Comment – Board offers little

Officially, the ICC is not getting drawn too deeply in the crisis threatening Zimbabwe cricket, but various newspaper reports over the weekend have indicated that it is working hard behind the scenes to try and broker a solution.The ICC is under increasing pressure from certain sectors of the cricketing world to end its policy of staying out of what Ehsan Mani, the ICC’s president, described as a “domestic issue … internal to the Zimbabwe cricket community”.The makeshift Zimbabwe side’s poor performances against Sri Lanka has raised awareness of the depth of the crisis, and there is genuine fear that the forthcoming matches against Australia could humiliate them and bring the game into ridicule.The first indication that the ICC was getting involved came last Friday when the Zimbabwe Cricket Union surprisingly announced that it had extended the deadline for the rebels to return to the fold by another 21 days. That came four days after the board has fired them just as it seemed that mediation would take place.The rebels are preparing to meet again with their lawyer on Monday, but there are signs that some of them have had enough. Sean Ervine, 21, was the first to jump ship, and on Wednesday he told his colleagues that he was quitting and left for Australia where reports suggest he is going to apply for residency. Others, depressed and weary with their treatment, are expected to follow.What could be the crucial factor is that the ZCU has refused to agree to mediation, which was one of its original offers. It claimed that the players’ attitude was to blame, and that they were only using mediation as a tool to try and force arbitration.Grant Flower, the unofficial spokesman for the rebels, was quoted in the Sunday Telegraph as saying that he believed the ZCU’s about-turn came about because they failed to deal with the dismissals correctly on Monday. “It seems,” he explained, “that they may have made a mistake by firing us in the first place. Obviously they want us to play against Australia to prop up the system. We want to get back and play but if this dispute is not resolved properly our stand will be a waste of time.”Comment
by Martin WilliamsonThe sudden change of tack by the Zimbabwe Cricket Union on Friday came as a surprise to most who have been following this whole sorry affair. It seemed on Monday, when the board dismissed the rebel players, that the end of the road had been reached.The sackings also caught most people on the hop, coming as they did as the players had just agreed to mediation with the board. The feeling among those involved was that the so-called political hardliners inside the ZCU had won the behind-the-scenes battle for control.But despite denials to the contrary, legally the board was on shaky ground, and the rebels immediately countered by threatening to sue for unfair dismissal. That, allied to increasing behind-the-scenes manoeuvring by the ICC, were the main reasons that the ZCU offered another 21-day deadline.But the offer isn’t as magnanimous as it might at first appear. The main sticking point first time round was that the board only offered mediation, while the rebels wanted arbitration, making it fairly clear that they did not trust ZCU to honour any promises. Their eleventh-hour acceptance of a mediator was agreed in the hope that if the two parties met, the board could be persuaded to go to arbitration.The final paragraph of the ZCU’s statement on Friday said that it was "concerned about the lack of bona fides of the players towards the process" and that it would "not pursue the mediation issue any further". Without the offer of mediation, it is hard to see the rebels going back to work.Sadly, the ZCU’s offer appears to be little more than a backside-covering operation on its part. And given that the board now appears to be under more political control than ever, there is even less reason in the rebel players’ minds why it should be trusted.

Hampshire 353 and 154 (Kaneria 5-68) beat Essex 158 and 235 (Napier 51*, Taylor 5-73, Udal 4-55) by 114 runs at Chelmsford
ScorecardHampshire wrapped up their fourth Championship win of the season shortly after tea on the third day, thanks to a dominant bowling display that never allowed Essex into the match. Hampshire, cricket’s yo-yo team with two relegations and one promotion in four seasons, will be confident of bouncing back up again: but for Essex, it was a demoralising defeat. They have yet to win in eight Championship games, and will be fighting to avoid the wooden spoon with Derbyshire, Durham and Somerset.Hampshire’s strength lies in their bowling. Without the injured Alan Mullally, their attack looked thin on paper, but Billy Taylor, an inspired signing from Sussex in the winter, took his first five-wicket haul and was well supported by the seamers Chris Tremlett and Dimitri Mascarenhas. As for the spinners, Shaun Udal seems to have recaptured some of the form that landed him an England one-day place in the mid-1990s, while Shane Warne remains one of the best bowlers in the world.If Hampshire are to push for the top spot, however, then their batsmen need to support the bowlers. John Crawley – out for 97 in the first innings – hasn’t scored a century since his double-hundred on debut for Hampshire in 2002, while Michael Clarke, who showed what he is capable of with a dominant 69 in the first innings, is still a few big knocks away from fully justifying his hype.Essex needed early wickets to mount any kind of challenge, and Darren Gough has always been the man for a challenge. Fresh from his 27th five-wicket haul in the first innings, Gough belied his age to pick up Nic Pothas and Taylor with two world-class deliveries; Pothas’s defences were beaten by pace while Taylor got stuck in Geoffrey Boycott’s favourite corridor and James Foster took a simple catch. But Warne’s 34 from 29 balls, including four fours and a six, took the match away from Essex.Will Jefferson and Alastair Cook set off in pursuit of the 350 needed to win as if they were chasing 50, and rushed to 48 in a flurry of boundaries as Taylor and Tremlett took the punishment. With only 15 minutes to go before lunch, the Essex faithful would have been thinking of the stirring run-chases that had been the feature of their promotion in 2002.By lunch that season was a distant memory, and so were the top three, who were dismissed in the space of eight runs. Jefferson was first to go, lbw to a straight one from Taylor. Andy Flower soon followed without scoring, edging behind to Michael Brown off his first-innings tormentor, Udal. And Cook, who hasn’t passed 25 since his maiden Championship century six innings ago, fell to Taylor just before lunch.And it was Taylor who also did the damage after lunch, removing Foster and James Middlebrook with successive inswinging deliveries that both piled into the stumps. Udal took the last three wickets, with only Graham Napier hanging in defiantly for an unbeaten 51. The Hampshire attack was so dominant that Warne gave himself only four overs. He’ll be hoping that this will be a luxury he can afford for the rest of the season.

New Zealanders 246 for 5 (Marshall 111) beat Essex (Irani 72*) 243 for 3 by five wickets
ScorecardHamish Marshall got New Zealand back into winning ways with a blistering 111 from 97 balls, to see off a spirited Essex side by five wickets at Chelmsford. After their defeat against Derbyshire earlier this week, it was a timely tonic.After winning the toss, Stephen Fleming opted to bowl first, but his seamers once again lacked penetration as Essex racked up 243 for 3 in their 50 overs. Ronnie Irani was the star of the show, finishing on an unbeaten 72 from 92 balls, with Ravinder Bopara, Paul Grayson and Aftab Habib all chipping in with important innings.In reply, New Zealand made a terrible start as Stephen Fleming fell in Scott Brant’s first over, but Marshall and Nathan Astle picked up the pace in a second-wicket stand of 93. Craig McMillan then broke the back of the run-chase with a 58-ball half-century, before Chris Cairns waded in with a typically destructive 19 from 8 balls, including a four and two sixes, the last of which was smacked over the Tom Pearce Stand to win the match.New Zealand wrapped up the match with more than 11 overs to spare, and can now approach next week’s NatWest Series with a timely injection of confidence.

The last time the players of Sri Lanka and South Africa walked off the field together in a Test match, at SuperSport Park in late 2002, both camps realised that their rivalry would never be the same again. South Africa scraped home in that memorable if rancorous match to win the series 2-0, but Sri Lanka had fought them to the wire with a fearless and aggressive performance, throwing off in the process an inferiority complex that had allowed them to be dominated for a decade.Sri Lanka realised then that the best way to counter South Africa’s abrasive style was by playing in a similarly aggressive and antagonistic manner. Sri Lanka sensed unease when they gave back as good as they got, and if that meant an acrimonious and fiery contest, then that was a necessary price of success. Sri Lanka are generous hosts, but poor losers.Thus when the rivalry resumes with a two-Test series starting at Galle tomorrow (August 4), prepare for an explosive and gripping confrontation. Two-match series can be turgid affairs, marred by an unwillingness to take risks, but this one should be anything but stale and slow-paced, although there will surely be long periods of attrition and entrenchment. The cricket is sure to be intense and tough and should be utterly absorbing. Don’t be surprised if the match referee earns his fee. You can almost feel the tension rising, the two teams, like prize boxers in the final minutes before entering the ring, looking forward to striking the first blow.Sri Lanka, buoyant after their successes in the Asia Cup and battle-hardened by their recent tussles with Australia, are a side now focused on a steady climb up the International Cricket Council’s Test table, and are determined to win their first series against South Africa. Graeme Smith’s team, meanwhile, will be starting a new season afresh, led by a bold and aggressive leader, who believes his players face a year of reckoning as they try to claw back ground lost to Australia – and England and India – and re-stake their claim to be one of the world’s best teams.Four years ago, South Africa escaped with a 1-1 series draw in Sri Lanka, bouncing back from a first-Test drubbing at Galle during a pulsating contest in Kandy, a defeat that still rankles with Sri Lanka’s players, the hard core of whom will also be playing in this series. Sri Lanka had looked far too strong for a South Africa team – which was making its return to the international game after the match-fixing scandal that had left it deeply scarred – being led for the first time by Shaun Pollock, but somehow they regrouped in time, showing immense character and resolve. The final match in Colombo was drawn.Since then, Sri Lanka’s star has risen and fallen. There was a nine-Test winning run from 2001 to early 2002 and then a slump back into mid-table mediocrity after their loss against England the same year. Changes to the captaincy – confusingly shared between Hashan Tillakaratne and Marvan Atapattu after the resignation of Sanath Jayasuriya in April 2003 – and the management team unsettled the team for a while and stymied progress. But after a welcome three-month break and a long preparation phase with John Dyson, the new coach, the first signs of progress appeared at the end of the year with a convincing victory against England.

When Australia arrived in February, the Sri Lanka team was quietly confident of pushing the world champions hard and winning the series. But, despite building winning positions, securing first-innings leads in all three matches, Australia completed a whitewash – the first Sri Lanka had suffered at home. The defeat prompted some hard-nosed self-assessment within the team. Sangakkara describes it now as “a blessing in disguise” as it precipitated a major rethink in the team’s attitude and approach. It also ended Tillakaratne’s Test career.During Sri Lanka’s tour of Zimbabwe, Atapattu and Dyson introduced a new preparation schedule. Players were encouraged to think for themselves and start taking more responsibility for their own preparation. Mundane net sessions were not forced down the players’ throats and a new relaxed, but nevertheless focused, team culture started to take hold. Players were encouraged to enjoy their cricket and trust their ability. All the while, Atapattu and Mahela Jayawardene, the vice-captain, worked behind the scenes pulling the team together and fostering a stronger team spirit.A change became evident in the second Test against Australia at Cairns when Sri Lanka escaped with a well-fought draw. There was a clear spillover of confidence into the Asia Cup. A surprise 12-run victory against India, the tournament favourites, at Dambulla boosted morale further. Sri Lanka had were now playing their most vibrant and self-confident cricket since before the 2003 World Cup. Whether the Asia Cup final was won or lost, Sri Lanka had turned a corner and started to move forward. South Africa will face a resurgent team.Of course, it will be hard for Sri Lanka to quickly adapt back to Test cricket. They had just three days break between the Asia Cup final and the Galle Test. But they, at least, have been playing competitive cricket and will therefore be match-fit. Most of South Africa’s players (the lucky ones were playing county cricket in England) come straight out of a southern-hemisphere winter, where there only significant preparation was a training camp on the cold Pretoria highveld, hardly ideal preparation for the sapping heat and humidity of Sri Lanka. With only one practice game to throw off any early-season rustiness, they face an enormous challenge.South Africa’s strategy will be intriguing. They have left behind Paul Adams, their biggest turner of a cricket ball, and will come armed instead with a couple of more orthodox left-arm spinners, Nicky Boje and Robin Peterson, who while steady operators are hardly unlikely to induce heart palpitations in the Sri Lanka camp. But Smith, quite rightly, appears to have recognised that fast bowling is his team’s strength and Sri Lanka’s weakness. Spinners do win matches in Sri Lanka, but pacemen, especially swing bowlers, can also play important roles, as shown by the likes of Michael Kasprowizc in the Australia series and Chaminda Vaas over many years.Unfortunately, for South Africa, the series starts in Galle: a penal colony for quick bowlers and a fortress for Sri Lanka. For the likes of Makhaya Ntini, Andre Nel and Nantie Hayward, the opening five days of the series will be the hardest. Somehow, they must keep their team in the series and prevent Sri Lanka’s batsmen, so at home on the slow-paced Galle pitch, from piling up their customary large first-innings total. If South Africa can escape with a draw then the quick men can look forward with a little more enthusiasm to Colombo, where the pitch at the Sinhalese Sports Club offers greater pace and bounce.The disadvantage of opening in Galle is more than compensated though by the fact that Muttiah Muralitharan, Sri Lanka’s sorcerer, will not be bowling his “doosra”, the delivery that was chiefly responsible for England’s downfall and his 28-wicket series bag against Australia. Contrary to many reports, the delivery has not been banned, but he has decided against bowling it until the International Cricket Council completes its review into tolerance levels for spin bowlers in November. Thus South Africa’s batsmen will not have to contend with a ball that darts way in the opposite direction to his stock offbreak; a wicked variation that is extremely well-disguised. However, Murali will surely remain the key threat. His top-spinner (already tested and cleared in 1999), which zips straight on, remains an important weapon.There is some more bad news for South Africa: Sri Lanka’s bowling attack is no longer two-pronged. The dangerous over-dependence on Murali and Vaas has been weakened by the emergence of new talent, particularly Lasith Malinga, and the fast development of old talent, especially Nuwan Zoysa and Upul Chanana. Zoysa has been a revelation since returning against Australia with extra zip and an inswinger, while Chandana, for so long derided by many as a gentle roller, has started to make his legbreaks spit and spin far more viciously than most observers thought possible. Rangana Herath too, a tight and reliable orthodox left-armer, has re-emerged in the Test arena successfully.South Africa’s batsmen, now without the support of Gary Kirsten, their middle-order rock, must devise a plan to keep Sri Lanka’s slow bowlers at bay. As many as three sometimes play at Galle (not including the part-timers Jayasuriya, Tillakaratne Dilshan and Thilan Samaraweera). Sri Lanka, meanwhile, must concentrate on keeping out the new ball, for once the ball softens South Africa’s bowlers will have to fall back upon a policy of containment, unless they can find some reverse-swing. In all probability, those will be the two contests that decide the series.

Sri Lanka 470 and 211 for 4 dec beat South Africa 189 and 179 (Dippenaar 59*, Boucher 51, Vaas 6-29) by 313 runs
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details

A superb display of swing bowling by Chaminda Vaas sent South Africa hurtling to a 313-run defeat at the Sinhalese Sports Club in Colombo, giving Sri Lanka a 1-0 series victory, their first over South Africa. Vaas gave Sri Lanka the early momentum on the fifth morning, taking two wickets, and then returned to finish off the South African innings for 179. He ended up with the exceptional figures of 6 for 29.The weather forecast for the day had been bleak, but Sri Lanka’s prayers were answered when dawn arrived bright and dry. Their morning got better, too, as South Africa started disastrously with three wickets tumbling for 14 runs in the first half-hour. Boeta Dippenaar (59 not out) and Mark Boucher (51) provided the main resistance, adding 101 for the sixth wicket. But another slide followed, and five wickets tumbled for 42 after lunch, as South Africa were bundled out for their lowest total against Sri Lanka.After an astonishing effort by the groundstaff to mop up in time after the heavy deluge the previous evening, Vaas needed just three balls to grab the prized wicket of Jacques Kallis, the one batsman that Sri Lanka feared could bat through the day. Kallis was unfortunate, as Vaas produced a wicked delivery that spat up from a good length to find the outside edge. Tillakaratne Dilshan was presented with the simplest of catches at second slip (24 for 3).Graeme Smith, meanwhile, was setting out his stall for a long rearguard. But in the fourth over of the day, he gloved an attempted pull off Lasith Malinga. The ball ballooned up off his thigh-pad and was caught at backward short leg. Five balls later, South Africa were left in complete disarray when Jacques Rudolph succumbed lamely for the second time in the match, top-edging a pull that sailed straight to Malinga on the long-leg fence (36 for 5).While the excited schoolchildren in the stands chanted “Go Lanka Go” in celebration, Dippenaar and Boucher quietly and efficiently dug in.They survived Vaas and Malinga’s early four-over bursts, and lookedsecure against the slow bowlers. The odd ball turned sharply and popped up,but there were no great alarms. The closest they came to being dismissed waswhen Malinga was drafted back into the attack for a short burst beforelunch. Finding some reverse-swing, he came perilously close to trappingDippenaar lbw when he had made 25.After lunch, Marvan Atapattu turned back to Vaas. Once again, he rose to the occasion and grabbed a much-needed breakthrough with a skilful legcutter that drew Boucher forward and nipped away enough to brush the edge. Romesh Kaluwitharana, whose glovework had been untidy throughout the match, very nearly let the ball pop out from his bright-yellow mitts (137 for 6).Having broken through, Sri Lanka pushed home their advantage. Next over, Shaun Pollock mistimed a clip off Dilshan’s part-time offspin and picked out Atapattu at short midwicket. Dilshan burst into an Olympian lap of celebration. But Vaas was the main hero and he soon worked through Nicky Boje’s defences with an indipper that pinned him in front. Two balls later, Makhaya Ntini departed for a duck after an airy waft (163 for 9). Malinga wrapped up proceedings with the wicket of Nantie Hayward, who knocked back the simplest of return catches.Sri Lanka’s series win reconfirmed their new-found confidence under Atapattu’s leadership, and lifts them to fifth position in the ICC Test rankings, behind Australia, England, Pakistan and India. South Africa, meanwhile, slide three places to sixth slot, their lowest ranking. Their ODI ranking will also be under threat when they start a five-match series on August 20. First, though, they have a few days to regroup.

Write to 23 YardsClick here for the 23 Yards homepageClick here or scroll down for the first post on this topicThursday, September 23, 20044.00pm IST – Woolmer, Botham and Kapil’s four sixesI’d wagered with a friend that after my last post I’d get at least 20 emails with goofy smilies in them, and it pains me to have to inform you that I have lost that bet. Most correspondents, however, agreed with me on the broad theme that I’d set out, though some disagreed with the specifics.Matt Merritt pointed out that positivity “was one of the things stressed by Bob Woolmer when he coached Warwickshire to great success in English domestic cricket in the 1990s, and by his club captain, Dermot Reeve. On the evidence so far, I think we might soon see a happier, smilier Pakistan team, with a corresponding upturn in consistency of results.” Matt continued:

Another example, to my mind, was in the debate during the 1980s over who was the world’s greatest allrounder. Hadlee was the best bowler, Imran probably the most complete allround player, but Botham and Kapil Dev both had a certain magic about them that, in my opinion, was inextricably linked to the fact that they played as though they loved the game and were enjoying every minute of it.

The best example where Kapil Dev was concerned was in 1990 at Lord’s when he smashed Eddie Hemmings for four sixes in four balls to save the follow-on. Probably only he or Botham would have considered even trying such a thing (in fact, even in these much more attacking times, I can’t think of many players who might have tried it), but he made it look like the obvious thing to do, flashed a few dazzling smiles, and carried on. Probably that’s why even people not much interested in cricket (my mum, for example), liked him.

Matt, along with a couple of others, gently chided me for suggesting that Gough is crabby, and endorsed my disclosure of not being too knowledgable about English cricket. Tom Lloyd said that Gough was “from the same mould as Flintoff”, and that the first paragraph about Flintoff could “equally apply to Goughie”. Matt wrote that “Goughie was often the only player who remained buoyant and upbeat during some very dark times, although he could get a bit snarly with opposition batsmen at times”. Hmmm … well, that must be why I referred to him as crabby, he is more crabby than shiny in my memories of England playing India, but I’m happy to admit that I probably got this wrong. Tom suggested that he might not have been displeased if I’d described Andrew Caddick as crabby, and I just realised that would also be an alliteration. Should I change it on the sly? Nah …Matt also said that I was too harsh on Hussain. “He took over as captain with England at a very low ebb,” he wrote, “and his tough-minded approach laid all the foundations for the success England are now having. Under different circumstances (if he had had the young players coming through that we have now) I think he might have been every bit as upbeat as Vaughan. Certainly in his new role as a TV commentator over here he is excellent – very shrewd, and often drily funny. I think history will judge him as one of the best England captains, but I don’t think he’ll mind if the equally excellent Vaughan takes some of the credit that is rightfully his. As he showed with the timing of his retirement earlier this summer, unselfishness was one of his greatest virtues.”Tuesday, September 21, 20049.20pm – The joy of cricketWhen 2004 is done and dusted, one enduring cricketing image from the year will stand out for me: Andrew Flintoff smiling. Smiling after being out for 99; smiling after being hit on the body by a short ball; smiling after a catch is dropped off his bowling; and smiling after hitting one of those sixes that, in their exuberance, are quite of a piece with that smile of his. Flintoff plays his cricket with a delight that is, like delight always is, infectious. The man enjoys playing; but does his enjoyment help him become a better cricketer? And does it help his team become a better side?I believe it does. I was reading Malcolm Gladwell’s wonderful book, , recently, and in it he describes a fascinating experiment carried out by the social scientists Gary Wells and Richard Petty. This is how the experiment went, in Gladwell’s words:

A large group of students were recruited for what they were told was a market-research study by a company making high-tech headphones. They were each given a headset and told that the company wanted to test to see how well they worked when the listener was in motion – dancing up and down, say, or moving his or her head. All of the students listened to songs by Linda Ronstadt and the Eagles, and then heard a radio editorial arguing that tuition at their university should be raised from its present level of [US]$587 to $750.

A third were told that while they listened to the taped radio editorial they should nod their heads vigorously up and down. The next third were told to shake their heads from side to side. The final third were the control group. They were told to keep their heads still. When they were finished, all the students were given a short questionnaire, asking them questions about the quality of the songs and the effect of the shaking. Slipped in at the end was the question the experimenters really wanted an answer to: “What do you feel would be a appropriate dollar amount for undergraduate tuition per year?”

The students who kept their heads still were unmoved by the editorial. The tuition amount that they guessed was appropriate was $582 – or just about where tuition was already. Those who shook their heads from side to side as they listened to the editorial … disagreed strongly with the proposed increase. They wanted tuition to fall on average to $467 a year. Those who were told to nod their heads up and down, meanwhile, found the editorial very persuasive. They wanted tuition to rise, on average, to $646.

Thus, the mere act of nodding their heads made the students who did so agree, subliminally, with the advertorial, with the opposite effect on the ones who shook their heads. The physical expression of an emotion actually brought about the emotion itself – even when it began as a meaningless gesture, something they did because they were asked to. Of course, they would all have rationalised it differently, but they allowed their opinions to be shaped not by thinking about the problem, but by acting out a reaction to it that they did not probably feel to begin with.Interestingly, Gladwell quotes Wells and Petty as concluding that “television advertisements would be most effective if the visual display created repetitive vertical movements of the television viewers’ heads (eg, bouncing ball).” My lesson of the day from this: never try to convince someone of something while they are watching a tennis match.Gladwell, after also discussing how emotions are contagious – when someone smiles at you, you instinctively smile back, don’t you? – sums it up beautifully. He writes:

We normally think of the expressions on our face as the reflection of our inner state. I feel happy, so I smile. I feel sad, so I frown. Emotion goes inside-out. Emotional contagion, though, suggests that the opposite is also true. If I can make you smile, I can make you happy. If I can make you frown, I can make you sad. Emotion, in this sense, goes outside-in.

Well, Flintoff makes me smile every time I see him strut his stuff, and you can bet that his team-mates feel the same way. (Another of my favourite players, Adam Gilchrist, also smiles a lot on the field.) There are plenty of social-science studies that demonstrate that our efficiency and productivity are higher when we are happy than when we are sad. Happiness is infectious, and self-reinforcing, and you will often find that the happiest team in the business is the most successful – and that victory and joy do not necessarily come in that order.We all know that confidence and diffidence can be self-reinforcing. You feel confident, you play better, that gives you more confidence, and so on. (This is why that term “momentum” is used so often in a cricket context.) But what do you do when you are in the middle of a bad run, with the losses piling up, and self-belief getting progressively less? Well, what Wells’s and Petty’s study, along with many others, indicates is that a happy, confident could be a useful start to a resurgence. What you show outside, you may well begin to feel inside, and that could, in turn, begin to affect the way you play. (This does not mean, of course, that wandering around with a goofy smile is enough; you also need talent and hard work, along with that positive attitude, and Flintoff and Gilchrist are a delightful confluence of all three.)I am not very knowledgable about English cricket, but from a distance it seems to me that they have turned a corner in the last couple of years – and the difference in their approach has preceded the upturn in their performances. Stressed-out Nasser Hussain replaced as captain by chilled-out Michael Vaughan, crabby Darren Gough giving way to shiny happy Flintoff. When Flintoff won the ICC One-Day Player of the Year award recently, he thanked Vaughan for allowing him to . With a player like Flintoff in his ranks, who plays cricket with such obvious joy and relish, that is quite the smartest thing that any captain could have done.Amit Varma is managing editor of Wisden Cricinfo in India.Write to 23 YardsClick here for the 23 Yards homepageMore 23 Yards
Attitude Inflation, and the quality of broadcasting
How Indian cricket fans are like the left parties in India, and why hardworking players rather than talented ones make the best captains, coaches and commentators More.Cricket journalist? But have you played cricket?
We should judge journalists only on the basis of they write, and not their biodata More.Beating up little brother, and harsh Indian fans
Indian cricketers, and other Indian sportsmen, are constantly vilified and denigrated by their “fans”. Why is this so? More.Hayden’s salvo and the angry fat man
Was Matthew Hayden’s salvo at subcontinental batsmen just an attempt at mental disintegration, or was there some truth to it? Was Murali’s brace like Perl, the programming language? What if the fat man is too fat for you? More.Do the right thing. But what?
Is there a moral dimension to cricket distinct from the laws of the game? If so, what is it? More.Murali’s redemption, and our arrogance
Muttiah Muralitharan has proved, with his new documentary, that his action is clean. But what does the controversy reveal about us? Was our judgment based on the available evidence, or on the biases we held? More.Mind games, performance enhancers and the huddle
Twenty20 cricket is good for the sport, and for the commerce of it. What about performance-enhancing drugs? More.A trophy on the mantelpiece, or a pot of gold?
A constant conflict in cricket is that between the long-term interests of a team, and their short-term needs. Generally, the short term wins out. More.Towards a posthuman sport, or a better world?
Should we fiddle with biology? Will genetic engineering make us lose our humanity, or will it improve our lives immeasurably? And what are its repurcussions for sport? More.Current players v past players, and gene doping
There is a strong argument that standards of excellence have risen in just about every single department of every single sport. Are the dominant sportsmen of today, then, the greatest ever? Also, gene doping. More.Headless Ganguly and the fair and lovely worm
A blog of the India-Pakistan match on July 25, 2004. Some great cricket, and fairly unbelievable commentary. More.Twenty20 to the rescue?
Twenty20 cricket draws in spectators and has revitalised cricket. It might also be the key to globalising the game. More.Is there a crisis in cricket?
Has the balance of the game shifted, with the bat dominating ball, as we enter “a batting bull market”? Or is that just alarmism, with bowlers impacting the game as never before, and ensuring that 77% of all Tests end in results? More.

Sourav Ganguly was greatly relieved yesterday when the ICC rescindedhis two-match suspension, which allowed him to play the second Test against South Africa in the Kolkata. As Ganguly noted at the pre-match press conference this morning, he had already missed four out of eight Test matches this year to injury, andhad been troubled by the prospect of having to sit out another two Tests.But there is also another reason why the captain does not want to missout on a chance to play. He is in a rather beleaguered state at the moment,and his authority is open to question as never before. But he canjustly claim to have had a major influence of shaping this Indian team, and hewants to prove that he still belongs among them, as both leader andplayer.India’s form in both Tests and one-dayers has been a distinct three orfour notches below that of last season, and there’s only so long thathe can keep fending off the charges being levelled at him by his critics.Ganguly also did he himself no favours by pulling out abruptly of theNagpur Test, and he has spent so much time on the sidelines this seasonthat he has every reason to fear that his players may grow used tobeing without him.There could be nothing better for Ganguly in the short-term than avictory, something to clear the darkening clouds of dissatisfaction andresentment that have built around in the cricket-watching public’sperception of Team India. Critics have asked if he still has thepassion and the energy for the captaincy, a draining task at the best of times.He needs to answer them with results. He could also do with a big score,as it has been a year – Brisbane in early December 2003 – since hisbatting had a major effect on a Test match, and also because his record atKolkata has been poor. Even though he is a veteran, he probably has more atstake in the game than anyone else.It is not without reason that Ganguly’s critics say that the time hascome to give up the top job to another man. It is possible that even some ofthose sympathetic to Ganguly might believe this is the course of actionthat is best for him. Captaining the Indian side, absorbing theintense scrutiny and measuring up to the expectations of millions ofpassionate followers must be the toughest assignment in world cricket,and not something the strain of which a man can bear for more than afew years.An example of this was witnessed by this writer this very morning.After a stint at nets, Ganguly walked off the ground and into the pavilion. Agroup of people, perhaps about 70 strong, had managed to get into theground to watch the players, and as Ganguly passed below they made arush for the railings, calling out: "Dada! Dada! Dada!"Why were they calling out in such a frenzy to a man occupied with his work and with a dozen important things on his mind? For a wave of the bat in return,perhaps, or some other mark of acknowledgement – some little thing totake away as a sign that they had been in proximity to the captain of India,and shared some interaction with him.Sometimes it must seem to Ganguly as if all of India is on its toes,shouting at him in many accents: "Dada! Dada! Dada!" Can he continue tosteer his way through the tumult for much longer? We shall know – maybenot at Kolkata, but soon enough.

The Sri Lanka Cricket Executive Committee decided to reappoint Brendon Kuruppu as manager for Sri Lanka’s tour of New Zealand, starting in mid-December. Sri Lanka is due to play a series of five one-day internationals and two Tests.Kuruppu, a former Sri Lanka Test wicket-keeper cum opening bat was first appointed manager to the national team in October for the tour to Pakistan, following the expiry of long term manager Ajith Jayasekera’s contract at the end of September. Sri Lanka won the tri-nation Paktel Cup and shared the two-Test series one-all in Pakistan. SLC are hoping to advertise for a new manager after the New Zealand tour.

A year that began with a nerve-jangling finale to Steve Waugh’s farewell Test ended with a shambolic one-day defeat to Bangladesh, and in between, Indian cricket took in more peaks and troughs than the average submersible on the sea-bed. The team that even Waugh acclaimed as second only to his near-invincibles last January logged a deflating series loss to Australia and a string of abysmal one-day performances that left them perilously close to the bottom of the scrap-heap.It had all started so promisingly, with the spectacular hijacking of the Waugh farewell . VVS Laxman and Sachin Tendulkar scripted glorious centuries as India piled up 705, and but for two magnificent knocks from Simon Katich – not to mention a curmudgeonly 80 from Waugh on the final afternoon – Anil Kumble would have bowled India to the most storied series win in her history.Three months later, the pain of that near miss was alleviated by the conquering of a frontier that had hitherto been impenetrable. Having withstood the pressure of global attention – even CNN started a news bulletin with references to the opening game – India edged out Pakistan 3-2 in the one-day series, before administering two crushing innings defeats in Tests at Multan and Rawalpindi. The first of those was dominated by the free-stroking Virender Sehwag, whose romp to 309 surpassed Laxman’s Kolkata effort of 2001 as the highest score made by an Indian, and the furore over the declaration that deprived Tendulkar of a double-hundred.Though Pakistan regrouped to square the series in Lahore, they were routed in the final Test, as Rahul Dravid reeled off one of his rock-of-ages efforts for 270. Demoralised by the sheer weight of Indian runs, Pakistan were also undone by some exceptional bowling, with Irfan Pathan – the most exciting talent India has unearthed since Tendulkar – and Lakshmipathy Balaji providing sterling support for the ubiquitous Kumble.After that series, Sourav Ganguly spoke of how only a mite more consistency was required to move within menacing range of the Australians. But once India came back after a three-month sojourn to play incalculably poor and pallid cricket, Ganguly’s pronouncement seemed like a poorly-timed jibe at fate. With players and officials still thrashing out details of central contracts, the team stumbled in the final of the Asia Cup in Sri Lanka, and then made depressingly early exits from the one-day tournament in Amstelveen and the ICC Champions Trophy. On all three occasions, India were given a walloping by a Pakistan side that appeared to be far more innovative and dangerous under Bob Woolmer.With the season having started under the haze of defeat, the last thing India cricket needed was a thunderstorm to wash away many of the gains of the previous two years. But that was precisely what it got, with the disgraceful events at the BCCI elections – still under scrutiny by the Supreme Court – and the tug-of-war over TV rights doing irreparable damage to preparation ahead of the showpiece series against Australia.

Jagmohan Dalmiya’s unquenched thirst for power and influence manifested itself in the form of four electoral votes and the installation of a puppet president – Ranbir Singh Mahendra – whose sole claim to notoriety lay in a scathing report that almost ruined Ganguly’s career when he was tour manager to Australia in 1991-92. And with the BCCI having become the Augean Stables, the TV-rights golden goose was nearly carved apart by Zee, a network with a conspicuous lack of pedigree in cricket broadcasting, and ESPN-Star, whose august standards had slipped as a result of pandering to TRPs and the page 3 fan.In such a backdrop, defeat against Australia was almost inevitable, especially once the visitors unveiled the glittering talent of Michael Clarke during the opening Test at Bangalore. Humbled in that game, and then stymied by inclement weather in Chennai, India plumbed the depths on a green-tinged Nagpur surface where Australia meted out a fearful 342-run hammering. Victory on a Cambodian-minefield pitch in Mumbai meant little in the final analysis, merely expressing the desperation of a side that had lost its way.Facile Test victories over South Africa and Bangladesh – illuminated only by Kumble and Tendulkar surpassing individual landmarks – glossed over the inadequacies in the final months, but a Boxing-Day knockout courtesy the world’s weakest one-day side was another none-too-subtle reminder of how far the World Cup finalists have fallen. A team that started the year dreaming of life beyond the clouds ended it with feet firmly rooted to terra firma, and petty administrators with all the credibility of a tawdry music-hall act can take much of the dubious credit for that.Top performers:Anil Kumble proved that it was never too late to get better. He shook off the years and shrugged off suggestions that he was past his best by harvesting 74 wickets, the most he has ever taken in calendar year. With a bit of help from the end and kinder umpires, he could have bowled India to a series win Australia at the beginning of year and at the end of year, he became India’s highest wicket taker in Test. And he is far from finished.Virender Sehwag was the only Indian batsman whose Test form lasted through the year even though he copped a miserable half in one-day cricket. He added three hundreds, one of them a triple, to his tally and stood tall amidst the rubble in the home series against Australia.

Click here for individual player statistics

In a dramatic break with tradition, New Zealand and the World XI – who are to play a three-match series after Sri Lanka cut short their tour following the tsunami disaster – will be allowed to practise on the match surfaces ahead of the games.According to the , organisers hoped that such a measure would take some of the early juice out of the pitches, thereby neutralising the early advantage which has been known to settle matches in New Zealand. Each team is likely to be allowed an hour of practice on the pitch the day before the game, whereas traditionally the playing surface has been the groundsman’s preserve until the start of play.The experiment has been made possible by the ICC deciding not to give the matches full one-day international status, and Stephen Fleming, New Zealand’s captain, was interested in finding out how the new provisions would alter the balance between bat and ball.”People are obviously working hard on solutions, and if this is going to make a better contest I’m all for it,” he said. Fleming added that no-one would be taking the games lightly, with the funds raised providing even more aid to the tsunami victims.”The importance of the series is very clear to us – we need tough matchplay before Australia arrive, so we’ll be working very hard,” he said. “It’s crucial we keep our structure and shape and treat these games like fully fledged ODIs.”