Ex-Bayern Munich player Lothar Matthaus claims the German club had more confidence in Luis Diaz and thus spent big on him rather than Nick Woltemade.
| Follow GOAL on WhatsApp! 🟢📱 |
Osman Samiuddin on the fading fortunes of Pakistan’s veteran wicketkeepers
Analysis by Osman Samiuddin22-Jul-2005
|
It is the tragedy of wicketkeeping. Your performances don’t merit attention until they fall below par. And if you are a modern-day wicketkeeper, then performances with the bat are also scrutinised. For over a decade now, Pakistan’s wicketkeeping – as opposed to other departments in the team – has been a bastion of consistency. If Rashid Latif served Pakistan as the more fluid and natural keeper, then Moin Khan has been the grittier, more explosive batsman. Now, with Moin out of contention (struggling with the bat) and the Latif out of the loop too (struggling, seemingly, with the team management), an era of stability behind the stumps is drawing to a close, leaving the selectors with some tricky decisions to make.There was frenzied speculation in the press, as well as among ex-players, that Moin would retire after being axed from the squad for the second Test against Sri Lanka. Inevitably, perhaps, given his resilience, he has not done the expected. Speaking to Wisden Cricinfo, Moin said: “I have no intention of retiring. I still think I am good enough and fit enough to carry on for some time. I have been told by the selectors to keep performing at domestic level and I will do.”Not many have argued with the decision to drop him, although the former Test selector, Salahuddin Ahmed, did provide a jarring note in Dawn newspaper, suggesting that Moin’s position in the team should be judged on his glovework alone. But it is his long-term future that has divided Karachi, Moin’s home town. Some senior journalists believe the time has come for him to hang up his gloves, and make way for youngsters like Kamran Akmal. “His keeping was never that great anyway,” says one, “but now that his batting has gone to pieces, he should go and give up his place to Rashid or someone younger.”Rashid Latif, in fact, provides an interesting frame of reference to Moin’s career. Pakistan cricket, in the past, has had a deep fault-line running between Lahore and Karachi. In the days of Imran Khan and Javed Miandad, it was at its most divisive, but Latif and Moin – both from Karachi – have often divided the people of this port city. A late-night local-radio show has been campaigning – albeit irreverently – for Latif to be recalled. The show is wildly popular among middleand working-class areas in Karachi – a demographic to which Latif has always appealed.Ever since his accomplished debut, in the fractious England series of 1992, Latif has been widely recognised as one of the best keepers, not just in Pakistan post-Wasim Bari, but internationally. His reputation as a forthright speaker and his services to the game in the city – he runs a cricket academy free of charge for young children – have endeared him to this city, if not always to the game’s authorities.
|
Moin, in contrast, has earned respect in spite of his faults. When he first made his debut in 1990, it was widely asserted that he was only in the team on Imran Khan’s insistence and ahead of other more deserving candidates. But over time his performances with the bat – from his cameo in the 1992 World Cup semi-final to his pyrotechnic displays in the ’99 World Cup – have balanced out concerns over his work behind the stumps.When he came back into the team last December and confounded the Kiwis with a typically unorthodox century – his fourth in Tests – it seemed, briefly, that the trauma of Latif’s exclusion would be softened. But Moin’s batting since has fallen apart, and his lazy dismissal last week, cutting a ball too close to him onto his stumps, sealed his fate. He said: “I have been through a really bad run with the bat. My keeping has been good, but I have batted very tensely and often tried to hurry it too much.”With the future of both Latif and Moin uncertain, Pakistan finds itself with some tough decisions to make, both in the short and long term. Kamran Akmal has been identified as one for the future, and in his sparse opportunities so far he has impressed with the gloves. About his batting, the verdict is less certain. And the selectors, by looking at Zulqarnain Haider, have at least displayed their eagerness to increase depth in the squad.The more immediate predicament, however, is who Pakistan should take to Australia – preferably with Akmal as understudy. In this light, Moin’s fall from grace has further clouded matters. Can Pakistan afford to take an experienced (as is Inzamam’s wish) but non-performing (as is nobody’s wish) player to Australia? If not, then the only option becomes Latif, a potentially combustible situation given the nature of his departure.Which option the team management will take is not clear, although local journalists – and Inzamam’s own preference – suggests that Moin will travel to Australia. What has become clear, however, over the course of the year is the urgent need to groom a replacement, to ensure no dip in the levels of competence and comfort Moin and Latif have provided to Pakistan’s bowlers over the last decade and a half.Osman Samiuddin is a freelance journalist based in Karachi.
You would think the publicists would be happy to promote the women’s Ashes. Apparently not
Jenny Thompson10-Aug-2005
|
|
|
Few people know that the women’s Ashes is on at the moment, so you would think the publicists would be happy with any kind of leg-up they could get to promote the series. Apparently not. Access to the England men’s team is jealously guarded, but understandably so – everyone
wants a piece of them, media and fans alike – and at least they are made available to the media after an important day’s play.But when a big story broke in women’s cricket at Hove
yesterday the star of the show, 15-year-old debutante
Holly Colvin who took three wickets, was banned from
talking to the media. The official reason given was
that she would be “too tired” after a long day in the
field. Where is the sense in this? For once the poor little
sister, women’s cricket, had the chance to shine
proudly alongside her big brother, but Cinderella was
kept away from the ball.All sports compete for press coverage, and football is
usually the winner. But the men’s game in the
ascendancy with Ashes fever sweeping the nation –
match even knocked football off the back
pages and planted cricket on the front. So interested
has the country been in cricket’s revival that most of
the broadsheets sent a journalist to Hove yesterday to
give women’s cricket some valuable exposure. even went so far as to plant Colvin on the
front of the paper – what great exposure – but their journalist, Sarah Potter, had to make do with quotes from England’s head coach and Holly’s mum.
|
|
|
To date, the ECB have been doing a fine PR job: this
series was launched on the London Eye, and there were
plenty of tv crew at the ground. The media interest
reflects the increasingly professional nature of the
women’s game, boosted greatly by the ECB’s involvement
since its merger with the WCA. The Tests at Hove and
Worcester are npower-sponsored, Sky are covering some
of the one-dayers and the women are technically more
correct, and better athletes than ever, thanks to
personalised coaching.But it is clear that much still needs to be done to
promote the game. The only poster in the entirety of
Hove which advertises the match is tucked away within
the ground, but the real error was in keeping Colvin
away from an interested media.
In 1998-99 Shane Warne was out with a shoulder injury and Australia looked to Stuart MacGill
04-Jan-2007
|
|
|
The wrong’un to bowl Nasser Hussain in the second innings of the first Test was a huge point in my career. The confidence required for me to consider bowling that – it was a pretty traumatic experience even to consider doing that then – and for it to work out was a pretty big deal for me. I hadn’t played at the Gabba when I went there for the first Test. I was really lucky in the second innings [he took 3 for 51 on the final day before a thunderstorm ended the game] and I thought “here we go, I’m a part of something here”. It was a turning point and in hindsight it was almost good that it rained because I left with a very positive feeling and I wanted more.When the Australian team went to Perth for the second Test I went to play for New South Wales. I got eight wickets in that game against Western Australia and it was a significant omission. Even if I played in Perth I wouldn’t have bowled much, so this kept me in touch.Adelaide and Melbourne were quite interesting. I’d been stuck on four wickets for the match, but I got wickets in both innings at the MCG [4 for 61 and 3 for 81] and I got some runs there [43], which hasn’t happened since. I really started to feel like I was contributing and I think that’s what led me to the final game. I was growing and having a greater impact. I wasn’t being looked on as a replacement, I was doing a good job and it was great to have an opportunity in Sydney to do well with Colin Miller and Shane Warne in the side. It really capped off a great time for me.I won’t ever forget taking 12 wickets at Sydney during my first Test there. There was 5 for 57 in the first innings and 7 for 50 in the second. Thinking about it, Mum and Dad were there, and it was nice. I’m not from Sydney but people in Sydney made me feel like I was. It was really great to make a contribution in each game.
Marc Ellison23-Jan-2010New Zealand’s rise to the top of Group C and a quarter-final tie against Australia in the Under-19 World Cup is an achievement that cannot be taken lightly, a pointer to how a nation with a population of less than five million people, where cricket is not the No.1 sport, punches well above its weight. Last year, the men rode a terrible run of injuries to reach the final of the Champions Trophy and the women reached the finals of both limited-overs World Cups; now, the kids are doing alright.Traditionally, rugby is the most popular sport in New Zealand and the historic success of the All Blacks is well documented. However, it is their consistent performance on the cricket pitch that deserves greater attention and praise – especially when you consider the populations of some of the other international cricketing giants.Cricket, and more specifically Test cricket, has struggled to capture the imagination of the New Zealand public in the same way as rugby has, particularly since the 1992 World Cup. Without doubt, the pure form of the game is regarded as the pinnacle by those who play cricket seriously; however, with attendances at home Test matches dwindling, it seems the shorter forms of the game, particularly Twenty20, have posed some competition to an 80-minute rugby game and stimulated greater interest in numbers through the turnstiles.It doesn’t seem to be much of an issue with New Zealand’s players. Opener Harry Boam
says that, even though other countries may have a greater population to draw players from, it comes down to performing on the day. “At the end of the day it’s still our best eleven against the best eleven of another country so we’ve still got eleven guys that can match it with any country, we just probably don’t have as many guys below that that are as good as their equals in another country.””The cream of the crop for us is as good as anywhere else in the world, it’s just the lack of depth means when there’s injuries we struggle to back it up.”Boam believes New Zealanders thrive under the tag of ‘the under-dog’ and that is what allows New Zealand to compete on the international sports field.”I think we like being the underdogs because we’ve got nothing to lose from it. Being smaller and generally seen as the underdogs, we’re not used to the label of favourites.””I think when we have our noses in front we tend to struggle under that mantle. I guess we find it difficult being favourites because we focus on the fact that if we make one mistake there’s the repercussions to deal with.”
I think we like being the underdogs because we’ve got nothing to lose from it. Being smaller and generally seen as the underdogs, we’re not used to the label of favouritesHarry Boam
In the current tournament, New Zealand have produced three comprehensive victories against Canada, by nine wickets, and Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka, both by seven wickets. While Boam has really stood out with his dexterity at the top of the innings, scoring 172 runs in three innings whilst only being dismissed once, New Zealand’s performances have been highlighted by some electric fielding and constructing solid partnerships with both bat and ball.New Zealand boast three players with first-class experience in the tournament – Corey Anderson (Canterbury), Boam (Wellington) and Doug Bracewell (Central Districts) – but, most importantly, they have proved that there is more to winning matches than just relying on one or two stars.New Zealand has relied instead on a true team effort, particularly with the ball and in the park. Their seam attack has ripped through the top orders of Canada, Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka, yet none have grabbed a bag of wickets, even though they have taken all ten wickets in each match.The wickets have been shared around with Logan van Beek claiming seven, Tim Johnston and Doug Bracewell six each, and Ben Wheeler five. It’s the sort of collective effort characteristic of a cricketing culture not blessed with depth but can depend on every player putting his hand up when needed.
South Africa managed to restrict India, the strongest batting side of the Under-19 World Cup, to a meagre 159, thank to their fielders
George Binoy in Kuala Lumpur02-Mar-2008
|
||
Most of the South Africa Under-19 bowlers, barring their captain Wayne Parnell and his new-ball partner Matthew Arnold, will not strike fear into the hearts of opposition batsmen. The medium-pacers and spinners during the middle-overs will need an exceptional day to run through most teams; yet on Sunday they managed to restrict India, the strongest batting side of the Under-19 World Cup, to a meagre 159, thank to their fielders.The athleticism in the field made South Africa’s attack doubly efficient: the bowlers stuck to a disciplined length on one side of the wicket and relied on their team-mates to cut off the runs. India’s batsmen saw scorching cover drives stopped by bodies that flew out of nowhere, and a few of them succumbed to the frustration.While all of South Africa’s fielders are top draw, some are more potent than the others and none more so that Sybrand Engelbrecht. He was an unknown until South Africa used him as a substitute often during the group stages and then he made people gape by pulling off a catch against Papua New Guinea that would rival Jonty Rhodes’ best.Engelbrecht was the most visible player on the field in the final against India. Fielding at point during the initial overs, he walked in with purpose as the bowler ran in, made quick ground to dive to his left or right, rushed to back up throws from fielders and egged his team-mates on vocally. He moved from point to cover or midwicket when the spinners came on to bowl, always coveting the position where the ball went often. When Manish Pandey drove Mohammad Vallie twice to cover, Engelbrecht, at midwicket, indicated that he wanted to change positions. Towards the final overs, South Africa had him at long-on for that’s where the batsmen were hitting the ball most frequently.
|
||
Engelbrecht had a key role in three crucial wickets. Tanmay Srivastava was batting fluently to consolidate India’s innings after two early wickets. The boundaries were difficult to find because of the sharp fielding and Srivastava tried to slice Roy Adams over point. Engelbrecht timed his jump to perfection and was several feet off the ground when he took the catch. That followed a similar but even more spectacular catch at point to dismiss Virat Kohli, who had begun to open up by clouting Pieter Malan over extra cover for six. Engelbrecht later displayed a calm mind during his run-out of Iqbal Abdulla: he had sprinted in quickly to cause confusion between Ravindra Jadeja, who had tapped the ball towards point, and Abdulla. Engelbrecht’s speed and smooth picked up forced Jadeja to send Abdulla back. He had a view of the stumps but Engelbrecht waited for the bowler to move into position before timing his lobbed throw to catch Abdulla short.While Engelbrecht was the stand-out performer in the field, the others could have bettered the best in most other teams. Riley Rossouw is a tall boy but he used his reach to good effect at cover and Jonathan Vandiar stopped several boundaries at long-off with his quick ground speed.The cornerstone to South Africa’s pressure-building tactics, however, is their wicketkeeper Bradley Barnes. He stands up to the stumps against the medium-pacers, though Ray Jennings said he could do it against Parnell as well, and does not allow the batsmen to stand, or step out, of the crease to try and put the bowler off his length. His reflexes and presence of mind are razor-sharp. During the final he was alert enough to stump Saurabh Tiwary even though the batsman had his back foot firmly grounded. Barnes, however, was wise to the fact that Tiwary’s runner Srivastava had backed up too far and was outside the crease. Excellent catch and sharp stumpings apart, Barnes has let only two byes go through the entire tournament.Superior fielding teams often win one-day matches. Sunday’s final was an exception but South Africa’s magnificent effort was the difference between India making 160 and somewhere close to 200.
The granddaughter of the cricket-loving tycoon Julien Cahn expertly explores his remarkable life
Stephen Chalke21-Feb-2009
Julien Cahn was a furniture retailer whose great wealth enabled him to create his own
cricket ground in West Bridgford, Nottingham. With almost no ability himself, but with jobs to
offer in his company, he assembled and captained a team, Julien Cahn’s XI, that contained
Test players from all round the world.Playing from 1923 to 1939, with several overseas tours, they lost only 19 of their 621 matches.
Cahn batted in large, inflatable pads, pumped up by his chauffeur, and his umpires knew better than to give him lbw or signal leg byes. He also bowled high lobs with fielders all round the boundary.
And if the opposition ever looked like winning, he would ply them with generous quantities of alcohol in much-extended meal breaks.His is a wonderful tale of an eccentric with the money to indulge his passion. Cricket was his first love but there was also fox hunting and magic. He was Master of the Quorn, despite being a poor rider, and he built an art deco theatre at his country house, where he performed his magic tricks. He
was a great philanthropist, giving vast sums to Nottinghamshire cricket and to charitable causes
that ranged from agricultural research to safer childbirth. He even bought Byron’s Newstead
Abbey, donating it to Nottingham Corporation.I wrote about him for the and it spurred his granddaughter Miranda Rijks to write this full-length biography. And how expertly she has explored all the corners of his life: from his hire-purchase business through his role in the Bodyline controversy to his secret payments to hush up a “cash for honours” scandal.Yet there is a sadness in the tale. Cahn was driven by a desire to be accepted into the British
establishment, and as Rijks’ sympathetic portrait makes clear, he never achieved that. He was
“in trade”, he was a Jew, he was “not one of us”. Ten years after his death, when the MCC was faced with a rapidly rising demand for membership, the president wrote to the treasurer: “If we apply too stringent an economic sanction, we will find the place full of Sir Julien Cahns.”This book is a treasure trove of such period detail. The editing and proofreading are poor, but
The History Press, formed out of the now defunct Tempus Books, is to be congratulated on taking on this title. It throws a fascinating light on a world that now seems scarcely credible.The Eccentric Entrepreneur: A Biography of Sir Julien Cahn Bt (1882-1944)
by Miranda Rijks
The History Press ÂŁ20
Australia’s long-serving opener reflects on the qualities that has made his team the force it is
Interview by Nagraj Gollapudi27-Nov-2008
|
|
|
Let’s begin with a popular conception: Why are Australians so competitive?
We are a very, very multicultural, multi-lingual country, where there is a struggle in terms of competition. So to make a name for yourself, to excel at something, you have to work very hard. I feel the competitive streak comes from the different cultures that make us the side we are.I remember once when I was 11, the first time I walked out everyone crowded around my bat. The opposition, mostly grown men, gave me no quarter at all. I knew I had to beat them, and I did beat them. I had to learn to compete.Right from a young age we are outside all the time. Kids are always encouraged to do lots of activities outside through various government and school programmes to be able to grow into strong adults. So straightaway that is a huge advantage. Look at the NCA in Bangalore. It has been around for a while now, but we’ve had such facilities for 20 years. You only have to look at the Olympics, where such a small nation like ours is competing so well with the superpowers.Were you taught from a young age that you are in it to win it always?
Within anything there is competitiveness to our culture. There is a perception that Australian people will win at all costs. That is true. We are very strong believers in winning, but winning ethically. Fairness in sport, sportsmanship, the ability to work hard but also to appreciate other people’s success, is something that is spoken about a lot. It is the fabric of Australian culture.In terms of cultural traits, Australians are supposed to be able to take things in their stride, to move on easily. How accurate is that?
When Warnie [Shane Warne] tested positive on the eve of the 2003 World Cup – and he was one of the greats – we just moved on. Now that many legends have retired we have moved on. You are right. What is very much in our culture is the get-in-and-get-it-done attitude. When you are a long away from anywhere else, your culture teaches you to fix it and get on.You grew up in Kingaroy, in the bush. Did you have to make sacrifices to get to where you are today?
There was no coverage of cricket as the television rights were with Channel 9, which was not available in the bush. So a lot of my knowledge of the game came from listening to the radio, usually while driving or on the tractor. We have a strong and proud country cricket culture, so it is not long before a boy from the bush starts getting picked for the region, starts playing for the state competitions and then national competitions. I was no different to that.But yes, there was a lot of sacrifice. Because of the size of our country, there was a lot of tripping around for my parents – some of the state tournaments were 20-plus-hour-drives away. That’s a long way. Even in the local games we would drive four hours ahead of the game in the morning to go play and drive back.
| “I remember once when I was 11, I walked out and everyone crowded around my bat. The opposition, mostly grown men, gave me no quarter at all. I knew I had to beat them, and I did beat them. I had to learn to compete” | |||
My mum and dad were fantastic. They were, and still are, incredibly supportive of my cricket. Mum was a full-time teacher, dad was on the farm. So they made enormous sacrifices. I give them enormous credit. Their two sons were competitive and talented in most sports, so they were always busy. It is coming back to haunt me now with my own kids!Is it true your dad laid a pitch in the backyard?
I was probably two years old when he did that. Our house was about ten acres, so we had a big backyard for a cricket field. My father levelled the surface and enclosed it in a mesh, just like a normal net in any cricketing park. Then we tended it, painted it, mowed it, rolled it with our farm equipment. It was a pretty good surface.Allan Border was one of your first captains at Queensland. It was a tough time to try getting into the team, and he was known as a tough captain. How hard were those times?
I met AB for the first time in 1988. I was never scared of him as there was never an aura about him or the other big cricketers. Growing up in the bush I missed a lot of the hype of what that they had achieved, who they were… Also, I was used to being around men, so I was not intimidated by him.AB was very good, very keen to talk about the game. Yes, he was a very hard-nut cricketer – he set high standards for himself. But that has been the case with all our captains.You played most of your international career under three captains: Mark Taylor, Steve Waugh, and now Ricky Ponting. Can you describe the legacy of each?
They all are very hard cricketers. They expect a lot from themselves, and, therefore the standards get raised and the expectations get raised automatically. There is no dogging them. You have to work hard to be in this culture.Even in Bangalore against India recently, on the final day it would’ve been easy to call the game off, but Rick said he wanted to play. Australian captains always think to win, no matter what the scenario is. You are not out of a competition as long there is time remaining in the game.A lot of people talk about the Sydney Test against India being controversial, but it was one of the best Tests I have played. Australia believed that they could win that match right to the last over and they did. An amazing victory. That’s what the captain demanded of the team.But do you think anything was compromised to achieve the victory?
I don’t think so. Not in my opinion.You didn’t see anything as being unfair?
The only thing that was unfair is that India perhaps could have drawn the game. They didn’t. They lost. If India had won that game, would there have been any noise made?It was a remarkable Test win. One side had belief till the very end that they were going to win the game.
|
|
|
Was there a case of being blinded by the idea of winning at all costs?
That is a throwaway clichĂ© that really says, ‘Look, you are top dog.’ You win anyway, so you might as well put a tag on it: ‘you win at all costs.’ You show me the evidence of that. The evidence that I have seen is that it is the side that actually thinks it is going to win that does. That has been the difference in this Australian team: we have believed together that we are going to win. And we do, most times. How important is aggression to Australian success?
To me aggression is of two types. There is real aggression and then there is pretence. You have to look into someone’s eyes to see if there is any real aggression. When I look into Rahul Dravid’s eyes I know that though he might not be outwardly aggressive, he is inwardly aggressive: he wants to hit the ball, he wants to seek out opportunities. He has got fire in his belly. A lot of the aggression that you see now, like staring and chatting, is all guff. That is just a waste of time.Aggression is how you actually play the game. It is about tenacity and helps in your longevity. Those things don’t lie over a long period of time. Again, have a look at Dravid – over a long period of time he has been able to maintain an incredible record. I mean, you think he is gone and the next minute he is back making a hundred.The only thing that can actually harm me is the cricket ball. That’s where I want to be aggressive at.Let’s talk about sledging. Do you do it?
It is gamesmanship. What it is actually doing is making someone uncomfortable and affecting their mindset. The concept of sledging has become a overused clichĂ©, something the media loves to use as a demon-like thing.Yes, it has always been there. As long as men or women are competing together there is competitive tension, which is why we are actually there. I want to see that. I want to feel that. I don’t want to walk into a Test match thinking ‘Where is everyone? Where is the competition?’Everyone talks in the game of cricket, but when Australians talk, they talk at each other, to get each other going. It is not always me versus you, but it could get to that. And that’s fine as long as it is within the laws of the game.Last year, the editor of pointed out there was a danger of things snowballing into something physical.
We have already seen it happening – between Sreesanth and Harbhajan during the IPL. That is physical, ain’t it? There is a line. It is not physical; cricket is not a contact sport. It is bat versus ball and the mindgames that go around it.What is your definition of Australianism?
Uncompromising, very hardworking, fantastic mateship, belief in one another, incredible pride for the country, and being very balanced. There is a good balance in our competitive matches because you see something and enjoy it for what it is and you’re never afraid to say ‘Well done.’You have been in cricket for close to two decades. What are the changes you have noticed in that time?
There have been good changes. One of the great changes in particular is the way batting sides approach the game. Their willingness to take risks, to score three-four runs an over, is a big change. It is just greater entertainment. That, definitely, is the biggest change.I have been swept up in that as well. I like the freedom of having a chance and taking a risk and developing opportunities to score freely. That is what I would go and watch a game of cricket for. Not to sit there and watch the likes of Geoff Boycott, who would bore me out of my brains. I don’t see that as fun or entertaining. The game has moved ahead a lot in a good direction. Twenty20 cricket is something that has been a good development for entertainment in cricket.But there are some negative points, too. Sadly it was disgraceful to not see a full house in the Bangalore Test. Maybe the writing is on the wall for Test cricket if you can’t get crowds to what is arguably the iconic series of the cricketing quarter. In Australia Test cricket is still popular because of our success. Success breeds success and the crowds want to be entertained. And playing Test cricket in front of full house is so much fun.How much does the history of Australian cricket matter to you?
It is significant part of our success. That’s why the Southern Cross is so important. From a historical point of view, there is a very proud culture around the baggy green. What has been really significant is the passing down of information and way of doing things from various seniors to their mates. But you have to create your own culture. The youngsters ought to learn but not get smothered with the blood of yesteryears.
| “I like the freedom of having a chance and taking a risk and developing opportunities to score freely. That is what I would go and watch a game of cricket for. Not to sit there and watch the likes of Geoff Boycott, who would bore me out of my brains” | |||
What does the baggy green mean to you?
I’ve got a brand new one at the moment because my original one, 94 Tests old, got stolen from the dressing room in Adelaide. It is the No.1 iconic thing in our sporting culture. If you ask any athlete what he would like to wear, it will be the baggy green. Cricket is the national sport. Even the business community respects the baggy green because its values are the core values behind any successful business.At ANZAC Cove in Gallipoli you scaled a hill to get an inkling of how hard it would have been to climb it with 42 kilos of gear, as many of the soldiers did. Why did you do that?
You don’t have to be religious to believe in what happened there. The actual site, where the battle was fought, remains traditional. Nothing has been built it on it. It is a very sacred place. I just wanted to get a sense of what the 18-year-old brave men felt when they climbed it under fire. I got an overwhelming feeling of the spirit.There was a lot of conflict within me just doing that. I knew there was no way I would be doing something like that now – advancing towards something knowing I was going to die. There is a little place there called the Neck, where the ANZACS walked straight into firing guns. Seven thousand men killed right there. I just wouldn’t do that.But you will understand from that the significance of where our culture comes from. You asked me the importance of history in our culture. The ANZAC spirit is still one of the most celebrated things in Australia. Globally we are respected for our fierce tenacity and warrior-like attitude and willingness to sacrifice for our country. It defines who we are.Has the image of the beer-swigging Aussie cricketer who turns up and plays hard the next day endured?
What do you reckon?We all enjoy celebrating. What has changed now is, we have taken it to a new level in terms of dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s professionally. Part of the reason is that we are playing every other day. The yesteryear people, me included, played a lot of cricket, but not to the same extent. The demands on today’s athlete is to be excellent at what you do. That means you can’t compromise on your fitness and your ability to recover. But we still enjoy in our own ways. I will have a beer during a Test match but I won’t have ten.Which has been your proudest moment personally?
I don’t know. It is other people’s moments that I really savour. For example Symmo [Andrew Symonds] getting a hundred on Boxing Day against England, Huss’ [Mike Hussey] first Test hundred. Those were happy moments, and I was a part of creating them – like settling Huss down and ensuring Symmo got through. It was using my experience to create an environment where they could achieve the success.The IPL has become an important event in the cricket calendar. There are many Australians who will increasingly be touring India more. Do you think somewhere down the line they may have to compromise their game to suit local conditions?
No. It is great that athletes can showcase their skills. That is good for the game. We have got an opportunity to become better people because we understand more about the world. I see no negative in that. It will not undermine our actual game because there is always competitive tension. Like, I really enjoy playing with MS Dhoni, but you won’t see us hugging on the field. In other ways it will mellow and take away the anxieties and the misconceptions about the Australian cricket team. You will actually see why those Australian are up there in their own team. You see a Mike Hussey and a Matthew Hayden turning out for Chennai Super Kings with a great ethic, trying really hard to win the game – it is a huge bonus.
Victor Brown30-Apr-2009Suresh Raina hammered a low full-toss from Munaf Patel through extra cover last night and punched the air in delight. He had just become the first Indian to score a hundred in the IPL (the previous seven had been made by four Australians, a New Zealander, a Sri Lankan and, last week in Durban, a South African). And he had done it in 55 balls, one fewer than Viv Richards needed to reach three figures in a Test match against England in Antigua 23 years ago. No wonder he looked thrilled.At the time it didn’t seem to matter when Raina skied the next ball, the ante-penultimate of the Chennai innings, to deep backward point, where Graeme Smith judged the catch nicely. Then it all went horribly wrong. A mistake by the scorers had gifted Raina two extra runs somewhere along the line. Suspicion centred on the 19th over, which, according to the scoreboard, Raina finished on 95 rather than 93. Somehow, he had pinched two of his partner MS Dhoni’s runs. The conclusion was grim: Raina had made 98 and the happy-go-lucky swipe that cost him his wicket had also, it now transpired, cost him a hundred.Wisdom after the event is only supposed to happen in sports like formula one or horse racing, where obscure contraventions and animals get in the way, or when a football club goes into administration. But this was a cock-up plain and simple. And it was one that highlighted cricket’s obsession with milestones and the problems that can come with it. The England opener Martyn Moxon never made a hundred in his 10 Tests, but once fell at Auckland for 99. He later complained that a sweep for three had been wrongly signalled as leg-byes. These fine lines can haunt a man.Would Raina have played a different shot from the one he got out to had he known he was on 98? Quite possibly. Should he have played a different shot? Not according to the letter of cricket’s oft-repeated law that there is no ‘I’ in team. And yet the realities of the game – particularly in a competition where a hundred is treated with the same reverence afforded to the bloke who split the atom – may have dictated otherwise. “Cricket, a team game?” scoffed the novelist VS Naipaul. “Teams play, and one team is to be willed to victory. But it is the individual who remains in the memory, he who has purged the emotions by delight and fear.”Raina, who later had a stumping missed off his bowling by his new pseudo-nemesis Dhoni, probably felt a few other emotions besides. Crucially, though, the error had no effect on the team score – and a total of 164 for five had only been surpassed by two teams batting second and winning in this year’s IPL. Rajasthan Royals never looked becoming the third.Their 2009 IPL has inevitably struggled to live up to 2008. Five previous matches had brought two wins – one of them courtesy of the Super Over, another thanks to fireworks from Yusuf Pathan – two defeats and a washout, and the feeling is that Shane Warne is struggling to get quite the same out of his young squad this time round. The absence of Shane Watson has not helped; neither have Swapnil Asnodkar’s struggles on the quicker pitches of South Africa. But the way three of his players dived over the ball to concede boundaries in the first 10 overs of the Chennai innings would not have happened last year.No doubt the old master will surprise us all, sneak into the semi-finals on run-rate, then pinch a couple of late wins to retain the trophy. But for the time being Rajasthan look all too susceptible to the kind of knock Raina played today – hundred or otherwise.
There is not a cricket-playing country in the world as backward and as
resistant to not just modernity but simple, natural progression as Pakistan
Osman Samiuddin in Hobart18-Jan-2010The broad point is often made in Pakistan that the world seems to be
passing the country by. The extent of it can still be debated, but that
the cricket world has long since left Pakistan behind cannot be.This series, in the eyes of evolution, has been man grappling ape, mobile
phones battling message-carrying pigeons. Australia, even this lessened,
beatable Australia, has been at least a civilization ahead of Pakistan.
There is not a cricket-playing country in the world as backward and as
resistant to not just modernity but simple, natural progression as
Pakistan.This retardation pours out from their every pore, but it fairly gushes out
when it comes to fielding. No side in the world is worse than Pakistan in
the field, absolutely no side. It isn’t just that they drop sitters, or
are slower and stiffer in the field than the beings of a cemetery, though
dropping nearly 30 catches in six Tests is bad enough. They were the last
side to pick up as basic a fielding skill as the slide, or the outfield
relay throw. And even now they do them with all the ease of a couple on a
blind date. Nobody hits the stumps with less frequency than them.This is science, but not that of rockets. Every side in the world has
bettered itself as fielding standards generally have gone up from the 90s.
It used to be a deeper scar across the subcontinent. But the breadth of
change across India has been vast and it has taken in fielding; Bangladesh
– a child of the 90s – has never been bad to begin with; Sri Lanka have
made the biggest, most impressive strides.Pakistan? On their best days they have remained as poor as they have been
always, on their bad days they have gotten worse. If someone were to write
a tour diary of Pakistan’s last three trips, to Sri Lanka, New Zealand and
Australia, it wouldn’t be much different from the earliest such diaries
Abdul Hafeez Kardar wrote in the 50s, replete as they were with accounts
of endless dropped catches, written off as if they were somehow collateral
damage in the great battle to be a good Test side. That’s how little they
have progressed over fifty years; mind you, no system of governance has
been settled upon in that time, so what is fielding?This team management’s response, day after day, dropped catch after
dropped catch, has been Luddite-headed and revealed an old, passé vision.
‘What will a specialist fielding coach do? The same thing we are doing.
This is a grassroots problem.’ What Pakistan does in its fielding and
catching drills is actually very little other than throw up high balls for
players to catch and standard slip-catching routines. They don’t think
much more is necessary. So devoid of new ideas have they been that they
were passed on a fielding routine indirectly by an Australian official,
which it is believed, was the first time they had even practiced something
different in months. It is broke. It needs fixing.It is also widespread. When was the last time a Pakistani tailender
transformed himself as did Jason Gillespie or Ashley Giles? Shoaib Akhtar
did it for about six Tests in 2005-06 but anyone else? What Peter Siddle
did in Sydney, none of Danish Kaneria, Umar Gul and Mohammad Asif are
likely to do.
If someone were to write a tour diary of Pakistan’s last three trips, to Sri Lanka, New Zealand and Australia, it wouldn’t be much different from the earliest such diaries Abdul Hafeez Kardar wrote in the 50s, replete as they were with accounts of endless dropped catches, written off as if they were somehow collateral damage in the great battle to be a good Test side
Pakistan had two men in the 70s who so helped transform the art of running
between the wickets: Javed Miandad and Asif Iqbal. Yet now they produce
some of the worst, most inert runners. The two run-outs in Hobart
pole-axed their reply, but the malaise goes beyond just bad judgment and
indecisiveness.Pakistan’s batsmen are consistently the least likely to turn ones into twos,
or twos into threes, and this is the bedrock of smart, modern batsmanship.
There will always be one, two, maybe more, who do not ground their bats
properly when running in, or those who don’t back up at all as the bowler
comes in. Who does that anymore?Members of Pakistan’s entourage have painted a picture of incoherent team
meetings at the start of a day or in session breaks, random and
ill-planned. Subsequently, Pakistan have been at their poorest when they
needed to be at their sharpest. Both openers were dropped in the very
first session of the series in Melbourne; Mitchell Johnson took two
wickets in the first over of the last morning there; Nathan Hauritz took
two wickets in an over soon after tea on the last day in Sydney; Ricky
Ponting was dropped on nought on the first morning in Hobart; Peter Siddle
took the key wicket in his second over on the final morning here;
three-nil and all through the summer Pakistan have not identified key
sessions and moments. These are sins of uncaring, unthinking, lazy minds.The leadership was timid, the batting limited and Australia declared four
times out of six against a bowling attack that is supposed to be
Pakistan’s strength; yet no stronger taste is left in the mouth as that of
this vast, debilitating unmodernity, which inflicted a whitewash upon
Pakistan itself. It is charming when they win with all this or push sides
close, because it is a retro throwback to the times when talent and
laziness could still win the day. But they lose more often because of it
and it is infuriating.On the fourth morning in Hobart, Intikhab Alam gave some catching practice
to Kamran Akmal, regular stuff with one throwing a ball at a crouched,
slow Intikhab who would open the face of the bat and edge to Akmal. He
managed to give about five catches to Akmal, out of maybe fifty. The scene
was everything, and nothing about it was right.