover to send back Mayank Agarwal. Vijay and Manoj Tiwary probably managed to put more distance between the ball and the closest fielder, but to their misfortune that man was du Plessis. The South Africa T20 captain ran back from mid-off both times, never letting the ball out of his sight, and dived to pull off two stunners.The footwork
MS Dhoni’s wicketkeeping is anything but conventional. He often has no follow-through when he collects, especially against spin. He also puts uses his legs to good use, bringing his pads together to avoid letting the ball through when it bounces before him. In the 12th over of the chase, Karthik shaped up early to play a reverse paddle against Ravindra Jadeja. Dhoni had plenty of time to react. While many keepers would have shuffled to the off side, Dhoni just stood where he was and stuck out his right leg. Sure enough, the ball came off Karthik’s bat, found Dhoni’s leg in the way, and rolled away towards short third man.The first timer
M Vijay is known for his trademark pick-up shot over midwicket in the IPL. He was known for being a familiar figure in Chennai Super Kings yellow, till he went to Daredevils this season. His new franchise, and his Tamil Nadu team-mate Karthik, made him do what Super Kings had never asked for in so many seasons. With Coulter-Nile unavailable, Karthik handed the ball to Vijay in the 12th over. So for the first time in the IPL, Vijay sent down his offbreaks, which cost his side three fours in four balls.

A tour of the Gray-Nicolls factory in Robertsbridge, Sussex, leaves our correspondent wondering about psychology’s role in the hitting power of modern bats

Sidharth Monga25-Aug-2014There’s a window. On the ledge is a small radio, a small table fan, an even smaller fan, two pots of cactus and a lot of sawdust. Next to it is a longish wooden platform. There’s more sawdust on the platform. Sugar soap. A mallet. A hammer. A drier. Sandpaper. More sawdust. An Ernest Hemingway is in the next window. Hardly a machine in this room. This is Chris King’s workstation.In the warehouse behind this room, there are tree trunks. There are clefts of wood stacked up. They have been cut from trunks that are no more. There are industrial fans set on the clefts. There is also a kiln to dry the cleft further. These clefts are being graded based on the grains on the faces of the clefts, whether there are any marks, knots or other blemishes. Between these two spaces in east Sussex, in this small Gray Nicolls factory, a short walk from Robertsbridge train station in east Sussex, magic is created.Cricket bats. The different sounds they make. Snick. Thwack. Tuk. A batsman’s only tool of aggression. Everything else is for his defence. It’s difficult to imagine they were trees once upon a time. This process starts with Gray Nicolls’s growing their own willow. The willow is sent to their factories in Australia and India too. The labour is cheaper in India, and the demand high, and it makes good business sense to branch out, but the batmakers in India can hardly provide the personalised customisation the ones in England do.Ask Shivnarine Chanderpaul. He visits the factory often. He wants about nine grains, a red edge, and he wants his blade slightly longer and handle slightly shorter than other bats. Grains are the lines that run along the length of the blade. The more the grains the older the wood, and the less dense it is, which means less weight but more size. After a point, though, too many grains indicate hollowness, which means no life.King is a former freelance photographer. He studied working on wood. He has also worked in antique restoration. The Hemingway is his. Three years ago he saw a wanted advertisement for a bat technician. He joined. Freelance photography is a hard-sell. He had been working on repairs until one fine day Chanderpaul came and asked him to make his bat. Chanderpaul went on to score 87 not out and 91 with it at Lord’s. King now makes all of Chanderpaul’s bats. He gets a little cap at the top of the handle so he doesn’t damage the bat when he is digging the bail in to mark his guard.Batsmen often leave with him a bat they like as a specimen for future bats. He looks at them, and replicates the curve, the bow, the length, the weight distribution. Some bats are lighter at the shoulder, some at the toe. He has Chris Woakes’ bat here. Often Niall O’Brien comes and spends a full day, just taking in the process. He goes and gets food for everyone here during the lunch hour.Then there are others who are not fussy at all. Alastair Cook can pick up a bat from a retail store and score runs. He is not as particular as the others. Once Cook broke a new bat two overs into an innings. King felt gutted. He feels anxious every time he has given someone a new bat. Among batmakers, it is a bit of a fantasy team. King has Cook, Woakes and Chanderpaul among others.King feels a batmaker has to be as much a psychologist as a craftsman. This is a bit of a revelation. The size of the bat, he says, is all about psychology. Gray Nicolls have done tests at Imperial College in London, which prove that the width of the blade makes no different to how far the ball travels; the weight does. King is a big believer that when the batsman glances down at the bat tapping down behind his back foot, he feels empowered by looking at the massive tool.It is a bit like hitting sixes on small fields that would have been sixes at the MCG too, just because your mind has been freed up by the small boundary. At the MCG you fear you will hole out. The bat doesn’t swing that smoothly then. In their heads, King feels, batsmen feel bigger bats will send the ball far; they do, but it’s because their belief in the bats frees up their minds and results in a cleaner swing.The effect of modern pressing and drying techniques becomes clear when you contrast Chris Woakes’ monster bat with the skinny piece of willow Walter Hammond used•Sidharth Monga/ESPNcricinfo LtdThere are many other older bats in this building. There is the legendary Scoop. The Lara 501 Scoop. That bat during the days of the Chappells was one of the first big innovative steps for bats. The Scoop was one of the first to take out weight from behind the blade, through two ridges, giving it a thicker appearance with the same weight. The Scoop is one of the most recognisable bats. Apart from Lara scoring his runs, Greg Chappell used it to smack a streaker, one of the more famous cricket incidents. It just so happened that Andrew Symonds also had a Gray Nicolls in hand when he tackled a streaker.Until the Scoop bats hadn’t evolved much. Since that innovation push in the late-’70s/early-’80s, they’ve come a long way. You can see how thick Andrew Strauss’s blade grew during his playing days. One of his first and one of his last bats are both here. His was almost the old-fashioned thin bat when he first began to play. He ended with a monster that looks like Woakes’s, which is our reference point during the factory tour. Linseed oil need not even be talked about.They also have a stoolball bat, which is no bigger than a frying pan, and a looks like a bigger version of a table-tennis racket. Stoolball, traditionally a sport played by milkmaids, is believed my many to be an ancestor of cricket, baseball and rounders. As the game stands today, the ball is delivered underarm from 10 yards, and the stoolball bat is used to hit it away. In its original form, the only way to score runs was to defend the stool, which was the wicket, for a run each. In its modern form, stoolball includes fours and sixes and running between the wickets, as in cricket. The diameter of the playing field is about 90 yards.The real beauty here, though, is Wally Hammond’s bat. It’s a beautiful walnut brown, but that’s mostly because of age. It weighs only 2lb, and looks tiny. Almost like the technique bats used by coaches nowadays. A technique bat, which companies have now begun to manufacture, is less than half as wide as a normal bat. It is used only in the nets by perfectionists. Geoffrey Boycott’s mum’s stick of rhubarb wouldn’t be much narrower.The thing about Hammond’s bat, though, is it is the kind that hit the only six over the Lord’s pavilion. Albert Trott did it in 1889. That is a massive six. Marcus Trescothick was offered a million pounds in 2010 if he could hit one over, but even his thick and wide bat couldn’t manage it.King goes back to psychology. He will concede, though, that modern pressing and drying, which gives you more volume for less weight, has increased the size of the middle. It might not send the ball farther, but a larger middle frees the mind up. The bowler also sort of fears those massive willows.One of these days hopefully a batsman will come along and use an older thin bat, even a Scoop, which is much thinner than the modern bats, and hit the ball just as far and score just as many runs. King, and other batmakers who are having to think of newer, snazzier shapes every day, will possibly smile a little smile.

Mitchell Marsh’s batting record does not scream “Test match top six”, but if he grabs his chance in the UAE, he might just challenge Shane Watson for a long-term position.

Brydon Coverdale09-Sep-2014Conventional wisdom suggests that Shane Watson and Mitchell Marsh could no more squeeze into the same Test team than two wicketkeepers could. In the long-term, that seems true. But in the UAE, where Australia may play two spinners, it is just possible that the selectors will want both Watson and Marsh to provide pace-bowling support to the two frontline fast men.And that would create a fascinating sub-plot to the tour. Watson, 33, the established allrounder, a man who has captained his country but has also flattered to deceive. Marsh, ten years younger, the raw up-and-comer with lesser credentials but boundless potential. There will be room for only one at home against India, when three fast men and a spinner are picked. Could Watson be fighting for his Test future in the UAE?At first glance, Marsh appears less ready for Test cricket than Watson was at the same age. Watson debuted at 23; Marsh will debut at 23 if he plays against Pakistan. Watson had played 33 first-class games, Marsh has played 38. Watson had 67 wickets at 28.38; Marsh has 56 at 26.92. Strikingly similar figures so far. But the big difference is in their batting numbers.Watson made his Test debut with 2355 first-class runs behind him at an average of 47.10, including eight hundreds. Marsh has 1768 runs at 28.51, with only two centuries. In Australia’s all-conquering team of the early to mid-2000s, Watson was considered a No. 7 and fifth bowler. If he plays against Pakistan, Marsh will almost certainly bat in the top six. Different eras, different standards.But a decade after his debut, Watson is still trying to find his niche in the team. “Allrounder” has been taken to mean “all round the batting order”. He has batted everywhere from No. 1 to No. 7, including a brief period as a non-bowling No. 4. Injuries have hampered him, but so has his inability to turn his regular starts into big, match-winning scores.His latest injury was the ankle problem he sustained when he stepped on a ball at training in Brisbane before the team flew out for the one-day tri-series in Zimbabwe. That allowed Marsh to establish himself in the ODI team with two 80-plus scores, and a hat-trick of sixes off Dale Steyn.Choosing players for Test cricket based on one-day form has hurt Australia in the past – Xavier Doherty in India last year is a notable example – but Mitchell Marsh’s 211 for Australia A against India A this winter in a first-class match was encouraging. He is also coming off a Sheffield Shield season that brought 493 runs at 37.92, more runs at a better average than his brother Shaun, albeit without any centuries.”He’s a package, an all-round package and it’s really pleasing to see we’ve got a few of them around at the moment,” the national selector Rod Marsh said. “Every team needs an allrounder and we’ve got two or three now that are looking pretty good.”But Rod Marsh spoke highly of Watson when he announced the squad for the Pakistan Tests.”Shane Watson is a seasoned campaigner, he’s got a pretty good first-class record when you have a look at it, he’s got nearly 9000 runs, over 200 wickets, four Test hundreds,” Marsh said. “Apart from that he can be as destructive as any batsman in the world and I think he’s in a pretty good space at the moment.”When asked if Marsh and Watson could play together in the UAE, Rod Marsh said: “You can fit more than one allrounder in a Test team, yes, but whether it’ll happen remains to be seen.”Whatever the UAE tour brings for Mitchell Marsh, it is a step closer to becoming Australia’s next long-term allrounder. For his own part, he hopes he can use the Test tour to learn from Watson, and if he makes his debut it will be a bonus.”It would be a dream come true,” he said. “I probably wasn’t expecting it to happen this fast, and I’ve still got to get a game. There’s a lot of hard work between now and that Test. We’ve got the T20s and one-dayers. Fingers crossed I can keep going well in that, and we’ll see what happens.”We all know that Shane Watson’s the first picked allrounder in Australia, and he’s a world-class player. The biggest thing for me is just being around him, working with him on and off the field. And then if I get the opportunity, we’ll see what happens.”But I’m just looking forward to getting over there; just to be around that squad – it’s a very settled Test side, and there’s a lot of experience. I’m looking forward to working with Shane Watson as much as I can. He’s been a great help for me. I’m really looking forward to that.”Just how much Watson will enjoy being challenged by a man ten years his junior remains to be seen. Last week, he said that the competition for all-round places would only increase with the emergence of James Faulkner as well as Marsh.”It’s a great thing because if there are more options for the selectors to pick from it means that people are continuing to go into every game knowing that they’ve got to push themselves to the limit to be able to perform for the team,” Watson told . “Otherwise they [the selectors] will be looking at another option.”In the UAE, they might look at two options side by side. And if Marsh gets that chance and does something special with it, all bets are off.