Too close for comfort

You would not have found many pundits who would have predicted such an intense test series that just finished. 2-0 does not reflect how strongly the Windies came back at a weakened and perhaps cocky Australian line up.

And it was the Windies’ bowling which surprised and exceeded expectations, especially as their best bowler Jerome Taylor was forced home through injury and their potentially most devastating bowler Fidel Edwards was not picked to tour.

Chris Gayle, who has had a difficult year with his lackadaisical attitude to test cricket and fondness for ADHD cricket Twenty/20, led from the front, belting two centuries in contrasting fashion: His Adelaide century carrying his bat anchored the innings and gave the West Indies something to bowl at, while his Perth ton was all devastation, leaving the Australian bowlers sprawling in his wake.

Australia scored no centuries in the series, but had four batsman average over 50. The Windies had four centuries, but only two men averaged over 50 and one of them was Narsinghe Deonarine, who scored a defiant 82 in the last test to give the West Indies a sniff of victory.

A worrying aspect was that only Dwayne Bravo averaged under 30 with the ball, and Kemar Roach bowled better than seven wickets and an average of over 50 suggests, creating concern and alarm with his pace and bounce and leaving a lasting impression on the battered Ricky Ponting. In time, he will be a ferocious bowler able to tear attacks apart with more exposure to test level.

Australia will be wondering where their plans went wrong. The Windies defied them in moments they looked set to dominate, and they faltered at crucial times as they did in the Ashes this year. On that occasion, when Australia faltered, England capitalised on the unexpected advantage better than the Windies did this series.

I was not impressed with Mitchell Johnson who, despite being the leading the wicket taker in the series with 17, was comprehensively out bowled by Ben Hilfenhaus in Brisbane and by Doug Bollinger in Adelaide and Perth. His run rate of 4.33 suggests that he was unable to give the control needed by the bowling attack and when Hilfy returns, he may be facing trouble for his position, because after such an impressive performance they cannot drop Bollinger.

Pakistan must be feeling confident they can cause Australia harm in this series. Unlike the Windies, their bowling attack is impressively formidable on paper. It is their batting, particularly that of the top order, that is frail. They may struggle to confront an opening bowling combination that will hopefully be Hilfy and Doug the Rug.

And on a final aside note, Brendan Nash, who left Australia to live in Jamaica and suddenly found himself in the national team and then the West Indies team, acquitted himself greatly during the series. He scored 250 runs at 41.67, with only Chris Gayle of the West Indies players scoring more. They would not have fared as well in the series without his pugnacity and desire to fight.

One of cricket's greatest absurdities

Cricket is definitely a funny old game. It’s a definite cliché that phrase, but it occasionally has a way of throwing a spanner in the works and providing something that just shouldn’t normally happen.

Rewind to Chittagong in 2006. Australia was playing their first test series in Bangladesh, and in the first test Bangladesh gave a spirited fight led by a stirring century from Shahriar Nafees. There was hope the spirit shown by the Bangladeshis would be carried into the Chittagong match. Alas it was not to be.

And the stage was set for the most absurd inning in cricket history.

Jason Gillespie had long been one of Australia’s great fast bowling servants. His partnership with Glenn McGrath was a major factor in Australia’s run of dominance and he could have easily been a top bowler for any other country at his peak.

He has recently been dropped following a disastrous campaign to England in 2005, which effectively spelled the end of his career, and was only called up because McGrath, Kasprowicz, and Tait were missing. He bowled well in the first test, and took three cheap and effective wickets in the first innings of Bangladesh. At the end of the first day, he was sent in at first drop after Matthew Hayden fell for 29, to join Phil Jaques.

He was not removed for the rest of the innings. Day two was shortened because of poor weather, but by the end of day three he had progressed to his maiden test (And first class) century.

Midway through day four, he moved on to an unbeaten 201, the highest ever score by a nightwatchman and also a higher score than many of his more illustrious batsmen. Along the way he chalked a gigantic 320 run partnership with Mike Hussey, who scored a rapid 182.

There was nothing really remarkable of Dizzy’s batting technique. He effectively put his leg as far as he could down the pitch and blocked. Now he was never a fast scorer, but he was incredibly difficult to dislodge. In India in 2004 his defensive innings, along with Damian Martyn’s century, helped draw the second test, setting the stage for Gillespie to take nine wickets in the next test to bowl Australia to victory.

His double century was full of drives, cut shots, and pulls. He had passed fifty twice previously, so everyone knew he could be a real pest if he hung around. This was something different. He bullied and wore down the Bangladesh attack that just couldn’t get past the long front foot. He brought up his double century with a leg glance for four. The commentators laughed with genuine glee, and Dizzy shook his head at the absurd notion that he of all people had scored a test double century.

Sadly, I have been unable to find any video footage of this particular gem. I’d dearly love to see it and laugh again. It always brings a smile to my face just thinking about it.

Only Glenn McGrath scoring a century could be close to more absurd. Or maybe Chris Martin making it into the 20s.

Is there a resolution?

The problems at the moment facing West Indian cricket have been well documented, with the power struggle between the WICB and the WIPA leading to the majority of their superstars refusing to play for their team.

In the meantime, the West Indians played a test series against Bangladesh and became the second team (After the now non-test playing nation Zimbabwe) to lose a series to the Bangas. It was a vastly under strength and untried side, with young hopefuls joining old veterans to form a team who would never even look like getting a game normally (With the exception maybe of Darren Sammy).

Now recent talks between the two parties have recently fallen apart again, and now there is a distinct chance that the West Indian team to travel to Australia to compete for the Frank Worrell Trophy will be led by Floyd Reifer and will feature unknowns who, although facing a weakened Australian side, will most certainly be crucified.

While this is happening, several West Indians will may the journey south to play in the Big Bash over the summer, earning their cash as mercenaries. This may be the future of West Indian cricket now, with the best players heading abroad in search of money they claim is not coming from the board. Chris Gayle has publicly stated his disdain for test cricket, and others are being snapped up by IPL franchises as well.

The reasoning is simple. Why play test cricket for the West Indies when you can earn more money in less time playing Twenty/20?

One hopes that come the end of the day we can have a resolution so we don’t lose a cricket team filled with history, explosiveness, and raw talent. I would hate to see the day when cricket is without the West Indies. Something within the game, maybe excitement, would die with them.

Hilf and North strike a blow for anonymity

Well...................well...................another Ashes series gone by and another result not everyone expected.

In 2005, we watched England down a far superior Australian team boasting several immortals of the game. In 2006/2007, we watched a highly fancied England team get annihilated by ‘Dad’s Army’. What does that leave us with in 2009?

Well it was probably a case of two mediocre teams battling to stop themselves from being the first to drop the ball, which in the end was all that was needed at The Oval. Australia dropped the ball badly and England capitalised in a big way to secure a 2-1 win that no-one really expected to happen.

Now in my opinion, the pitches were once again shite. I hate how curators are turning pitches into bland batting strips. It annoys me that the bowlers are getting the raw end of the deal. Why can’t we see a green pitch for once where the ball moves around like a nightmare? Why can’t we have a dustbowl that turns square? Why can’t we have a bouncy pitch that has a chance to rattle a batsman’s helmet?

But enough griping, on to the point at hand.

The stats make great reading for the series, especially since Australia had three bowlers with 20 wickets and four batsmen with over 300 runs yet still found a way to lose the series. Only one bowler managed to average below 30 as well, a further example of the pitches turning out like the M4 Motorway.

Australia came to England’s shores with a team made up of fledging stars and young guns, with a lot of the hype centred on Phillip Hughes and bowlers Johnson and Siddle.
Yet it was the unknown soldiers Ben Hilfenhaus for the bowlers and Marcus North for the batsmen that provided a solid base for the rest of their team.

Hilfenhaus was unheard of when he came to England. He had been well known in Australia for several season after emerging as one of the best young quicks coming through the ranks, particularly in the season Tasmania managed to win the Pura Cup (Now back to Sheffield Shield thank God) for the first time.

Conditions definitely favoured him, and in the five test series he collected 22 wickets and bowled some magnificent outswingers, although he never took a five wicket haul he so deserved. The English will have a lot of respect for the quiet former bricklayer who worked hard for his wickets.

North came through a different route. Now 30, he has plied his trade for Western Australia and has been a county pro for many years now, playing for five different counties during his time in the country. His selection for South Africa was a gamble, but in England it made perfect sense as he had the years of experience in English conditions.

His two centuries and a 96 left him a formidable object at number six and we could well hold onto that position for some time. And with Mike Hussey out of sorts and on the wrong side of 34, he could even be boosted up the order.

The success of Hilfy and the Australian cricket team’s only smoker are a good sign for the team and a victory of anonymity. Let’s hope that they continue to prosper for Australia’s sake.

A worrying lack of depth

While a lot of the media attention during this Ashes series has been diverted to the Australian form woes and Freddie’s impending test retirement, I’ve noticed something alarming about the England side that no one has really delved into.

KP’s injury was a bad setback for England, which, while I concede he’s not in the greatest form, leaves a big hole in their batting lineup. He is one player who stands head and shoulders above his teammates and is one of the few batsmen in their lineup that thrives against the strongest teams.

Ian Bell is his replacement, a very talented batsman with a technique quite pleasing on the eye and eight test centuries to his credit. That said, Belly (Or ‘The Sherminator’, as Warney calls him) has never scored a test century without someone reaching the mark before him. He has frequently lacked the necessary steel to mix it with the best sides, and his record as England’s number three was decidedly woeful.

There lies the problem. When a regular team member is out, does Ian Bell fit the criteria of England’s next best batsman?

Look into the county system and you’ll start to see the problem. At the top of Division One’s run scoring chart is Marcus Trescothick, now retired from international cricket. Michael Carberry is next, but he’s an opener. The first middle order batsman you find is James Hildreth, whose numbers this year have been partially bolstered by an unbeaten 303 against Warwickshire.

His nearest opponent is Jonathan Trott who, at 28, is a more mature debutant and has been scoring prolifically in the last few years. But he has 18 hundreds as opposed to 40 fifties. Slight conversion rate issue there.

In Division Two, there problem is even worse. The top four players are past their prime as test batsmen (With Martin Van Jaarsveld also a South African!). The nearest young batsman is Alex Gidman, whose record is rather modest. And below him is Phillip Hughes!

I’ve heard a number of calls for Robert Key or Joe Denly, but neither is really true and tested yet. That statement is arguable for Key, who has a test double century to his credit, but at 30 he isn’t really a young face. Denly needs another year or two to really figure out his technique before he gets thrown into the deep end. He didn’t have a particularly good year in 2008 and Division Two isn’t full of the top bowling talent.

England do have decent bowling numbers to fall back on, with Harmison waiting in the wings (Although hopefully they won’t need him) as well as the solid Tim Bresnan, Ryan Sidebottom, the young but sharp Luke Fletcher, and the spectacularly successful Alex Shantry, who has been snatching up wicket for Glamorgan. No spinners are really being noticed though, apart from those currently in the England setup.

Mark Davies was a player I thought needed to be in the test side, but he is struggling to get a regular game with Durham and despite a truly remarkable bowling record, he may become part of the unrecognised heap.

England is not short on keepers, with James Foster a class act and the unlucky and brilliant Chris Read.

But what can England do if they start losing batsmen to injury or retirement?

And the final question for you to ponder on, what will England do when Freddie leaves the test side?

Jimmy, will you please stand up......

England will be banking on its new look bowling attack taking the fight to the Australians during the Ashes. But in my opinion it is not Flintoff that holds the important card, it is Jimmy Anderson.

Jimmy has had a mixed bag of a career, pretty much summed up by one good spell and then six or seven ordinary ones. He looked the goods at times, and then he came crashing back to earth.

His Ashes series in 06/07 was nothing short of a disaster. He collected five wickets at the horrible average of 82.60 and was manhandled by Ricky Ponting and co.

Good signs were showing soon however. During the English summer he collected 5/42 against a powerful Indian batting lineup. The next two tests he was again ineffective. The story was continuing.

It took New Zealand’s tour to England to finally get the best out of Anderson. And he delivered with career best figures of 7/43 to wreck the Kiwis. He swung the ball alarmingly both ways at good pace. Had he finally arrived as a test cricketer or was it another in a long line of false dawns?

He did well against South Africa, fumbled on India’s batting tracks, and then performed brilliantly without much luck against the Windies.

Now, on the eve of the Ashes series, he has taken 5/34 against an admittedly weak Warwickshire side and has established himself as his team’s premier paceman.

England’s success will hinge on his performances. He needs to hassle openers Phillip Hughes and Simon Katich with his swing, and get the ball moving both ways. Hughes was also unsettled by the short ball in his brief stint against the Lions and he may find himself becoming an early Anderson target.

This is Anderson’s greatest test, a series against the oldest enemy Australia in which he is the unanimous spearhead. If he fails, his career will once more hit the stalling point it has hit before. If he succeeds, maybe he will have finally reached his immense potential.

My mate Hughesy

I live in a little suburban town in Sydney where we call a spade a shovel and outdoor sports are a good way to meet and greet the populace. During my failed cricket career, I was privy to meet the then President of my cricket club, Steve Mullally (No relation to a certain England left-arm quick who couldn’t bat), before he became a talent scout for Cricket NSW.

One day I was fortunate enough to bump into him (He’s extremely busy these days), and out of curiosity asked him whether there were any players I should keep an eye out for.

‘There’s a young bloke that’s playing for Western Suburbs called Philip Hughes. He’s going to go all the way’.

And thus I did, being the good cricket tragic that I am, keep an eye out for him. That was about 2006, when he had just come down from his banana farm in Macksville, and he was already setting the Sydney first grade scene alight.

Three years later he is the most talked about Australian cricketer in the world. His astonishing rise to the baggy green might someday become something of a folk legend.

I watched in the papers for Hughesy, but grade cricket receives limited coverage. He was picked up for some under 19’s Australia teams, but he didn’t really achieve much. Finally in November 2007, his big appetite for runs and enormous potential became too much for the selectors to ignore.

He made his first class debut against Tasmania and made a grinding 51 in a game that Doug Bollinger took 12 wickets. Simon Katich, the captain of NSW and then on the road to the most runs in an Australian first class season, took the young man under his wing.

There were several half centuries that season but the youngster has failed to convert them into the hundreds sorely needed to get his name noticed. But then came the Pura Cup final against the strong Victorian team, containing a young fast bowler that would soon come into the Australian team, Peter Siddle.

Hughesy made only six in the first innings. But in the second, backed by the insatiable Katich, he made 116 to become the youngest man to hit a century in an Australian four day domestic final.

I was there the day Hughesy made that century, full of sharp drives, some lucky edges, and some excellent running between the wickets, and I was one of the loudest to cheer when he made the magic milestone. I’m not sure Hughesy remembers the loud guy with glasses in the stand willing him to succeed.

He made appearances for the academy team during the winter, and then came an important season for the young man the next year. Matthew Hayden was fading fast, Phil Jaques was out with injury, Chris Rogers was getting on and Simon Katich, his mentor, was in the side and whispering in ears.

Hughes took the opportunity to have a devastating season, scoring 891 runs against some of the finest domestic attacks in the world. Only Rogers and the reborn Michael Klinger scored more runs that season.

His finest performance that season was a brilliant double of 93 and 108 on a seaming Bellerive pitch where the next highest NSW score was 42.

Suddenly with Hayden retiring, Australia might have a young talent who would fill a big hole left by the powerful Queenslander.

Some were sceptical of the possibility of sending the young lad into what would be a tough debut series against the recently victorious South Africans. But the selectors decided to watch him play against Tasmania in Newcastle to have a second opinion. Hughes made 151 and 82 not out. He had booked his ticket to South Africa.

What followed was nothing short of incredible. After an embarrassing duck in his maiden test innings, Hughes grafted 75 in the second innings to help Australia to a hard fought win. Then he surprised the cricketing world by knocking off George Headley to become the youngest player to hit twin centuries in a test match with 115 and 160, knocking up his maiden century with a towering six.

He finished as Australia’s highest run scorer for the series and was probably only beaten by Mitchell Johnson and AB De Villiers as men of the series. He has now secured his role as Australia’s test opener for as long as his batting oozes runs, which may not be too hard considering his voracious appetite for runs, one usually associated with the truly great players.

As the Ashes loom, England now have a new player to worry about, one that has flogged three centuries and two fifties in five first class innings for Middlesex. One that has already scored test hundreds against arguably the most ferocious attack in the world.

You will hear a lot more about Philip Hughes before his career is over.

An culture of suspicion

An old problem has just been highlighted by Pakistan captain Younis Khan, and one that is always inflammatory and brings out the worst in parochial cricket fans.

He mentioned on Cricinfo following the third ODI that controversies seem to rear their ugly head whenever an Australian team plays a nation from the subcontinent, and some degree he’s right and to some degree he is wrong, although I’m not sure to what context he is speaking.

The problem stems from the recent trouble over suspect bowling actions, with Saeed Ajmal reported for problems with his doosra and before that Johan Botha was called once again during the South African series over his doosra and quicker ball.

Now the suspicion in this case would not have come across in most cases, except that the team involved following both incidents was Australia.

It takes only that sort of evidence for the narrow-minded to draw to the conclusion that Australia, who have struggled recently, are attempting to take bowlers who have had successes against them out of play. And to be honest, it is really easy to see the connection considering the history.

Muttiah Muralitharan was initially called for throwing in Australia in the early 90’s by Darrell Hair, and that sparked a massive controversy. Ross Emerson did the same thing on Sri Lanka’s next tour during an ODI, and that again sparked problems. When the 15 degree rule was introduced, Murali no longer has any problems.

Part of the problems is not with the Australian team as such, but as how the Australian team is viewed. The Australian team that has dominated the greater part of the last decade has played superb cricket, but has come to be viewed as boorish, arrogant, overconfident and aggressive.

That is true in quite a few respects; they were certainly no angels on the field. But there is no such thing as a saint on a cricket field. That issue was mostly developed under Steve Waugh’s ‘Mental Disintegration’ ploy. It’s not like Mark Taylor needed to sledge so intensely to win.

The Australian team has been viewed, primarily in the media, as bad losers and even worse winners and thus a lot of teams have their opinion switched firmly on the dislike. This has not been helped by the controversies that seem to follow them around, some of which they cause and some of which they are unfortunately drawn into.

It wasn’t the Australian team that called Murali, and in the two recent cases the spinners were called by neutral umpires, one of which was from the home country. Saeed Ajmal claimed that Shane Watson spoke to the umpires about it, but I’m sceptical about that claim as there isn’t really any evidence of it and it wouldn’t make any sense for the Australians to do it.

They were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The last Indian series was one of the bitterest series in recent memory. Indian fans were baying for blood following the Sydney fiasco (Many STILL go on about it), and the attitude among the newer elements of the Indian team was to match the aggression of the Australian team.

Australia was never going to win that series, but the many on-field and off-field incidents left a bad taste in the mouth.

Australia has become a great scapegoat for problems due to the fact that they are most unpopular team in world cricket. Hell, they are liked less than George W Bush.

The Left-Handed Pearl

Left-Arm Fast bowler. They are the mythical bunch that is a diamond dozen, but those who have made it to the top have shone as some of the finest bowlers of the game.

Mitchell Johnson has blown his way to the top of Australia’s bowling attack following a humble start, and Zaheer Khan has emerged from a long and difficult apprenticeship to be India’s top bowler. But the main reason they cause excitement is that they are left-arm quicks, and can do things a right-armer would dream about.

The history of left-arm quicks traces all the way back to the very first test, where England fielded Tom Emmett, a bluff Yorkshire professional who could bowl very fast on his day. Australia’s attack, missing Fred Spofforth, opened the bowling with John Hodges, a Victorian bookmaker who played the first two tests and never played test cricket again.

On the return match in England, Fred Spofforth was supported by Frank Allen, once hailed ‘the bowler of the century’, and a man who was allegedly a gargantuan swinger of the ball. He took 4/80 in the match as Spofforth annihilated England.

England would tend to rely on left arm orthodox bowlers in its early history, but they did produce an all-rounder who could be dangerous on his day in the form of George Hirst, who achieved more with the bat than the ball in his few test appearances.

More successful was Jack Ferris, who teamed up with Charlie Turner to form one of the most lethal partnerships in test cricket history. Ferris’ career was blighted by the weakness of the Australian batting at the time, and eventually left to play in England as a professional.

When South Africa initially came into the test arena, they struggled to match the strong Australian and English teams, but they did have Arthur ‘Dave’ Nourse, a left-arm swing bowler who was the ‘Grand Old Man of South African Cricket’.

In the late 1920’s, England unearthed a young lad from Nottinghamshire who would make his mark a few years later as the accomplice of one Harold Larwood. Bill Voce, although yards slower than his older partner, was a key figure in Bodyline where he would set the leg trap and use his awkward angle and great height to create havoc and a long run of bruises.
He would have sporadic success in his career, and his last tour with Wally Hammond’s team in 1946/47 to Australia when he was long past his peak was a disaster.

After World War Two Australia unearthed a candidate for one of the all-time left-armers in Bill Johnston, a droll Victorian who had been a spin bowler before he turned to swing. He took 16 wickets against India in his debut test series and then in the next five took at least 20 wickets. Not bad, especially when you consider that he was competing with Ray Lindwall and Keith Miller for the new ball.

Frank Worrell, a much-underrated bowler due to his batting talent, was often called upon to open the bowling for the West Indies as the struggled to find the next Learie Constantine. He took a best of 7/70, but a younger all-rounder from Barbados would supersede him as an all-rounder and player. Garry Sobers, arguably the greatest all-rounder of them all, took 235 wickets bowling swing, genuinely fast, or any type of spin he felt like.

When Australia toured South Africa in 1957/58, a lot of their hopes were pinned on Alan Davidson, who was finally being given the new ball after having to wait behind the impenetrable Lindwall/Miller/Johnston combination. He was acknowledged as a master bowler, but had played 12 tests and had taken an unremarkable 16 wickets at 34.06.
In the next 32 tests he took 170 wickets at under 20 to reduce that average to 20.53. Doing that he established himself as the finest left-arm quick of that time, and he is only challenged as the greatest of them all by one man.

South Africa had developed Trevor Goddard as a useful all-rounder who at times opened the batting and the bowling for his country. When the arrival of some genuinely fast men gave him better support, the ferocious South African team of the 60’s was born.

The generation gap between the next gifted lefties was bridged by Richard Collinge, a gigantic but gentle swing bowler whose best was overshadowed by Richard Hadlee, but always gave his best for New Zealand.

Lefties struggled to make an impact in the 70’s. Bernard Julien was spoken of as another Sobers but failed to have an impact. John Lever played 21 tests as a classy swing bowler, but had to shake rumours he used slave or something similar to get swing.

Australia produced two with vastly different careers. Gary Gilmour was a spectacular swing bowler and hard hitting batsman who produced his best in the one day game. He struggled later in his career as the increasing professionalism left players of his ilk in the cold.

Geoff Dymock, a maths teacher who struggled with remote postings for many years, was a determined, hard-working bowler who improved to such a state in his early 30’s that he was considered good enough to partner Dennis Lillee during the Post-WSC reunion. He was the first person to dismiss all 11 batsmen in a team at Green Park in India in a match his batsmen still managed to lose.

In the 80’s there was little to be seen of the left-arm quick, and it was thought they had gone out of fashion as quick as the Malcolm Marshall bouncer. Then suddenly out of Pakistan came a young man with a whippy action that could bowl fast and swing the ball both ways alarmingly late.

Wasim Akram took 5/56 in his second test and showed signs of greatness. At the turn of the decade, he was acknowledged the finest fast bowler in the world, even better than Windies beanpoles Curtley Ambrose and Courtney Walsh.
Australian captain Mark Taylor, a man who managed a century against Akram hailed him as the most difficult bowler he had ever faced, and much better than any West Indian of the time. His record is formidable: 414 wickets at 23.62. He suffered during his career from a myriad of scandals, and late in his career he lost a lot of the zip that made him the most feared bowler in the world.

That said, in my opinion Wasim Akram is the greatest leftie of them all.

Australia managed to produce a tall, gangling WA quick that could make the ball swing and lift from a good length. Bruce Reid suffered from back problems his entire career, but managed 113 wickets at 24.63, he was no mug when he got it right.

Sri Lanka, after initial struggles, unearthed an invulnerable warrior who to this day carries their pace attack. Chaminda Vaas was never lightning fast, but he learned progressively as he went. He forsook pace to become a crafty swing and seam bowler, capable of blowing away teams on helpful pitches and containing batsmen with his accuracy.

Nathan Bracken had been earmarked as the next Bruce Reid when he came through the ranks, but it took a long time to make his mark. And now at 31, and having not played a test since 2005, a classy swing bowler seems to have cruelly been cast as a limited overs bowler, despite being widely admitted as one of the finest swing bowlers in the world.

But the leftie rides again. Johnson and Zaheer are at the pinnacle of this class at the moment, but South Africa has Wayne Parnell waiting to take the fight. Pakistan’s Sohail Tanvair is a wrong-footed and unpredictable quick with strong potential. And there is definitely one out there who could be the next Alan Davidson. The next Wasim Akram.

Now that would be a treat.

Bracks left scratching his head

As Steve Magoffin joins Brett Geeves over in South Africa in case Peter Siddle or Ben Hilfenhaus need a replacement, the world’s premier one day bowler must be shaking his blond locks in disillusionment after he went from Australia’s best swing bowler to typecast limited overs gun.

That reasoning has the twang of the ridiculous about as you consider that Bracken, for a long time one of the most talented bowlers in the country, has destroyed teams in the Sheffield Shield/Pura Cup for years.

In 2004/2005, when NSW once again proved that Queensland could not beat them in a final (They still haven’t), Bracken devastated their strong batting line up with 6/27. Earlier that season he had bowled out South Australia for 27 in 15 overs, taking a barely believable 7/4. That evokes stories about the time Keith Miller did something similar to South Australia when claiming 7/12.

Doubters will point to his limited success in five tests, 12 wickets at 42.08. That fails to explain a one day record of 159 wickets at 22.90, with a strike rate of 31.1. In the last four years he has been a major driving force in Australia’s successes in the one day arena.

In the 2007 World Cup, his presence meant that Glenn McGrath was dropped to first change in his last hurrah, with Bracken, McGrath, and Shaun Tait proving a formidable one day attack.

In South Africa, the conditions always favour quicker bowlers with ample seam movement, good swing, and bouncy pitches. Bracken is Australia’s best swing bowler. What has he done to deserve such shabby treatment?

The mecurial Mitchell Johnson

If the Australia’s test win in Johannesburg proved anything, apart from that Australia is not dead and buried yet; it proved that Mitchell Johnson is improving as a cricketer with every test.

His first season as a test cricketer was quite underwhelming, considering the amount of hype surrounding him and the fact he had to fill the quite sizable shoes of the finest bowler of modern times; Glenn McGrath.

I must admit I thought him overrated. He did not swing the ball much, a much needed weapon in a left-armer’s armoury, and could at times be wayward. Fast forward another season and he is the leader of the Australian bowling attack.

For Johnson to go from promising change bowler to Australia’s most dangerous bowler within a year shows how vital Johnson has become, and how much he has improved in such a short time.

Johnson has always been consistently quick, and one of his greatest strengths is being able to bowl at a good pace for an entire day. He can get swing, sometimes quite late, and his variations in pace are clever and well disguised.

His batting has improved dramatically. There is no doubt that when his career is over he will have scored at least one test century. He only narrowly missed out in the previous test when he ran out of partners. His stroke play is crisp and his timing quite exquisite. He may not quite reach that level of ability, but there can be some comparisons made to Johnson and other left-arm all-rounders Alan Davidson and Wasim Akram.

The only problem Australia has with Johnson at the moment is the high workload being forced upon him. When Stuart Clark returns that will be partially remedied, but in the meanwhile he is Australia’s best fast bowler and will be a key part of an Australian team rebuilding following its most successful period.

March 3: Cricket's Day of Tragedy

March 3rd was a tragic day for everyone close to cricket. The most fanatical of Pakistan fans are now weeping what is surely the demise of international cricket being played in their country for some time, while worldwide cricket fanatics, myself included, mourn the fact that not even a sporting team can escape from religious fanaticism.

Sadly there were lives lost. Five members of the security team, the driver of the umpire’s car, and two bystanders were killed. Fortunately none of the Sri Lankan players, the primary target of these terrorists, were killed, although both Thilan Samaweera and Tharanga Paranavitana
were hit by stray bullets.

The repercussions from this will affect cricket on a global scale as they now realise what these cretins, misguided in their religious devotion, will do to get their messages heard.

No international team will go to Pakistan anymore. The writing looked on the wall when teams such as Australia and England were refusing to tour there, blaming the political upheaval. It looked even further doubtful following the Mumbai terror attacks, when India refused to tour the country.

Any hope of the average Pakistan citizen, most of whom worship cricket, seeing international teams compete against their nation on their home turf is now long gone.

That’s part of the tragedy. Pakistan will now be totally isolated from the rest of the cricket world, with its fans forced to watch their team play in neutral venues if they are to keep playing top level cricket. No longer can their fans see the likes of a Jayawadene, Ponting, Pietersen, Tendulkar, or Graeme Smith touring.

I am so glad the Sri Lankan players are safe. If there is any good news we can take out of this tragedy, it is that we have players of the calibre of Samaweera, Sangakarra and Mendis still able to entertain the masses.

We have witnessed one of the most, if not the most, devastating events in cricket history. If the game of cricket can recover from this, it will go on forever.

The Disaster Masters

One of the unexpected laughs of the week came at the expense of England, who showed the world they are still the masters of disaster with a dismal collapse to 51 in their test against the West Indies.

And the reason I laugh? Every pommie supporter has been in my ears or on Cricinfo talking up how Australia will be devastated on their trip for England. Following their ridiculous fall on the weekend, I am completely confident that we will retain our hold on the priceless urn.

England and Australia are often accused of paying too much attention to the Ashes. It is true to some respects, although Australia in its time puts a lot of priority on its duels these days with South Africa and especially India, as well as having a long standing competition with the Windies for the Frank Worrell Trophy.

England, however, are clearly Ashes-obsessed. The tabloids in England are more infatuated with beating Australia than they are with Amy Winehouse’s drunken exploits or what stupid comment the Gallagher brothers have summoned for the week. It’s an old sore that they can’t tolerate, a colony creating its own identity and then emerging as superior in some aspects, as they have with cricket.

The hysteria surrounding 2005, when England thrillingly won to breathe life back into the contest, was a good example of how much they revere the contest, and how much it means for them to win.

There were some that hadn’t ever seen the urn in England’s trophy cabinet following its capture in 1989 and subsequent long term possession by Australia. I don’t blame them for going mad and then giving MBEs top the victorious team. They did the same for the English Union team when they won the World Cup in 2003, having knocked off, you guessed it, Australia for the title.
England were widely rumoured to be treating this tour as an ‘Ashes warm-up’. How that has now backfired spectacularly.

Their reliance on Kevin Pietersen is beginning to grow with every test, especially with the continually lean showings of Alastair Cook and the spineless Ian Bell. Their bowling, apart from the luckless yet venomous ‘Freddie’ Flintoff, is rather frail.

Stuart Broad is developing but can’t hide a lack of real pace. Ryan Sidebottom is steady and accurate, but can be negotiated by a good batting line-up. He went wicket less at Kingston, and that might be playing on their minds.

The less said of Harmison and Jimmy Anderson the better. Neither are the answer for England’s bowling woes. Harmy is way too inconsistent and has problems with his attitude. Now that he is on the wrong side of 30, they need to cut off from a talented but highly enigmatic bowler.

Anderson is a real conundrum. He can bowl prodigious swing at a good pace at times but when he has an off day, which is quite often, he can be plundered for many runs. He was highly ineffectual in the last Ashes series, and the Australian batsmen will be licking their lips if he comes into contention for a place.

Monty is certainly their best spinner. And one would hope he finds his mojo, as he can be considered a far better spin bowler than anyone Australia can muster at the present time.

England needs to have a long think, and so do all you pom supporters out there. Do you really think you can win the Ashes with this inconsistent bunch of underachievers?

Time to gamble on Hughes

As the selectors, in their infinite wisdom, gather this week to decide upon the touring team to South Africa, the vital decision they have to make is who will replace Matthew Hayden as opener.

And my nomination has to be that of Phillip Hughes.

The New South Welshman, only 20 years of age, has set the domestic scene alight in his two seasons at the top level. In season 2008/2009, he has 891 runs from 13 innings at an average of 74.25. And many have been scored spectacularly.

His double of 93 and 108 on a nightmarish track in Hobart was the sign of a player who has the potential to be an all-time great. To put that into perspective, no other NSW players passed 50, the next highest being 42 by Steve Smith.

His career thus far reads 30 innings, 1570 runs at an average of 60.38, with a high score of 198, five centuries, and ten half-centuries. If Hughes was playing for any other country (Possibly apart from India), he would be considered one of the finds of the decade, and would probably already be playing international cricket.

While it can be argued that Phil Jaques is the incumbent and has test cricket already under his belt, it would be a mistake to rush the batsman back into the side when he is still recovering from back surgery.

Michael Klinger is a red hot candidate for the tour, being at the time of writing the only batsman to score over 1000 runs this season. But this is the first season he has been able to apply himself. At 28, he can be considered a gamble if he goes.

The other choices would be for the bowling attack. Johnson is first choice, followed by Peter Siddle. Doug Bollinger and Ben Hilfenhaus should round out the squad. Nathan Hauritz will remain number one spinner, even though he isn’t a particularly strong wicket-taking option, and Jason Krejza will be the back-up, as Australia struggles to look for a permanent Warne replacement.

I do reckon it is time for Australia to dump the foolish notion of fielding an all-rounder. They have fine bowlers and decent part-time options (Clarke, Katich), so they should probably boost their batting a bit by playing a straight batsman, which could open the way for either Dave Hussey or Kilnger at six.

And I am willing to say goodbye to Andrew Symonds. A class player, and one I’ve vastly enjoyed since he started his career. Australia just doesn’t need him anymore.

2009, a punter's view

What are the predictions so far for 09? Will Australia be still number one by the end of the year? Will South Africa or India have overtaken them? Who will be the top batsmen? The top bowlers? The new heroes?

I’m happy to pick up the slack and make my brave predictions for the new year, and I hope we can get some discussion going.

Firstly, Australia will no longer be number one (This is of course referring to the ICC ranking system). We’ll probably get beaten in South Africa, although if Stuart Clark plays the result will be much closer than first thought. However, Australia should retain the Ashes.

England is a real mess at the moment. KP has resigned from the captaincy and there will be no Peter Moores. England is a shadow of the team that won the 2005 Ashes, although some of the heroes are still lingering around.

Flintoff is still a force to be reckoned with, and KP is a genuine superstar batsman who can by dynamite against any opposition. However, their bowling attack is pretty flimsy, as is their choice of Bell at number three. Bell has never made a test century unless another batsman has passed the mark before him, and while stylish, he just doesn’t have any steel in his spine.

India and South Africa will define excellence in 2009, and while India are looking as good as ever, South Africa have the advantage due to their finely balanced bowling attack and the coming of age of several of their players (Namely De Villiers and Amla).

India has a classy team, led by two fine fast bowlers in Zaheer and Ishant. Ishant has the mark of an all time great, and will continue to improve as long as he doesn’t break down due to his somewhat frail physique. Their problem is their aging veterans, who are approaching their use by date (Namely Dravid, Laxman, and Tendulkar, although the latter two players have a year or two left in them).

Dhoni has a lot of charisma, and leads the team well, but India will not be able to challenge South Africa unless they win important series away from home. If they can beat the South African team outside of their comfort zone, then they will be the top side.

In the meanwhile, they are probably one of the better limited overs sides around. And there is plenty of good young players coming through that could have a great affect on Indian cricket for the next few years. Look out for them at the 20/20 World Championship.

Sri Lanka have looked terrific since introducing Ajantha Mendis into their attack. While they will have to worry about how to replace Chaminda Vaas in the near future, they have a good team that can give any team a real shake on their day. They do tend to rely on Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakarra too much, but when they go strong, they will surprise. They could well provide India with some anxious moments if they tour there, especially if any turners make an appearance.

Pakistan, thankfully, are making some tours this year, including one to Australia. I’m glad they are getting some international cricket this year after a 2008 they’d rather forget. There will be no Mohammad Asif because of his idiotic drug taking, but Nasir Jamshed is a talented young opener, and they still have the services of Umar Gul, Sohail Tanvir and Yasir Arafat, not to mention the Britney Spears of cricket, Shoaib Ahktar.

New Zealand may bloom this year with their youthful team, but India is their first obstacle and their relatively pedestrian attack will struggle. Iain O’Brien bowled well last year but he is 232. A lot will fall onto Tim Southee, Kyle Mills, and the ever-reliable Daniel Vettori. Hopes will ride on the crop of young batsmen coming through (Jesse Ryder, Daniel Flynn and Ross Taylor) to find their feet this year. Keep your eyes on Flynn. He is a player who loves a scrap.

The West Indies had a long year, but the talent is there. Their fast bowling is a problem, but Jerome Taylor is still a damn good bowler. And Gayle, Sarwan, and the Shiv form a formidable batting trio. It is the rest of the team that needs to lift to match their depended-upon heroes. Another frustrating year looms.

Ah Bangladesh. The more things changed, the more things stayed the same. Any improvements were blown open by irresponsible batting, inadequate bowling, and a generally undisciplined approach, although they gave Sri Lanka a serious scare in their recent test series by reaching a 4th innings total in excess of 400. Sakib Al Hasan looks to be an allrounder of immense promise, let’s hope they nurture him well. Don’t be surprised if they pull off a shock in the World 20/20.

Alrighty, looking at the schedule, I’ll now make my predictions.

The top test run scorer of the year will be Virender Sehwag, although I reckon Michael Clarke will run him close this year. Both India and Australia have quite a few test series this year. Sehwag always scores heavily, but Clarke is a batsman that is on the improve every year and his maturity has been evident this summer via several fighting knocks.

The top wicket-taker will be Mitchell Johnson. Johnno had a good year in 2008 to finish equal second highest wicket taker, and I reckon he will enjoy the responsibility of being the number one. England will be facing an immensely improved and dangerous Johnson in England this year.

The top ODI run scorer will be, on a limb, either Gautum Gambhir or perhaps Kumar Sangakarra. Both are accomplished, and will face a glut of one dayers this year.

The top ODI bowler is harder, but I’ll go with Ajantha Mendis to elude second year syndrome and be a real force.

Give us your opinions and let’s get some lively discussion going!!!