With 20 to win from 16 balls and six wickets in hand, England choked like a consumptive goat wolfing a bucket of marbles

George Dobell at Edgbaston23-Jun-2013And so the wait goes on. England have now lost in the final of five global ODI tournaments – three World Cups and two Champions Trophies – and remain the only side who were involved in this event not to have won a global ODI competition.This result will hurt. It will hurt not just because they came so close, but because they will know that they were, to a large extent, the architects of their own downfall.With 16 balls remaining, England required only 20 more runs with six wickets in hand. They will never have a better opportunity. But then they choked like a consumptive goat wolfing a bucket of marbles to lose four wickets for three runs in 14 balls. England are in no position to chuckle at South Africa’s reputation as “chokers”.There will be a temptation to blame umpiring decisions, the shortened nature of the game and the absence of a couple of key players for this defeat. It is true that some of those factors might have been relevant – Kevin Pietersen making a century for Surrey even as England were collapsing provided a reminder, should any be required, of his value – but none of them inflicted the fatal blow.The truth of the matter is that when the pressure was at its greatest, England crumbled. An old failing against the spinning ball was exposed once more as England looked, for a time, as if they were back in Colombo last October or in the UAE groping in the dark against the turning ball.The batsmen will, as ever, bear the brunt of the criticism. Probably rightly so, too. The bowlers had performed admirably to keep India to an under-par total with Ravi Bopara sustaining his fine form in his latest incarnation as an international player. James Anderson, whose figures suffered for mis-fields and edges, was also excellent.

England’s other near misses

• 1979 World Cup: Mike Brearley and Geoff Boycott gave England a great start before it all went wrong chasing a Viv Richards-inspired West Indies

• 1987 World Cup: England were cruising at 135 for 2 in pursuit of Australia’s 254 but the chase blew up after reverse-sweep from Mike Gatting.

• 1992 World Cup: Again England were asked to chase and again faltered, this time to Pakistan galvanised by Imran Khan.

• 2004 Champions Trophy: England had all but won defending 218 against West Indies but Courtney Browne and Ian Bradshaw played the innings of their lives.

Yet it was telling that the eventual margin of defeat – five runs – was exactly the same number of runs that England gave away in overthrows. Twice a failure to back-up adequately was punished, with Eoin Morgan failing to back-up an errant throw from Tim Bresnan that cost England four and then Morgan throwing wide when the batsman was comfortably home and conceding another single. England also conceded four wides. You do not have to be a mathematical genius to work out the avoidable damage that caused.There were other factors. Jonathan Trott’s failure to cling on to a catch offered by Virat Kohli, Trott’s stumping off a leg side wide and an Asian-style pitch that offered so much turn that India could hardly believe their fortune. The British really are a hospitable bunch.But perhaps the incident that will provoke most debate was the stumping of Ian Bell. Replays suggested Bell, dragging his back foot, was unfortunate to be given out. Certainly Alastair Cook was unimpressed with the verdict of TV umpire, Bruce Oxenford, stating: “I felt it was a poor decision. Maybe the umpire saw it differently. It looked pretty clear that it was in.”But on reflection, England may recall that a close no-ball call went their way in the crucial match against New Zealand. Besides, Bell had never settled and was far from certain to lead England to victory had he survived. It did not look a good decision, but to pinpoint it as a turning point may be wishful thinking. It was the fifth-wicket partnership that should have led England to victory and the Bell incident is, largely, a red-herring. The best sides tend to encourage a “no excuses” culture.It is no coincidence that India were the only unbeaten side in the tournament. They were not at their best for much of this game but, at key moments, they held their nerve better than England. It is often such factors that define these games.They could hardly have asked for more familiar conditions, either. Cheered on by a full house crowd overwhelmingly dominated by their supporters – “we didn’t have much support out there,” Cook said afterwards – their spinners gained sharp turn from the dry surface and exploited it very effectively.Still, it will frustrate England that they had earned themselves a position from which they should have won. India may have proved themselves the best team in this competition, but England will know that they squandered a wonderful chance to take this competition.Afterwards Cook admitted that the defeat represented his “lowest moment” in his career as England captain so far.”We were almost there,” Cook said. “It was in our hands. From the position we were in, you back yourself to win more times than you do to lose. We had high hopes of achieving something really special. We had the opportunity. It’s a tough pill to swallow. Clearly, us as a batting unit, we’ll be looking at ourselves going, what could we have done better?”But Cook also expressed his faith in his side and his pride in their achievement in reaching the final. Most of this squad, he said, will be involved when the next global ODI event comes around, in Australia and New Zealand in 2015.”The majority of the squad will be pretty similar in 2015,” Cook said. “There were six other teams involved in this competition that would have liked to be in the situation we were in at the start of the day.”I’m proud of the way the lads have fought. We’ve been under a fair bit of pressure in this tournament. A lot of criticism and flak have flown our way, yet we got to the final. We played some good cricket; we just couldn’t quite get over the line.”

Pilloried for much of the summer before playing a quite brilliant innings at its conclusion, Shane Watson had a funny old Ashes series

Geoff Lemon16-Sep-2013It was one of those golden days that a player may be lucky enough to have once in a career, where the world outside the ground slows to a hum, where every strike is crisp and clean as sliced apple, where everything falls solely to the benefit of a man standing still at the eye of his cricketing hurricane.As Shane Watson walked off The Oval late on the first day of the final Ashes Test, the Australian response to his 176 went three ways. Some soaked up the present, that moment when a cricketer was untouchable. Some wondered if this could be the making of Watson’s future. And a great many looked back, to the series lost and the patchiness of Watson’s career. “Watson and England both have achieved their first objective this morning,” wrote Australian journalist Greg Baum on Twitter. “He’s playing in Brisbane.”It was tongue in cheek, but referenced a very real Australian sentiment: that Watson is a liability, a source of trouble, a weakness for opponents to exploit. Two of the last four Allan Border medals for Australia’s cricketer of the year have gone to Watson. In the same period, he’s generated more home-grown antipathy than anyone. The narrative is of Watson as selfish, demanding and self-absorbed. As with most assessments of public figures, it leans less on evidence than conjecture.Watson is not helped by having one of the most expressive faces in cricket. On-field, there is always the sense he has just been dealt an injustice. Bowling, his hands fly to his head every other ball, mouth twisting into a lupine O. When hit, he looks aggrieved. Hitting a bowler, he looks righteous. Troubled by one, he looks seasick. Dismissed, he looks betrayed, shaking his head in lamentation at the cruelty. In one Test, edging toward slip, the stump mic picked up an agonised “Ohhh no!” before the ball had even hit the catcher’s hands. Watson knew what that edge meant, and the depths of his unhappiness formed a dark sea that lapped into our living rooms.The tradition of Aussie gruffness says he should pipe down and get on with it. And so we extrapolate: sooky, soft, preoccupied by his own fortunes. The desire to do well is never interpreted as concern for the team. His tortured path to his first hundred is tendered as further evidence. But to criticise Watson here is to forget Ashton Agar’s swat at Trent Bridge, Rogers’ painful crawl at Durham, Smith’s false bravado at The Oval. Added to the mix are genuinely thoughtless moments – publicly coveting the opener’s role while Ed Cowan tried to establish a Test career, marginal DRS referrals, frustrated threats of retirement.Confirmation bias is the filtering of information to support an existing opinion. In this way, negatives from Watson’s career accrue while positives are discounted. Partly the angst is down to simple volume of opportunity: he’s been in the national line of sight longer than anyone but Michael Clarke. Resentments become disproportionate as the cause persists; we’ve all lived with someone who raged over bin liners or the location of soap. Nor is the sentiment universal – disapproval is louder than satisfaction, unless it’s coming through a motel wall. But it’s not just personality. Attitudes to Watson exist not in spite of his talents but because of them.Australian cricket in my lifetime has always been seduced by the romance of the allrounder. Mostly it’s because we never had one. While I was in bunny jumpsuits, the firmament brought Imran, Kapil, Botham and Hadlee into alignment. Australia got Simon O’Donnell. Steve Waugh’s bowling ossified along with his spine while we cast envious eyes at Kallis. However great Australia’s sides, we were always six and four, straight up and down, the only kid at the party wearing a tie. Commentators circled back to Keith Miller, or in desperation, Dougie Walters. Even Mark Waugh’s best offspin or the haircuts of Colin Miller couldn’t replicate that unlikeliest thrill of cricket: a man who could make a hundred then bowl the other mob out.

Watson wasn’t the next big thing, he was Luke Skywalker. He was talked up by all the last big things. He also proved to have the structural integrity of Mr Potato Head

In this context, Watson wasn’t the next big thing, he was Luke Skywalker. He came along, blithe and blond, batting top four in the Shield and bowling straight-out fast. He was talked up by all the last big things. He also proved to have the structural integrity of Mr Potato Head. And so it began, a stop-start career that never let him settle. He’s been a bowler who slogs, an opener who bowls as cover, an opener who doesn’t and a middle-order lynchpin who can’t. His bowling retirements are like Johnny Farnham farewell tours. He’s managed to look invincible and incapable; his periods of dominance have never become eras.Jarrod Kimber brilliantly explored the Australian obsession with the “natural”: the ferocious talent who would sweep all before him. When a young Damien Martyn panicked in Sydney, 1994, he was made scapegoat for his team-mates’ failings. “Any hopes of him becoming a captain, a legend or even a 10-year player left once he showed in one innings that he was not the one. His papers were stamped ‘non legendary’.”Watson has been similarly processed publicly, for a career that couldn’t deliver on its entirely unrealistic promise. But in an era short on talent he is not so easily discarded, and frustration with his performance is not entirely fair. At Old Trafford I badgered Darren Lehmann on whether he saw Watson as a proper batsman. “What I do see,” said Lehmann, “is when you can play an extra bowler in your top six, it’s such an advantage… So as an allrounder, no dramas.”It was an important distinction. And on reflection, my thinking was shaped by an Australian era where Justin Langer was the batting exception for averaging 50. Clarke’s 52.08 is the only remnant of that time. Of 11 top-seven batsmen since Mike Hussey retired, the best are David Warner and Watson, who top 36. The rest range from 35 to 9.Even against great allrounders, Watson is only a run behind Imran and Miller, and between three and nine ahead of Botham, Kapil, Mankad and Hadlee. His ratio of innings exceeding 50 is the best of the lot, once every second Test, with Miller and Botham closer to one in three, Imran three and a half, and the others toward four and beyond. Of course he doesn’t bowl like any of them, averaging fewer than half the overs and wickets per match, but we’re talking legends of the game’s history.As the numbers settle, we find ourselves looking at a man who may not have made the best teams of his country’s past but is among the best cricketers in his country’s present. Those who admire him are less vocal than those who don’t. What has plagued his career is uncertainty, and it’s here that the real antipathy is born. Ricky Ponting was hounded into retirement because we couldn’t stand not knowing when he’d retire. Watson is hounded because we don’t know if, when, and in what capacity he’s going to deliver.While resentment manifests itself at a personal level, the bulk of its cause is not inherently personal. If Watson’s 176 – and his recent technical work on his lbw problem – can prompt a more consistent phase of his career, concerns about his wicket-taking face will begin to seem strangely less important.

Stats preview to the Perth Test, where England have lost each of their last six Tests

S Rajesh12-Dec-2013England haven’t beaten Australia in a Perth Test since 1978, and even that wasn’t worth a regular Test win as Australia’s main players were away doing Kerry Packer duty. Since then they’ve lost seven out of nine Tests, and each of the last six, at this venue; in those last six Tests here, they’ve averaged less than 21 runs per wicket with the bat and conceded almost 38 with the ball. Their last three defeats have been by margins of an innings and 48 runs (2002), 206 runs (2006) and 267 runs (2010). Given that England must avoid defeat to stay in the Ashes, these are not encouraging stats.Australia have been unstoppable here against England, but their overall recent results here aren’t quite as daunting, which is what Alastair Cook and Co will need to remember as they go into the Perth Test. Since 2006, Australia only have a 4-3 win-loss record here, with two defeats against South Africa and one against India offset by wins against England (twice), India and West Indies. In 2008, Australia lost twice in Perth: against an Indian team which was also trailing 2-0 in the series, they were beaten by 72 runs, while South Africa chased down a target of 414 for the loss of only four wickets later that year. Their most recent Test there also ended in defeat, by 309 runs against South Africa. In 2009 they beat a fairly ordinary West Indies side by only 35 runs, but that was followed by two emphatic results – a 267-run hammering of England, and an-innings-and-37-run win against an abject Indian team.In these last seven Tests, Australia’s batting average is only slightly more than their bowling average, but what’s worrying for England is how poor their batsmen have been in the last six Tests here. Only two centuries have been scored by them during this period – 123 by Graham Thorpe in 1995 and 116 by Cook in 2006 – and there are only two other scores of more than 75. England’s three top-order batsmen who’ve played Tests here – Cook, Kevin Pietersen and Ian Bell – have all got starts and a venue average of around 40, but none of them have imposed themselves on a match.Apart from their poor record in Perth, England also have the baggage of the series scoreline to play against. After being thrashed in Brisbane and Adelaide, England need to win two out of three Tests to retain the Ashes. Only once have England recovered from a two-match deficit and levelled a series against any opposition: in 1954 in the West Indies, England lost the first two Tests by 140 and 181 runs, but won the third and the fifth by nine wickets to draw the series.

Team records in Perth

Team (period)TestsW/ LRatioBat aveBowl aveAustralia (overall)4023/ 102.3037.1628.44England (overall)121/ 80.1226.6736.09Australia (since 1990)2315/ 53.0039.8126.85England (since 1990)60/ 60.0020.5937.72Australia (since 2006)74/ 31.3333.7529.51Australia’s top order hasn’t been outstanding here either. Michael Clarke has played 15 innings here but scored only one century – 135 not out against England in 2006. In his last four Tests here, Clarke has scored a total of 127 runs in seven innings, at an average of 18.14.

Australia’s current batsmen in Perth (Qual: at least 2 Tests)

BatsmanTestsRunsAverage100s/ 50sMichael Clarke851837.001/ 2Brad Haddin431144.420/ 3Shane Watson326243.660/ 2David Warner222274.001/ 0Mitchell Johnson520826.000/ 2When the venue is the WACA, the central topic of discussion is invariably fast bowling, but the table below shows that overseas spinners have performed as well as their fast bowlers in the last seven Tests. Among the overseas spinners, the left-arm ones have done pretty well: Monty Panesar took eight in the match in 2006, while Robin Peterson, Paul Harris and Sulieman Benn have all taken four or more in a Test. Among the overseas fast bowlers, Chris Tremlett had a superb game in 2010 with match figures of 8 for 150, while Dale Steyn has 11 from two Tests at an average of 24.90.For Australia, though, fast bowling has been by far their most potent weapon here: they’ve taken 114 out of 127 bowler wickets in the last seven Tests here, at an average of less than 26; spinners have gone for almost 60 runs per wicket.What’s also noticeable is the rate at which bowlers have conceded runs at this ground. Batsmen have often said that this is an excellent venue for run-scoring once a batsman has adjusted to the pace and bounce, and the stats confirm this: bowlers overall have conceded 3.51 runs per over at the WACA in Tests since 2006, the highest among venues which have hosted at least five Tests during this period.

Pace and spin in Perth since 2006

WicketsAverageStrike rateEcon rate5WI/ 10WMAus pace11425.6348.13.195/ 1Aus spin1359.7696.13.720/ 0Others – pace8833.4453.93.722/ 0Others – spin3432.0549.53.881/ 0Among the Australian fast bowlers, Mitchell Johnson’s stats in Perth stand out. In five Tests he has 36 wickets at an average of 19.66, and a wicket every 33 balls. At all the other venues, he averages 31.45, and takes a wicket every 57 balls. The fewest number of wickets he has taken in a Test here is five, while against England in 2010 he returned match figures of 9 for 82.The other bowler who destroyed England in 2010 was Ryan Harris, who had match figures of 9 for 106. He didn’t do too much in his only other Test, against India in 2012, but his Perth average is still an outstanding 15.72, at a strike rate of 32.7 deliveries per wicket.

Australian bowlers in Perth

BowlerTestsWicketsAverageStrike rateEcon rate5WI/ 10WMMitchell Johnson53619.6633.63.502/ 1Ryan Harris21115.7232.72.881/ 0Peter Siddle3830.7562.32.950/ 0Perth’s a pitch for fast bowling, but it isn’t usually a venue where teams prefer to bowl first: five of the last seven Tests have been won by the team batting first. The two instances when the team batting first lost the Test were Australia against South Africa in 2008, and India in 2012, when they were bowled out for 161 and lost by an innings and 37 runs. Overall in the last seven Tests, teams batting first have averaged almost 32 runs per wicket in their first innings, while the average has dropped to 25 for the second innings of the Test. It goes back up into the mid-30s for the last two innings.

Innings-wise average runs per wicket in Perth since 2006

1st innings2nd innings3rd innings4th innings31.6824.8435.9834.66

With victory over West Indies a surety, Sachin Tendulkar took time out during his final day of cricket to enjoy the moment with his fans, team-mates and family

Sidharth Monga in Mumbai16-Nov-2013At 9.05am, Sachin Tendulkar scored a goal in the warm-up football teams play before the start of a day’s play. This was the final day of his international cricket career. A healthy crowd had already entered through the gates. This was no mundane warm-up. They were all watching, and cheered Tendulkar on. Tendulkar, who has shed a lot of his restraint over the last week, waving to crowds at every boundary he goes to, now removed his hat and took a bow. That’s about as much showmanship as Tendulkar has ever exhibited. It also began the first round of “Sachiiiiiin, Sachin” for one final day, although people still hoped that West Indies would make India bat a second time and take two early wickets so they could watch Tendulkar bat again today. And tomorrow.At 9.12am, Tendulkar walked towards the steps to go back up into the dressing room and change into India whites for one last time. What was he feeling? He possibly wouldn’t remember, because people on either side asked him for autographs, and Tendulkar didn’t turn them down. The staircase has 34 steps. It took him three minutes to finally make it to the top. Over the next few minutes he would have changed into his match whites, taped his fingers – disfigured from 29 years of non-stop competitive cricket, during which time one by one his team-mates kept walking out.Finally, at 9.26am, out he came with a confident walk, that white hat on, not perfectly stiff – it’s probably his lucky one, and he has been wearing it soon after he washes too – the right hand pushing the bracelet up. The Wankhede Stadium came back to life as soon as the left foot touched one of the 34 steps. After a team photograph was taken, MS Dhoni took the team off the field and let Tendulkar lead them back on. Tendulkar walked in for what could be his last session, surveyed the Wankhede Stadium, his Wankhede Stadium, even as two cameramen walked in front of him and Dhoni to his side.Tendulkar took his position at short-fine leg as R Ashwin began the overnight over at 9.31am. Before the next over started, Tendulkar was sent back to long-on. Pragyan Ojha could have bowled right-arm legbreaks and would have gone unnoticed. Tendulkar was not only at the boundary, he was waving to his fans. This is a bond difficult to thoroughly explain. Suffice to say Tendulkar has been the most popular personality across all parameters in independent India. The rest of the cricket didn’t matter once again.On his final day of international cricket, in front of his home crowd, Tendulkar did let himself go a bit. Off the third ball of this over, he didn’t take a start towards a ball hit between him and deep midwicket, and let the other fielder field it. But he was back to full attention now as he raised his arms and wanted to know where to field – on the boundary or up at mid-off – for the other batsman, Marlon Samuels. He was asked to stay back at long-off, much to the crowd’s joy.People in the stands either wanted Tendulkar to bowl or West Indies to score a lot of runs so they could see Tendulkar bat. Before the start of the 17th over, it seemed they had had their first wish. Tendulkar went from short-fine leg towards the umpire, the crowd left their seats and began to applaud, only to see he was taking R Ashwin’s cap over to the umpire. What a tease. What a ritual, though – one he had going with Anil Kumble. During Kumble’s perfect ten, Tendulkar insisted he hand the bowler’s cap over to the umpire. He did so before Kumble’s last over in Test cricket too. Now he was beginning to do the same for Kumble’s successors.Before the 18th over, Tendulkar went to do the same for Ojha. The idea there is for Tendulkar to give advice to the bowler, which Ojha took although he went ahead and handed over his cap himself. The Wankhede crowd didn’t like it, and let it be known. Never has a Test so one-sided been so keenly watched in India. Three balls later, Samuels lost his mind, and was stumped by a mile. Tendulkar jogged in from long-off, Ojha broke the huddle next to the stumps and ran to greet Tendulkar. Who knows, it might have been something that Tendulkar pointed out?It is difficult to imagine what Tendulkar would have been going through. This was turning out to be a perfect end for him. He had had a good innings while he batted – not a hundred, but still fluent, delightful even. Now there was no pressure as West Indies never really challenged India with the bat. The innings win looked certain, and Tendulkar could now just savour his last day in Test cricket. He would also have wanted wickets, but with every wicket that final moment would come closer. That final moment that you know is inevitable, but still want to avoid as much as possible. “Save tonight/From the break of dawn/Come tomorrow/Tomorrow I’ll be gone.”Sachin Tendulkar indulged his fans on an emotional final day•BCCISo Tendulkar saved tonight. He would look back into the stands, he would smile, and every five minutes or so he would wave to the crowd. The crowd of course would go mad. They, too, were in a quandary. They wanted India to win, but they wanted them to drag this out as much as possible.This, though, was ending fast. Chris Gayle and Narsingh Deonarine fell in the 22nd and 24th overs. Things were happening too fast to process. People were happy for Tendulkar and India, but they weren’t quite prepared for the end yet. You can never be. What they wanted, though, was a bowl for Tendulkar. About 48 minutes into the day’s play, Dhoni did remove Ojha. Tendulkar wasn’t too far out of sight, but the 30th over went to Mohammed Shami and the whole Wankhede booed. Dhoni is the best captain to have at such times. He doesn’t get swayed by emotion, and while he is a bit of a showman, he waits for the right time. That wasn’t the right time.Shivnarine Chanderpaul and Denesh Ramdin now built up a partnership. The crowd quietened down a bit. For about 19 minutes more, because that’s when they sensed another bowling change. Ojha, who had got a change of ends, was now being taken off. Another massive “boo” arrived as the ball was thrown to Ashwin. ” [Down with Dhoni],” went round the stadium. Dhoni didn’t care. You sensed he would give Tendulkar a bowl after the eighth wicket had fallen.The bowling change worked as Ashwin trapped Chanderpaul. Soon Ojha removed the clueless West Indies captain, Darren Sammy. There were eight minutes to go to lunch. “We want Sachin.” A minute later, between over breaks, Tendulkar began to remove some of the strapping on his fingers as he stood next to the pitch. The crowd leaned forward, but they knew they had been teased before. So they waited. Then Virat Kohli left him alone at the pitch, and clapped as he walked off. Here it was. Tendulkar removed his hat, and switched the electricity in the crowd on.There were only about 20,000 people in the stands, but as they all stood up they became the loudest 20,000 people you could imagine. As he corrected his hair, pushed the bracelet up, twirled the ball and set the field – two slips, gully, short leg, long-on, long-off – the sound built and built. The batsman, Ramdin, waited for the 41st over to begin. He must have thought he was facing Lillee and Marshall combined. The first ball was a legbreak, landed on middle and leg, but was too full, and was defended easily. Tendulkar sent out a full toss next ball. Were those palms sweating?Tendulkar looked up at the big screen for a replay. Big screens were not even thought of when Tendulkar started bowling in Tests. They showed Ajit Tendulkar – to the younger Tendulkar – after the replay. It had been three minutes since he was given the ball, and he had bowled only three balls. The googly didn’t arrive in that over. At 11.27am, the over finished, and this meant the last over for him before lunch unless Ojha took the ninth wicket in the next over.Ojha didn’t, but he sped through the over. There were a few seconds left. The leg umpire began to walk to the stumps, at his normal pace, but halfway through the clock turned over. He then spoke on his walkie-talkie, and it turned out we were extending this. So Tendulkar got a bowl again. “Thank you, Sachin” chants now. The second ball of this over was meant to be an offbreak but it turned out to be a generous full toss. The fourth was a googly, but too short and too straight, although that extra bounce could not be missed.The over ended, and Tendulkar went back to his fielding position at the boundary. The next over ended too. Dhoni looked towards Tendulkar at long-on. Tendulkar raised his hands to tell the captain he had had enough. It was time to go for the kill. Immediately Ashwin was brought back, and four balls later the wicket was delivered. Now the last man was in. It could be any moment now. This was the end, my friend. Hey there, lady, don’t bend to pick up the ball of wool, you might miss the moment.There was a huddle after Ashwin took that wicket, but Tendulkar left it prematurely. Presumably the captain and the team were rehearsing their plans as to what to do after the last wicket was taken. For half a minute they discussed, even as Tendulkar stood at the boundary.Eleven minutes later, at 11.50am, the moment arrived. Tendulkar had just been moved to square leg. Shami bowled Shannon Gabriel through the gate. Tendulkar raised his arms in joy. It was all over. Tendulkar was a former professional cricketer now, after 29 years of his 40-year-old life. He ran towards the stumps. Players were already there to hand him those. The extras came out, everybody formed a guard. Tendulkar walked through it, but the players formed a fresh guard as soon as he reached the end. This was supposed to happen till the end of the ground, but they couldn’t keep pace with him. Did he wipe a tear off as he approached the dressing room?For the next one hour, nobody sat, nobody moved, nobody left. They waited patiently for all the awards to be given before Tendulkar was called upon to speak at 12.28pm. Classily, Ravi Shastri, the man conducting the interviews, handed over the mic and left the frame. For 20 minutes, Tendulkar spoke and thanked everybody who contributed to his success. Most touchingly, he spoke of the “Sachiiiiin, Sachin” chant.Chaos ensued after Tendulkar was done talking. You wished he would be left alone when he took a lap around the ground. It’s between him and his biggest lovers. A unique bond. Let him savour it all alone. However, it is too much to expect that in India. Hundreds tagged along. You couldn’t see anything but an India flag being waved by possibly the shortest man in that group. Hangers-on again. A constant in his life. The crowd was being denied this private moment. They had earned it. They deserved it. Rightly they shouted, ” [Throw out the extras].”Thankfully, though, his team-mates and family were with Tendulkar. The team-mates took turns to carry him on his shoulders so he at least stood out. After the lap was over, he made a special request to everybody to leave him alone because he had to go meet another lover of his. He walked back to the pitch, bent down, touched it with both hands, and then touched his heart. On the way back, he wiped his eye. Tendulkar had left the building. Only he knows how tomorrow morning will be, when he has no bowler, no contest, no pitch, no team to prepare against.

The BCCI president responds to criticism of the proposals for the revamp of cricket’s governing body

Interview by Sambit Bal06-Feb-2014The main criticism against these proposals has been that it looks like a takeover of cricket by three boards, an imposition of your will on the rest of the world. How would you respond to that?
I would say then people have not understood the proposal. I do not think that the proposal envisages a takeover of cricket by three boards. The proposal deals with a lot of the issues that the game faces today. And it has suggested improvements by way of changes to the way the game is structured today.If I had to sum it up I will say the proposal gives financial stability to nations who play cricket. It addresses the concerns of Associates and Affiliates, provides a way forward, provides a future for the Associates. It provides greater funding for the top Associates, which was not there before to this extent, and there are also improvements in the governance structures.The Pakistan Cricket Board is on record saying that this goes against the principles of equity and against the interests of cricket.
One has to be more specific. I’m quite happy to address each one of the proposals and discuss with you if you have specific queries on each one of the proposals.One of the central concerns about this proposal has been that it puts the interest of three boards above the interest of cricket in two regards. One is allocation of money, and the second is the consolidation of decision-making authority or process. Let’s talk about money first.

It’s clear that India brings in most of the money in world cricket, and even in these proposals it’s not taking as much as it gets. But the distribution formula is not based only on the contributions made. It took into account the history of the game, the participation of the boards in various tournaments, the achievements of these boards.For example, England and Australia have been playing cricket the longest, so that was taken into account. So we tried to address a lot of attributes and that is how we came up with this. A kind of scorecard was made, giving points for all this and this distribution module came out of this.How did the 80% figure come about? Is it a simple calculation based on sponsorship from Indian corporates for ICC events?

It is not simple. It’s a combination of sponsorship, broadcast rights fees and all that. One can’t have a precise figure but I would say between 70% and 80%. This was even the assessment of ICC.But the distribution of wealth in cricket has traditionally been based on equality, and that’s the principle that even the BCCI follows in India. You don’t give more money to Mumbai and less to Manipur.

There’s a difference. You can’t compare the BCCI to ICC. You can’t say that all money is coming out of Bombay. And all the other boards recognise this, and they also recognise a certain amount of leadership has to come out of India, which is what we are trying to provide.I think one must look at it from the point of view that the revenues generated go to help all cricket. It’s only a small percentage of that that is retained by the BCCI and the rest is a contribution to world cricket. That’s how one must look at it. I think one of the other boards said this: it’s like a participation fee. But this brings wealth to cricket. I don’t think other members have objections, or that anybody said that India should not get more.

“Somebody has to prepare a draft for discussion. So three out of ten sit together and prepare a draft, others can go through it, suggest changes, and in fact, a lot of changes have taken place”

So the suggestion is that India staying strong is good for the health of cricket globally?
A strong India with a vibrant commercial structure is good for world cricket.The proposal has to be seen as a whole. It evolved from the discussions about the next rights cycle and the procedures and timelines etc. And then we started looking at all other aspects of ICC and we said that a lot of things need to be done which could be part and parcel of this.For example, we recognised the fact that the FTP had flaws. So this proposal now looks at a more reliable and dependable FTP, because there will be bilateral agreements between members. It looked at a financial model in which the Associates and Affiliates will get far more than they got before.That has not been made very clear. How are they going to get more, because there is $300 million which has been taken away?

I’ll explain it to you. In the last rights cycle, a total of $314 million was allocated to the Associates. But actually the Associates, in terms of money, got directly from the ICC $125 million. And then the balance, the difference between the two, went by way of subscriptions collected from them, then there were ICC administration costs, event costs, tournament costs, and costs of running tournaments and some umpires’ programmes or some other high-performance programmes etc. So basically it is 125 plus cost.Now in this proposal they are likely to get 200 plus costs, so the amount has gone up substantially. The top-performing Associates will get almost 100 million, which is what was given to all of them.What has not been understood is the fact that the Associates and Affiliates are going to get more money and they are also going to get the opportunity to play at a higher level. That’s been one of their major concerns. They say, we are playing only amongst each other, we never get to play you. Now that opportunity is given. So conceptually we have broken that glass ceiling, which is a very, very big change. You can’t look at things overnight, you take a ten-year cycle, 20 years. A top Associate can become a top Test nation – that possibility is there.How will that work?

You will see when it is finally tabled. Some small, minor changes have been made to the earlier draft. Let’s wait for it to get approved.We’ll come back to the bilateral agreements. There is a concern that if there is no universal FTP, and agreements are made between individual boards, it will leave the weaker boards at the mercy of the stronger ones. You can simply choose to play who you want.

The present FTP is not a guaranteed FTP.”Associates and Affiliates are going to get more money and they are also going to get the opportunity to play at a higher level”•International Cricket CouncilBut there’s at least a thing in principle and concept.
For your information, the present FTP is not signed. That is indicative, but it is not a legal document. It is not and it was never binding. Whereas, the FTP bilateral agreement will be stronger. India has sat down during the Dubai meeting and discussed with a number of countries the proposed FTP for going forward, which we are going to coincide with the right cycle.So in principle you are committing to play all the countries?
We are working out details. We have worked out with a number of countries. One or two are left and that also is being finalised.A few boards have said that it has become a bargaining tool – an “either you are with us or against us” kind of situation.

No, you are saying that. I am not saying it.That’s something some of the boards have told us. That they have been told, “We’ll only sign bilateral FTPs with people if you agree to this proposal or you are exposing yourself to isolation.”
I don’t know who has said that but certainly not India.So if two boards voted against this proposal, will they also be given tours?

Our team of three or four officials from India sat in Dubai and have held discussions of all the possible FTPs with various countries there. Now, we have only so much time in a year to play. I also want to have a good domestic season and we want to have inbound tours. We want to have at least two inbound tours during our home season, because that is very important to BCCI. Our fans must see our cricket. So therefore, with all this in mind, we are working on a schedule. It is a question of whoever comes first, whoever comes and we are able to accommodate, fine. If we are filled up, then we have a difficulty but we are trying our best to see as many as we can accommodate.Can I take two specific names – Pakistan and South Africa?
We are open for them. About South Africa, somewhere some wrong information is floating around. We are due to sit with them and discuss the FTP. Somebody is coming here over the next two days and discussions are going to happen.India have been fairly generous travellers but now you are going to carve out a home season. So will that mean India’s touring commitments will shrink?

Possible, but I have to balance both. I must play sufficient cricket in India, and I don’t think anyone will deny that. We have excellent venues and all venues should see cricket. Our matches are allotted by rotation, so every state wants matches. We have got 21 ODI centres. We have so many international venues and I think cricket should be seen in the length and breadth of India.It’s been suggested by the ECB and CA that this proposal came about “to keep BCCI in a tent”, and they have said it on record that there was a danger that India wouldn’t have signed the MPA [Members Participating Agreement].

There were a lot of issues we had on the MPA, genuine issues. I would not have signed the last MPA, but whoever signed it, I don’t know how it got signed. There are a lot of disadvantages.

“The present FTP is not a legal document. It is not and it was never binding. Whereas the FTP bilateral agreement will be stronger”

Any specific ones that you would want to point out?
I don’t want to get in to details, but we have had substantial issues on the MPA. Secondly, it is no secret that we have had many issues at ICC, not ICC, the ICC.Administrative issues?
I’m just saying there were a lot of issues at ICC. Now, I think BCCI is quite happy to be involved with the leadership of cricket. We will embrace this ICC in the new structure, which will be good for cricket as a whole. All of us are on the same page, so to that extent I think these new proposals, if you take them one by one, you will see how they are inclusive. Basically it is more inclusive now.Going back to the earlier question: the view is that we did it to keep India in the tent and we didn’t want India outside, throwing stones. How would you respond to that?
I have already said that now we can have an ICC that India can be fully involved with.But was the threat real that you would have not signed the MPA in its current form? Was signing the MPA conditional to these proposals going through?
We had made it clear that we could not sign the MPA in the form in which it was. It needed many changes. And the other members in the committee realised that India’s concerns were legitimate, and therefore it led to a discussion, a lot of discussions, out of which all those proposals came.One of the other concerns has been that when such far-reaching reforms were being discussed, there was not a wide consultative process, and it was essentially a small group of people who put it together, and then it was sought to be imposed on the rest of the members.

I think this is not fair. What did we do? The F&CA [Financial and Commercial Affairs committee] has a working group to prepare and suggest. So we discussed amongst ourselves and then invited other members and presented them with a draft proposal. This was for discussion, it was not for approval.From the 9th of January, when we met in Dubai, I made the presentation and what we said was: this is a draft, this is what we are suggesting. If there are improvements or suggestions, or some other model, please feel free. On the 9th when we presented, it was written in big, bold letters: “Draft for discussion”. Somebody has to prepare a draft for discussion. So three out of ten sit together and prepare a draft, others can go through it, suggest changes, and in fact, a lot of changes have taken place. There has been a lot of consultation and a lot of points that were mentioned earlier have been dropped also, and some changes have been made.The ExCo [executive committee], which has India, Australia and ECB as permanent members – the composition of it has stayed that way.

That alone has stayed. We had said that the chairmanship will rotate between the three – that has been dropped. Anybody can become a chairman. We have only said that the first chairman will be so-and-so, and after that it will be elected by the committees.”We must look at possible reasons why spectators in some or many geographies are no more coming to the grounds to watch Test cricket”•Getty ImagesThese three members will always stay. What’s the rationale behind that?
Because they are providing a leadership role also. On the ICC board and the IBC [ICC Business Company], all members will be directors. Even in the ExCo and the F&CA, there will be two other members from the remaining seven, so four will already be there out of the seven. Seven people will be in one or the other committee, then the decision is democratic isn’t it? There is a casting vote for a chairman.What people have not understood and appreciated is that all proposals will go to the board through the ExCo; and to the IBC Board, the F&CA will make recommendations. The final decision is taken by the ICC board or the IBC board, where all ten members are present. And in the ICC you need seven votes to pass a resolution. So I am not able to understand the criticism here, because ultimately you need seven votes and finally the ICC board and the IBC board function in the same fashion.There is a simple reason why it has looked bad. It has looked like three people got into a room and came out saying that we will get more power and we will get more money.
Someone has to do the work to start thinking, someone has to come up with a draft. And it was a draft that was open for discussion.To many the great irony in this proposal is that the BCCI is now proposing a system that it had always opposed. This feels like a return to the Imperial Cricket Council.

There is no veto here. Except the fact that the three boards will be members of the F&CA and the ExCo, it doesn’t say anywhere that there will be a veto. There are two other members at all times. Anyone can become the chairman after the first chairman. Now that India is through this proposal committing to playing a bigger role in world cricket, what is your vision for cricket globally?
We must understand, cricket is a great game. In the beginning and for a very long time, we only knew Test cricket. I think the first thing is that the primacy of Test cricket must be established. We must also look at possible reasons why spectators in some or many geographies are no more coming to the grounds to watch Test cricket. I think it’s a concern. Administratively, today the ICC has spread cricket to a number of countries, there are a lot of Associates and Affiliates. Some who knew cricket earlier are now developing it, some who never played cricket are entering cricket. From that point of view, the propagation of cricket, taking it around, that is already in place, that is going on.So you are committed to the idea of expanding cricket?
No, I’m not saying expanding, I’m saying it’s already in place. I believe resources should be used more efficiently, and those areas and geographies where there is a lot of interest in cricket, we should give greater attention, obviously. It is very important, now that we have three forms of cricket, that all these forms flourish and grow. I think that is a very big challenge. And you will agree that all the three forms are not equally popular in all countries. That is also a challenge. And, importantly, I think the ICC has to deliver truly world-class events.The Test championship has been removed.

The Test championship did not have the kind of support one would have liked. There were difficulties in the format. We are used to Test series – two Tests, three, four or five. So a one-off Test match… whether it would sustain the interest – these were the questions that were going around the table. And finally I think the feeling was that the last Champions Trophy in England was such a great success, we should persist with it.So how will the primacy of Test cricket be maintained in the long run?
This is what we are doing. We are encouraging even Full Members [by giving them] additional resources so that they don’t give up Test cricket, because for many members, they incur losses running Test series. So this might help fund that, so that it helps them to sustain Test cricket.

Jacques Kallis on the health of Test cricket, the allrounder’s art, what South Africa’s Under-19s must do now that they’ve tasted success and how he plans to stay whetted for one-day cricket, in a free-flowing Q&A session at Newlands

Firdose Moonda in Cape Town02-Mar-2014’I want to remembered as someone who enjoyed the game. There are a lot of pressures and sometimes you forget to enjoy the game’•Getty ImagesI grew up not wanting to play for South Africa because we didn’t have international cricket at that stage. I wanted to play provincial cricket and that was what I was working towards. To suddenly be exposed to international sport, your goals change. It was a major changing point in my life. It afforded me the opportunity to see places, meet people, explore other things.Have you ever had a regret about retiring from Test cricket first, and have you missed it?
All good things do come to an end. The moment I had begun to lose a little bit of passion or I got a little bit tired, I’d have called it quits. Ideally, I would have liked to finish it at Newlands but everything happens for a reason. I have not missed it yet. I am still involved in the side quite a lot. I have been involved with the guys. We went on the camp before this series, in the bush. I still feel a part of it. Surprisingly, I have watched a little bit more cricket now than I did in my playing days. Life is a lot easier on the couch.Everyone has a favorite ground, what is it about Newlands that is so special to you?
What better ground is there in the world? You’ve got the mountain, you’ve got beautiful weather, you’ve got great facilities. I grew up wanting to play at Newlands, bunking a few classes to come and watch matches. It’s a magnificent place to play cricket. The crowds are always fantastic. They are always behind the guys. The memories play such a big role here.Favourite Newlands memory – double-hundreds or twin hundreds v India?
The [twins] were special to me, even though I had done it before. The way the game was positioned, if we got bowled out then, India could have won the match. To get to that second hundred to set the game up meant a lot. I’ve had plenty of games where I’ve got 30 or 40 and it has meant more to me than a hundred. To get our team to a position from where we couldn’t lose the game was nice.The 200 was also special. There had been a monkey on my shoulder to get one. Fortunately and unfortunately, I got one in Pretoria. [Later] getting it here, it was almost giving something back to Newlands.Pair to double-hundred v Sri Lanka… How did you turn it around?
I focus on my strengths and don’t worry too much about opponents. There are little things you pick up but you want to exert your game plan onto them and not step back and let them make the play. It was a little thing where my movement was a little late and I picked it up straight away [on the video footage]. That was all I needed to see. For the next week, I worked on being a little earlier. It’s little things at this level.How do you feel about comparisons?
I didn’t play the game for statistics. When you play this game you want to be as good a player as you can be and make decision that will benefit the team. I like to believe I got more right than I got wrong. There have been some magnificent players in yesteryear who didn’t play as much cricket as we did and some who didn’t get the opportunity to play at all. If they did and they had the opportunity and facilities that we have today, they probably would have achieved what I achieved and more.How do you intend to stay in good touch [having retired from one format]?
When I want to achieve something and put my mind to it, I want to give it everything I’ve got. I want to be part of a team that wins the World Cup. That’s something that’s missing on my CV. If I didn’t believe we could do it, I would not stick around for it. If I didn’t believe I could make a difference, I wouldn’t do it. We’ve still got 20-odd ODIs before the World Cup and if I am not scoring the runs, I have no right to be in that team. I’ve just sat down with Gary Kirsten and worked out a programme. Not playing Test cricket will give me time to work on one-day skills.Would you consider domestic cricket or a contract in the UK?
I would like to play as much as of the one-day cricket as I can going forward. It’s about getting the balance right.How do you get into your bubble?
I have the ability to go in and out of concentration and it applies to a lot of things in life. We spend six and half hours in the cricket field and you can’t concentrate for that long. I managed to find a way to concentrate for the five or six seconds when a bowler is at the top of his mark or when I am at the top of my mark. That’s the difference between the experienced guys and the younger guys. The younger guys sometimes make mistakes because they think they can concentrate the whole day. You have to learn to switch on and off.Administrative issues in the background of your career, how did you stop that from interfering with your game?
There were some tough times but we are also not silly as players that think it only happens to South Africa. There are issues all around the world. We don’t have a lot to do with what the board has to say and what they do and it doesn’t really directly affect the players. We had faith in the guys that were handling that sort of stuff, to handle it. We were there to play the game. Eventually it gets sorted out, sometimes not as quickly as players would have liked, but we also didn’t get the results the players would have liked. It works both ways.Your opinion on the BCCI’s growing power?
I don’t think anyone really knows if it’s a good or a bad thing. We are going to have to wait and see. If we are brutally honest, the BCCI has had a lot of power over the game for some time, so I don’t think it is really going to change much. My only concern is that they make decision in the best interests of cricket and not only in the best interests of the own cricket, and I think they will do that.

“I know I would not have achieved what I did if I couldn’t bat and bowl. I would get bored fielding in the slips all day.”Jacques Kallis on being an allrounder

T20 cricket v Tests?
Look at the turnout here. Test cricket is healthy. Test cricket is the ultimate. That’s what cricketers want to play. I don’t think there needs to be too many changes. There is some talk about night cricket but I am not a big fan of that, because I think conditions will change. We need to look after Test cricket.Having said that, there is so much money in T20 cricket, we can’t turn our back on it. The pace Test cricket is played at these days is probably twice the pace it was before T20 cricket. It’s opened up a new audience. But we mustn’t overkill it.Ideas to grow Test cricket?
The World Test Championship is a great idea for Test cricket. We need to focus as much attention and cash as we can [on Tests]. We need to make sure the culture of Test cricket stays. When I was growing up, we’d play the odd two-day game. I think it’s vital that we still have that and guys are exposed to a longer form of the game.Allrounders – is it a dying art?
My reasoning is [that is down to] the amount of cricket that is being played. There’s too much to bat and bowl. In South Africa, we produce allrounders because of the conditions. There’s always something in it for the batsmen and something in it for the bowlers. There are some great allrounders coming through. If you look at the history of the game, though, there hasn’t been that many that have really come through.I know I would not have achieved what I did if I couldn’t bat and bowl. I would get bored fielding in the slips all day.What is your legacy?
It’s about giving something back to the game. I don’t want to be seen as someone who just took from the game.I also want to be seen as someone who never gave up, no matter what the situation. It’s something we do as a South African team and we’ve done it a few times recently. There have been so many times when people have written us off and we came back.And I also want to remembered as someone who enjoyed the game. There are a lot of pressures and sometimes you forget to enjoy the game.Your opinion on this game [against Australia]?
Sometimes we give up home advantage. We maybe could have got a wicket that gave a little more. The Australians, when there is some sideways movement, they are not always comfortable. They are very good on a wicket like this. Sometimes we have to be clever with our home conditions.We are under pressure here, but this game is far from over. We are going to have to bat well. I have no doubt we can. A couple of years ago, we were in a similar situation and we bowled them out for 47. Stranger things have happened in this game and all three results are still possible.What is your advice to the Under-19s?
It’s a fantastic achievement [winning the World Cup]. Going into the final, they probably had that chokers tag on them. It just shows South Africans can win tournaments. It will give the national side a lot of pleasure.I learnt a great lesson when I started my career. My first six or seven Tests I scored virtually no runs and I doubted myself. Then I scored some runs and it taught me many lessons. I hope this success doesn’t make them think they’ve made it. Now the hard work starts. Don’t sit back and take it for granted.Your toughest opponent?
Seamer: Wasim Akram. He had the ability to swing the ball both ways. Spinner: Shane Warne. He controlled the game, he attacked, defended. Batsman: Brian Lara.Sachin Tendulkar?
He has done a tremendous amount for world cricket and for taking it forward. He played the game hard but always in the right spirit. To achieve what he achieved is incredible. I enjoyed my battles against him. I always said I will play this game hard but in the right spirit, that I can [leave aside] the game when I am in a country and have a beer with them. That’s the way he played it [too].Hashim Amla?
What a revelation he has been. I remember when he started people said he will never make it with that technique. It shows you what hard work can do. You take the hardworking guy over the talented guy. I’m not saying he is not talented but he also works as hard as everyone. When he gets out, you feel a shiver go down people’s spines. He is a complete player, he is difficult to bowl to, he’s got the guts and the determination.What are you going to do after cricket?
It has been nice to catch up with friends and family. That was the first thing I really wanted to do. My sister has recently got married and she is pregnant now, so its nice to spend time with her.My foundation will take up some of my time. I wont be involved too much in the game at the moment. Perhaps the odd commentary stint… Though, from a coaching and batting point of view, I would like to give back. I would always want to share the knowledge I have been given and learnt.

The ultimate entertainers, West Indies now have the batting power to match the threat their fast bowlers brought in the 1980s

Alan Gardner in Chittagong01-Apr-2014West Indies may have a formula for T20, or they may just let it flow through them. Modern players often talk about going out on the field and expressing themselves but it appears to be only the West Indies team that truly do so, at least in this format of the game.Whether dancing to calypso, Korean pop or some local folk number, West Indies’ style has proved just as catchy as it was two years ago. The energy levels as they celebrated a sensational torpedoing of Pakistan were a little down on the party-hard reaction to beating Australia a few days ago, with just a few perfunctory giddy-ups for the cameras, but West Indies emanate conviction that their method is as sound as their arms are strong. With or without all the carry on, they are the World T20 entertainers.Darren Sammy has become as powerful a symbol of this as Chris Gayle and Marlon Samuels, stars of their triumphant 2012 World T20. Tony Cozier has written about his resurgence in the finisher’s role – innings in Auckland and Antigua, Barbados and Mirpur over the last few months underscore the point with all the emphasis of one of Sammy’s flat sixes – and here the captain gave another tingling display of his dead-eye death batting.As Saeed Ajmal, the premier spinner in this format, was crunched back down the ground in the 19th over, Sammy celebrated banishing the ball from his presence by pumping his fist back and forth, as if ramming home the metaphorical advantage. Ajmal had already gone the distance twice before, at the hands of Dwayne Bravo, who also belaboured Umar Gul – the second-most successful T20 bowler around – for consecutive sixes. Bravo was run out at the start of the final over but Sammy drove remorselessly on, thumping and jiving.Darren Sammy has proved to be a brutal force•Getty ImagesAsked previously about West Indies preference for dots over dash, sixes over singles, Sammy said it was just a natural inclination as to how to play the game. Suresh Raina belittled the approach, to which Sammy responded: “If he thinks we are only six-hitters, then stop us from hitting sixes.” India managed it, convincingly; Pakistan did not. Of West Indies’ 166 for 6, 51 came in singles, twos and a three; 106 flowed in boundaries.”In those situations, the best of them all go for runs,” Bravo said of the disdain with which Ajmal and Gul were treated. “We had nothing to lose, we were under pressure. So I said to Sammy, as long as we stay still, don’t worry about picking Ajmal or trying to rotate, just stay still, keep our eyes on the ball, we’re powerful enough if we get close to the ball to hit it over the ropes. Our aim was to get at least 135 to 140 with the start we got but the self-belief we have, the form and the power we have, the momentum went with us, we finished positive and got to 160.”The power of West Indies’ T20 batting – missing Kieron Pollard, too – has replaced the fear factor of their fast bowling in Tests 30 years ago. They use it to bludgeon opponents, intimidate them, shrugging off the chance to run ones and twos in favour of full-frontal assault. As with Samuels’ tinderbox innings in the final of the last World T20, this match reinforced the sense that they are rarely ever out of a game.From 84 for 5 at the end of the 15th over, Bravo and Sammy ran amok for another 82 runs from 30 balls. Perhaps the only way they could get better (other than jogging just a more singles) would be to implement a pre-War Test trick and reverse the batting order, somehow convincing Sammy to play each five-over block as if it were the last five overs – with the fall back of Gayle, Samuels and the rest to come in if he failed. Bradman would surely approve.”This is the first game that we lost wickets in the first six overs, so we were trying to consolidate but at the same time whenever we got a boundary we keep losing a wicket again,” Bravo said. “So in the middle overs, it calmed down. We’ve proved ourselves, in Twenty20 cricket we know how the game plays, if you take the game right down to the end anything is possible, as long as we don’t give up and keep faith and have that self-belief that if we bat 20 overs we’re going to get a decent total.”But we have to bat 20 overs, so at no point can we let what happens in the middle overs get the better of us, that comes with experience and self-belief. We still had Andre Russell and Sunil Narine to bat. It’s good we did not panic at 84 for 5 and take the game all the way down to the end. We showed in the Australia game what the difference can make as long as we have clean hitters at the wicket, so that’s our aim, that’s our strong point and we use it to the best of our ability.”Bravo, who is enjoying a purple patch in West Indies maroon, spoke of the team’s passion and enjoyment for the game, something else that Twenty20 has helped to resurrect in the Caribbean. “All West Indians are like that, we just want to entertain our fans, most of all the people of Bangladesh come out every game and support the tournament so it’s important that we give them their money’s worth,” he said. If West Indies’ manage to carry off the title again, it will be in the manner of all great entertainers: leaving us wanting more.

When the dust over their exit from the World Twenty20 settles, Ireland will have to introspect and find answers to concerns on their long-term team composition and strategies

Ger Siggins22-Mar-2014For seven years, Ireland have been cricket’s scrappy outsiders, gate-crashing world tournaments and picking up prize scalps. Pakistan, Bangladesh, England and Zimbabwe have all had their noses rubbed in it by a side which always seems to add up to more than the sum of its parts.For almost a decade they have been top dogs in Associate cricket, a position cemented by their being crowned champions in all three formats in 2013, and no side, not even the best in the world, has taken apart their attack quite as brutally as Netherlands did in Sylhet.Kevin O’Brien took a similar death-or-glory approach in Bangalore in 2011 and it paid off with a match-winning century against England. But to be on the other side of such an onslaught was not pleasant.”It’s a bit of a shock,” O’Brien admitted after the game. “None of us really envisaged what has just happened. We just didn’t have any answers.”Although disappointed with the result, Cricket Ireland’s chief executive Warren Deutrom saw nothing to divert him from his aim of getting Ireland to the sport’s top table.”It was one of those days when everything went right for Netherlands,” Deutrom said. “I’ve never seen a batting performance like it. They just went for it from the first ball, which you’ve got to admire.”Deutrom isn’t concerned that the defeat and early exit will have negative repercussions for his organisation as it continues to make its case at ICC: “Cricket people will look at that and see how it was one of those days. In the last four weeks, we have beaten West Indies and Zimbabwe, both full members, and those results aren’t wiped away by a freak batting performance.”Irish supporters, who usually travel in numbers to world events but gave this one a miss – saving for Australia/New Zealand 2015, they say – were more nonplussed than angered by the defeat. The Blarney Army isn’t used to seeing its team beaten by Associates – just 12 losses in 110 games since 2007, and Netherlands’ win was their first in 18 against Ireland since 2008.Blame was hurled, too: at Ed Joyce for dropping Tom Cooper on 1; at the bowlers who never found their length; at the captain for his lack of answers. But the bowlers who were carted around the Divisional Stadium were the same who were magnificent against Zimbabwe and UAE. Alex Cusack was savaged on the internet forums that sang his praises two weeks earlier when he took 4-14 and 2-17 in four-over spells in Kingston.When emotions cool, however, there will be a need for answers on why two offspinners were entrusted with the new ball, one of them a 20-year-old who played his maiden T20 international only four days before. Andy McBrine is a fine prospect, who was a real success in the West Indies, but he should have never been asked to set the tone for the innings against a batsman like Peter Borren, who feasts on spin. This after Borren and Stephan Myburgh had got their eye in against the similar style of Paul Stirling in the previous over. McBrine went for four sixes and Netherlands were on their way.The captain looked lost without the counsel of the retired Trent Johnston, and with the absence of John Mooney and the continued exclusion of Niall O’Brien the side lacked the traditional Irish sporting qualities of “boot, bollock and bite”. Niall O’Brien was suspended in 2012 for missing an Intercontinental Cup game in Kenya and Gary Wilson was given the gloves in his absence. The Surrey man has continued to wear them since O’Brien’s return.Ireland have also been missing the services of Niall O’Brien behind the stumps•AFPPhil Simmons has drawn wide criticism for his refusal to countenance a switch, despite Wilson’s lack of day-to-day experience – he kept in four games for Surrey last summer, a total of 242 overs, against O’Brien’s 2,304 overs behind the stumps at Leicestershire. It has weakened the team in the field, too, where O’Brien is a poor outfielder and Wilson one of the best.A series of keeping blunders last year – including a couple which probably cost Ireland a win over Pakistan – frustrated the players and a delegation of four senior bowlers approached the management in Abu Dhabi in November requesting change. Wilson, who is close to the captain, kept the gloves.The team management will also have to explain why, incredibly, it failed to let the captain know just why Netherlands had set off with such belligerence to get the runs within 86 balls. Porterfield himself was clearly irked by the blunder.
“I was more concerned about defending 190 runs but I only found that out with about 20 balls to go,” Porterfield admitted in three separate interviews after the game.”I might have gone about it differently,” Porterfield insisted. “I thought spin was going to be the way but maybe we could have gone with the seamers slightly earlier to try to get the run-rate up, and try to get them out of the game. That might have made it easier.”His bowlers struggled with the no-fear attack of the Netherlands batsmen on a good pitch, and their carefully-worked out plans were torn up. But the sheer freaky nature of the display was best summed-up by Porterfield: “Maybe we bowled too full – but it’s hard when one ball is going straight over your head and the next is disappearing over midwicket.”Simmons will continue to search for and develop new bowlers. Three fast-medium seamers have spent several weeks in Australia, working with Craig McDermott. Craig Young, a former Sussex player, came on so well that he was selected for Bangladesh.”We’ve never necessarily ever had an express pace man,” Porterfield said. “Boyd Rankin was the last quick bowler we had but he’s playing for England. Express pace is one of the things we’d want – so would quite a few teams around the world.”Craig Young has that potential, and we have Peter Chase back home as well. We’ll be looking to those lads over the next 12 months to step up and get as much experience as they can. I know Craig has learned a lot over the last eight weeks and played a couple of times when we were in the West Indies. But the more he plays and learns, the better it’s going to be for ourselves because he does have that something different.”

One brought life to a dead rubber, the other gave a lesson in how not to play spin

Andy Zaltzman01-Apr-2014England’s match with Netherlands was, in many ways, the least relevant of the 23 internationals they have played in all formats this winter. Both teams had already been eliminated; the England team is likely to be scheduled for dismantlement under whichever new coaching overlord is appointed; they have only two T20 internationals scheduled this summer, and their limited-overs focus will be trained entirely on next year’s World Cup. Objectively, this game was completely meaningless. And yet England miraculously conspired to find a way to make it seem to be the most relevant match they have played in years, an expression of all that has crumbled in the last few months. It was not, in the greater scheme of their catastrophic, resources-defying season. But, in the heat of what should have been battle, it seemed to be.They were unremittingly drubbed by an impressive Dutch bowling and fielding performance, failing to chase down a moderate target with striking anti-aplomb. And yet, England had been tantalisingly close to departing the competition with dignity intact, which was perhaps the height of many England supporters’ expectations.It is true that they had been knocked out approximately when most people expected them to be knocked out, having recorded the exact number of wins (or one more than the number of wins) that people were expecting them to be knocked out with. But at least they had played – or, at least, batted – quite well, and, in their spectacular victory over Sri Lanka, played some of their best cricket of the winter. Admittedly, as accolades go, “England’s best cricket of the 2013-14 season” is on a par with “Dracula’s Happiest Girlfriend”, “Megadeth’s Most Soothing Lullaby”, “Vladimir Putin’s Most Trustworthy Pledge”, or “Graeme Smith’s Most Elegant Cover Drive”.The thorny issue of the new appointment of a new head coach remains distractingly prickly. Ashley Giles’ results have done nothing to support his candidacy. He may be viewed as the safe option, but his appointment would be an enormous risk. As, you might argue, would the appointment of any of the other candidates. Whoever is rewarded/punished with the job will have to deal with the ongoing reverberations of the five-month cricketing trauma the England team has just endured, in which a handful of barely visible diamonds have struggled to glisten in an alarmingly mountainous dung heap of underachievement. It will be a fascinating summer.In media interviews concerning his potential employment as England coach, Giles pledged a “carrot-and-stick” approach. Ironically, the carrot and stick were the two implements that England appeared to be batting with on Monday, as their winter of discontent reached a barely believable nadir of uselessness. Since their humbling by Sri Lanka, Netherlands have played some excellent cricket, and challenged both New Zealand and South Africa. Losing to them is clearly no disgrace. But folding like an agoraphobic deckchair was a suitably dismal way to conclude what has been one of the most comprehensive, wide-ranging single-season failures in the history of cricket, perhaps even in the history of top-level sport.● Why are England copping so much incendiary flak for their performance against Netherlands, a team who had challenged both New Zealand and South Africa hard? Commentators, journalists and minority-interest comedian-bloggers are far too eager to pass judgement. The fact is that England already knew that they could not qualify for the semi-finals. Their 88 all out was perfectly pitched to keep their net run-rate figure fractionally ahead of the Dutch. Thus, fourth place in the group was heroically secured, an achievement that no one can ever take away from this proud cricketing nation. Furthermore, the previous day, Australia had slunk out of the tournament with a total of 86 all out. You could, therefore, understand the nerves afflicting the England players as the target of 87 loomed. They stumbled over the line, overcoming the Baggy-Screen score and sparking scenes of wild celebration across England, before concluding their winter by playing to the crowd with a final slapstick run-out, having gained glorious numerical vengeance for their 5-0 Ashes galumphing. (I write this before Australia’s final innings of the tournament. But still, 88-86. What a win.)● It was an extremely touching gesture by New Zealand to perform an homage to English batsmanship in their crucial quasi-quarter-final against Sri Lanka. Imitation, the saying goes, is the sincerest form of flattery, if not, in this case, the most tactically productive, and for the Kiwis to pay such a pitch-perfect tribute to England – rabid uncertainty against the turning ball, festooned with a couple of pre-school-level run-outs – even at the expense of their own tournament aspirations, speaks volumes for the regard in which they hold the founding fatherland of cricket.New Zealand, who, as often in major tournaments, sporadically looked like potential winners, gave the cricket world a peerless object lesson in how not to play spin bowling. The conventional, old-school wiles of Rangana Herath, looping tempters lobbed onto a length, were the principal source of pain, aided by Sachithra Senanayeke’s more 21st-century stylings. Between them, they took seven wickets for six runs in 6.3 overs; New Zealand’s other two wickets fell to run-outs from balls bowled by Herath, so, in total, the Kiwis managed to mini-amass 6 for 9 from the 39 balls they received from Sri Lanka’s spinners, a performance described as “a bit of a disappointment” by the New Zealand government’s Ministry For Understatemenets.The four runs micro-harvested by New Zealand’s Nos. 3 to 7 constitute the fewest scored by those positions in any T20 innings in which all five of those batsmen have batted (and the 11 runs nano-stockpiled by their Nos. 3 to 10 was also an contra-record, thrashing the previous low of 17).● England’s one consolation in their World T20 humiliation was that Australia fared equally badly. Clearly, playing a World T20 so soon after an Ashes series is unsustainable for both sides, just as playing a 50-over World Cup directly after a five-Test squabble for the urn proved completely impossible for both England and 1999, 2003 and 2007 world champions Australia.The Ashes calendar must therefore, unarguably, be re-re-adjusted to ensure that this limited-overs dessert is never again served so soon after such a filling five-day feast. I suggest that additional Ashes series are therefore scheduled for 2014, 2014-15, 2016, 2016-17, and 2017. Purely to protect the players. Any additional income would be entirely incidental, and given to charitable causes, such as The Bob Willis Trust For Exhausted Commentators, The Rudi Koertzen Foundation For Slowly-Raised Index Fingers, and The Barmy British Legion, a terrific organisation that assists veteran travelling England supporters.● Some more Sri Lanka Spin Stats:1. Herath’s 5 for 3 was the cheapest five-wicket haul in all T20 history, undercutting the five runs conceded by Anil Kumble (5 for 5, RCB v Royals, 2009), Arul Suppiah (6 for 5, Somerset v Glamorgan, 2011) and Delorn Johnson (5 for 5, Windwards v Barbados, 2011-2012).2. It was also Herath’s first five-wicket haul in any limited-overs match, international or domestic, in 50-over or 20-over cricket (he has taken 17 in Tests, and 35 more in first-class games).3. Herath and Senanayake were the third and fourth bowlers in T20 international history (if the term “history” can apply to something that is still in its first decade of existence) to bowl more than two overs with an economy rates no more than one run per over. Bhuvneshwar Kumar bowled three wicketless overs for just three runs against West Indies on March 23; prior to this tournament, the only instance was when Ireland’s Alex Cusack took 3 for 2 off 3 against Kenya in a WT20 qualifier in 2008.4. This was the first time in all T20 cricket that two bowlers in the same innings have bowled more than 12 balls each at an economy rate of less than or equal to one run per over.● Lasith Malinga captained Sri Lanka for the first time, and proceeded to defend a meagre target of 120 with a considerable margin to spare. T20 captain Dinesh Chandimal will, presumably, return for the semi-final, and it is entirely conceivable that Malinga will end his distinguished international career (a) without having ever skippered his country again, and (b) with an unimpeachable record and a reputation as a tactical genius for defending small totals.Alongside him in the field were four previous Sri Lankan captains (Jayawardene, Sangakkara, Dilshan and Mathews) with a combined total of 350 matches’ worth of international leadership experience. Between them, they had skippered Sri Lanka in the field for a total of 21,805 overs – that equates to approximately eight months of captaining, every day for seven hours a day.This probably explains why Malinga was not the most obviously domineering captain, and why Jayawardene (183-time skipper) was doing an awful lot of pointing, waving and shouting for someone who definitely was not captain.

R Ashwin believes the “guts” shown by the Indian spinners to flight the ball and overcome the fear of being hit in T20s has been the major factor for India’s success

Abhishek Purohit in Mirpur03-Apr-2014A legspinner tossing the ball high, giving it a rip with his wrist to lure the batsman out before getting it to dip, grip, turn and earning a stumping. An offspinner tossing the ball high, giving it a tweak with his fingers to draw the batsman forward, getting it to drift, grip, turn and earning an outside edge to slip. These are not dismissals you normally associate with Twenty20 cricket. But these are just two instances of what Amit Mishra and R Ashwin have been able to achieve in this World T20.Both spinners have had principal roles to play in each of India’s four successive victories in the group stage. On three of those occasions, they have not had the weight of runs backing them, as India relied on their preferred strategy of chasing. All three of those matches – against Pakistan, West Indies and Bangladesh – were ‘live’ ones, with qualification for the knockouts dependent on their results. Mishra was the Man of the Match against Pakistan and West Indies; Ashwin got the award against Bangladesh.Two subcontinent sides supposedly accustomed to playing spin, and a third which has backed itself to hit the big shots under pressure, and have done so in crunch matches against Pakistan and Australia. None of them managed even 140 against the Indians.The conditions have been spinner-friendly in Bangladesh, particularly so in Dhaka. MS Dhoni has said it has been one of the main reasons why the Indian slow bowlers have done so well. Ravindra Jadeja hasn’t been among them, though. It is not really his style to lure batsmen with flight and guile.But no matter how much the conditions support you, it takes tremendous heart for a spinner to bowl slow when the temptation is to fire it in quick. To overcome the ever-present fear of getting hit in T20 and toss the ball up. For one spinner to do it in a single T20 is itself remarkable. For two in the same XI to do it over the course of a world tournament with so much control is incredible. Ashwin, and particularly Mishra’s, biggest achievement this World T20 has been to consistently beat this fear, and do so without the security of a big total to defend every time it mattered.This absence of fear, or presence of “guts”, over four matches is what South Africa will be up against. It was a term Ashwin used several times ahead of India’s semi-final clash. “In terms of variation of pace, you need a lot of guts,” Ashwin said. “If you’re at the top of your game, you can land the ball exactly where you want it to land.But apart from that, to actually slow the ball down when the batsman’s going after you is a key component of this particular game, for which you need quite a lot of guts. And if you’ve gone for a six, it requires even more guts to come back the next ball. Those are the key components of a winning game, as far as I’m concerned.”It tells you a lot about a spinner’s state of mind when he says the ball is behaving as he wills it. “In the last two or three months, I feel that I’m probably at the top of my bowling game,” Ashwin said. “When I reach that phase, I pretty much don’t practice at all. That’s a phase I’m in right now. The ball is landing exactly where I want.”South Africa will have to counter Mishra and Ashwin on a helpful and unfamiliar surface – they have been playing in Chittagong so far – and that too in a knockout. Bowlers have not had to contend with heavy dew turning the ball into soap in Dhaka, like it did so often in Chittagong.South Africa have probably the most nerveless innovator among current limited-overs batsmen in AB de Villiers, and they will need to keep calm when it comes to taking on spin. South Africa also have the Super 10 stage’s leading wicket-taker in Imran Tahir, who’s managed 11 wickets in less helpful conditions with his mix of quick sliders and googlies.He’s had a well-publicised visit from Shane Warne in the Mirpur nets. Will he stick to what has worked for him in Chittagong, or will he use more flight and turn like the Indians have? Whatever method he uses, Ashwin said it would again come down to the same word – guts.”When it comes to international cricket, there’s a very small margin between the quality of spinners. Everybody’s bound to have a certain amount of quality in them. It’s all about the mental make-up of the spinner and the amount of guts he has in that particular scenario,” Ashwin said. “It’ll be handling pressure that makes the difference, because Imran Tahir has been in top form. And I expect (Aaron) Phangiso to play. When that happens, you’re pretty much evened out on the amount of spinners both teams will play. It comes down to how well your spinners handle it.”Apart from pressure, the spinners might also have to deal with a wet outfield, as rain is expected around the time of the match on Friday. The last time rain came down in an India game in a World T20, against Australia in 2012 in Colombo, it contributed to their exit from the tournament, as their three spinners found it difficult to grip the ball. Even Mishra and Ashwin, for all their heart, could struggle if it rains again.