India stumbles on loyalty

Since their impressive and strong showing against Australia during the 07-08 summer, India have faltered in consecutive test series and have generally looked frail. The question on everyone’s lips is why?

The selection table is my bet, though others may disagree. But it seems that India are in a period that Australia is currently in themselves, a time of transition in which the golden age must pave way for a new generation to have a influence on the game.

India have been blessed during the 90’s and 00’s with some of the finest batsmen in history; the defiant wall Rahul Dravid; sanguine Sourav Ganguly; aggressive Virender Sehwag; the steely resolved Australian killer VVS Laxman; and of course the greatest batsman since Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar.

In the bowling stocks they have been supported by two solid spinners in Anil Kumble and Harbajan Singh, and have unearthed several impressive young pacemen who will take the burden up from Zaheer Khan.

India’s problem has been their reliance on what is known as the ‘fab four’, numbers 3 to 6 in their batting order, the youngest of which, Laxman, is approaching 34. While I concede it is difficult to replace players of that calibre in any line-up, India need to look to consider several factors.

Firstly, only one of the fab four have reached a century since the tour of Australia; Dravid, who made 111 against South Africa in what was his only score above 50 for the series. Only Laxman made passed 50 in the Sri Lanka series, and he made two out of the three made by a middle order batsman from India.

Secondly, consider the young talent currently waiting in the wings. Rohit Sharma, S Badrinath, Suresh Raina, Manoj Tiwary and Virat Kohli are all making big impressions in the domestic scene. Badrinath’s non-selection is baffling, considering his dominant record in recent years.

Thirdly, look at India’s next opponent; Australia, currently the number one team in the world despite some protestations from South Africa and India to the contrary. While Australia may look weak following the multiple retirements over the years, they are still a class ahead of anyone else.

In the hotly contested (and intensely scrutinised) series during the Australian summer, only Laxman and Tendulkar scored centuries. Tendulkar clearly dominated in what was probably his final tour of Australia, and that is a good sign, but Dravid and Ganguly were shadows of their former selves.

India’s only bowling problem that I see is Kumble himself, who appears to have lost his venom. Whilst his record against Australia is good (108 wickets at 28.52), his recent form has been less convincing and his captaincy lacks imagination.

Harbajan showed encouraging signs against Sri Lanka and South Africa, and will be bowling on pitches likely to help his turn and bounce. Supporting him will likely be Zaheer, who hasn’t had a great deal of success against Australia, and the dangerous Inshant Sharma if fit. Kumble is the weak link.

India needs to take the plunge and pick new faces in their team ahead of this series, and the selectors need to show nerve to pick the players performing. An Indian team that I would like to see on the park would look like this:

V. Sehwag
G. Gambhir
VVS Laxman
S. Tendulkar
Rohit Sharma or Suresh Raina
S. Badrinath (Could also bat at 3 in place of Laxman)
MS Dhoni © (Sehwag is also a candidate for captaincy)
Harbajan Singh
Zaheer Khan
Either RP Singh, Munaf Patel, YK Pathan or Piyush Chawla
Inshant Sharma

This is of course my opinion, and opinions are like bums. Everyone’s got one.

A question of depth

I worry for English cricket sometimes. While I may not be English, I still hope for competitive Ashes series when we take on the Poms, as competitive as duels between India are getting these days.

Sadly England is always one step behind, and especially when they have injury troubles they are caught out even worse. Their lack of depth is sadly evident.

England is currently fielding a five man bowling attack (Including the much needed Flintoff), some of which have questionable claims for being there (Namely Broad, who lacks any venom, and Jimmy Anderson, whose inconsistency continues to baffle).

The stocks in county cricket aren’t too bad for bowling. Durham has a whole plethora of good fast bowlers at their disposal, including the still developing Liam Plunkett, Graham Onions, Western Australian Callum Thorp, and the oddly ignored Mark Davies, who consistently takes more wickets than his companions.

There is other solid talent hovering around such as South African convert Ryan McLaren, who has achieved great results for Kent as an all-rounder. Chris Woakes at Warwickshire has made a fine start to his career, and of course, looming over at Worcestershire, is the bowler that cemented his reputation in the 2005 Ashes, the speedy Simon Jones.

The batting ranks look thin. Ravi Bopara is churning out runs, but apart from him, no young batsmen, apart from maybe Samit Patel, are standing up to be counted. Bob Key has led Kent well but his returns have been inconsistent. Australian-born Paul Horton looks like the best bet to replace Andrew Strauss if the latter runs out of form though.

In an odd coincidence, two former English wicketkeepers in Matt Prior and Chris Read have had good seasons with the bat, with Prior amongst the top run makers so far this year and Read leading the high flying Nottinghamshire with gusto.

That hole could be fatal if some players start to lose form and the replacements just aren’t up to scratch. The comparison England has to teams like India and Australia is that while England may have good talent on the field, they don’t have a multitude of players waiting in the wings.

Australia’s depth borders on the ridiculous. Any other nation would cry out for the luxury of having Brad Hodge, David Hussey, Chris Rogers and Ashley Noffke waiting in the wings, not to mention young talent of the quality of Shaun Marsh, Luke Pomersbach and Ben Hilfenhaus. That’s the vital strength of Australian cricket. While some nations may have equal or more talented players, Australia has continued to churn them out.

India is beginning to show signs of this as well, already having an impressive youth set up and a number of young players showing the ability to eventually take over from an aging and transitional Indian side that will soon have to move on Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly, V.V.S Laxman, and that legendary figure himself, Tendulkar.

England has been accused of resting on its laurels during a time it could have dramatically raised its stock following the epic streak of 2004 and 2005, when it laid claim to being at the top of world cricket. Instead of capitalising, England got sloppy and it has cost them their prestige and a place at the top of the pecking order, now fought over between India, Sri Lanka, South Africa and Australia.

A good sit down to thrash out why they have not achieved what seemed possible all those years ago is recommended. Maybe they should look to adapting some Australian development models, or even reduce the number of county teams to encourage competitiveness.

One thing on I’d like to point out though is that talent will not be coming through if county cricket continues to allow Kolpak players into the competition. Look at Leicestershire and Northamptonshire, you could form another South African side with the numbers those teams have.

A new (and vastly unexpected) change of direction

English cricket is set to travel into a brave new world following the resignations of Michael Vaughan and Paul Collingwood, and then the appointment of tyro Kevin Pietersen as the next English captain over the three cricket formats.

The Vaughan era was one of sudden prosperity and sudden decline. Following every Englishman’s dream of retrieving the Ashes (Some of the younger generation had never seen it out of Australian hands before then) in 2005, England have grown steadily worse, with poor selections, lackluster performances and the declining quality in county cricket.

One of the major reasons for this decline was Vaughan’s knee injury, taking him out of action for a good 18 months and leaving England without his steely determination and sharp tactical brain. Andrew Flintoff did almost a parallel of Ian Botham during his captaincy reign, having little success. And there was Marcus Trescothick and Andrew Strauss given a try as well.

Another key factor was the loss of Simon Jones, who seemed on the point of international explosion when he exposed flaws in the Australian batting lineup via his sharp reverse swing. He has not played a single international match since that Ashes series, and despite superb form this season, has not been reselected in the England team.

Gradually the English team lost its direction and its players performed erratically, even against weaker nations. Vaughan returned in late 2006, but was half the player he used to be. He re-inherited a team that was demoralized following an Ashes whitewash and they were soon beaten at home by India in 2007 and now South Africa in 2008. The guile of Vaughan had lost its aura.

To be fair to Vaughan, England has been woeful. With the exception of Kevin Pietersen, they have been found wanting against strong teams. Ian Bell, for example, who has a massive amount of talent, seems to go missing when the pressure is on, and he has never scored a century unless someone has got there before him.

Vaughan’s decline as a player has been sad to watch, as he is an extremely graceful batsman to watch when on song. The runs began to dry up as his injury prevented him from having the same command of his strokeplay, and the tricks began to dry up as his team began to falter against stronger opposition.

This may now change with KP’s appointment, one that has been met across the cricket world with equal parts skepticism and enthusiasm.

Logically KP was the only choice to replace Vaughan and Collingwood. He is the one batsman who is a certainty to play across all formats and he is the only player with a forceful enough personality to take on the job. While Strauss and Alastair Cook were considered, Cook is probably too young for the job and Strauss is no certainty over all the formats.

Pietersen is still under 30 and has proven himself unable to be intimidated by big name opponents such as South Africa and Australia. While we are yet to see if he has any tactical nous that is required when matching it with a Ponting or a Jayawardene, he certainly has the determination that made is previous skipper popular and respected.

His batting will hopefully be unaffected, and knowing Pietersen it may bring the best out in him. He has shown he can lift his game against the stronger opponents; hopefully he can inspire his more insipid teammates to do the same.

The first test is to see whether he can rally his troops to win the final test in order to win some pride back. Then comes a blitz of test series against India, the West Indies, Sri Lanka and finally Australia, only the Windies of those are considered a weaker team.

KP faces a tough trot in the battle to establish himself as England’s captain, and it will take his best to inspire his team to the kind of success that cemented Vaughan’s reputation as the most successful English skipper.

Where to from here?

During the last few months, cricket has been transformed as the old world shifted its axis from the Anglo-centric basis to the monopolies of India, in which millions of dollars, rupees or rand are flowing into the coffers of the ICC.

The BCCI is now the strongest board amongst the major nations, and thus is at the forefront of the ICC decision-making committee. It has copped flak for its lack of action over Zimbabwe for what appears to be political reasons, but it changed the face of cricket with the introduction of the IPL.

The BCCI’s rise to power was always going to happen, whether old world administrators liked it or not. A nation of a billion, developing itself after colonial rule and colonial influences, was always going to reach a stage of being strong enough to throw its weight around.

There lies a problem within that. The BCCI needs to make sure it uses its power responsibly and not exploit it over the old guard of England and Australia, which previously had the power, and probably for too long, falling into complacency in some areas.

The response amongst the media has been mixed. Most Indian fans see any bashing of their board as either ‘racism’ or the inability of the old guard to adjust to a new world. The latter is probably true, although that has not stopped some from suggesting it is India plus the Asian block vs the rest.

The problems have arisen over the BCCI’s stance on some issues which have divided the cricket community; namely Zimbabwe and the prevalence of 20/20.

On Zimbabwe, India and the Asian block (Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh) have supported the right for Zimbabwe to retain full member status despite having not played tests since 2005. The issue goes deeper than that, and it brings into perspective the thorny issue of politics and sport.

Zimbabwe’s cricket at grass roots level is in tatters. The domestic competition is reduced in stature and a great majority of the country’s best cricketers no longer play there anymore, with further rumblings within the last few months of players being refused permission to play in Europe and make more money.

The investigation into the board’s finances turned up serious irregularities into where the ICC’s money was going, not to the grassroots cricket but somewhere else. Peter Chingoka, the country’s cricket chairman, has proven himself no more than a bully boy, no more concerned with the cricketers than he is with adding a new extension to his mansion.

In return for keeping Zimbabwe floating in the top level of cricket, Zimbabwe are firmly in India’s corner when India require an issue that will be divisive of the major powers. It is frustrating that Zimbabwe is allowed to stay at the top level when (a) the team clearly isn’t good enough and (b) the grassroots level of cricket is not seeing the money the ICC shovels into the country’s cricket association.

Some have said that politics and sport should not mix with this issue, but the fact is that Zimbabwe is allowed to stay at the top level PURELY for political reasons. The BCCI recently cancelled a tour to Zimbabwe claiming it was not marketable. People should realise that they haven’t acted as so to keep Zimbabwean cricket healthy.

As a historical example, let me bring into the picture the South African ban from 1970 to 1992. This ban was based purely on that Government’s policy of apartheid, and all the major test playing nations of the time agreed to ban the South Africans from touring and refused invitations. In time, the Government changed and the cricket board changed for the better.

How is that not the same case here? A cricket board with fingers in plenty of pies and with extremely close ties to a dictator who has destroyed a country that used to be called ‘the bread basket of Africa’. A difference maybe is that Zimbabwean cricket is struggling, but will that not continue if the country’s board remains in power?

Away from Zimbabwe, the other major divisive issue is that of 20/20, which is quickly replacing one day cricket as the preferred short version of cricket. Whilst invented in England, India has taken to the game and in turn made it far more marketable and available to a wider audience.

The IPL was the BCCI’s brainchild to show off its organisational capabilities, its ability to lure to level talent, and expose the level of money it is able to produce for the game. It was a raging success, with competitive cricket and ultimate victory to a team that was initially unfancied, but brilliantly led by the genius that is Shane Warne.

The ECB, however, have been left behind as it struggles to maintain its prominence in the new order of cricket. While Australia and South Africa have leapt on the BCCI wagon, England continues to bluster around and make mistake after mistake. The Champion’s League was set to involve the top 20/20 teams from around the world, but the BCCI-endorsed tournament, set to appear in September, will not feature any county teams.

The massive feature of 20/20 is encouraging on many fronts, but my worry is that it may damage test cricket. India showed great problems readapting to test cricket against Sri Lanka recently and their batsmen were out at times when restraint was needed. Not to take anything from Sri Lanka’s bowlers, but India’s batsmen at times showed a lack of restraint.

On a closing note, may I point out (I’m aware this may seem a little biased) that as the 20/20 world cup is set to appear in India next, and the Asian countries are set to host the World Cup in 2011, Australia and New Zealand have not hosted a major cricket tournament (Not even a Champion’s Trophy) since the World Cup in 1992. Although the countries are set to host the World Cup in 2015, this is only because their bid, which was initially the only one presented, was usurped at the last minute by a decision to award the tournament to the Asian Block for the third time.

Anyone smell a rat there?

Under threat

Be prepared people, it looks like the Champion’s Trophy of 2008 may be a no show.

With the tournament scheduled for later in the year, and with the country having already lost the right to host World Number One side Australia for a tour there, Pakistan is no in trouble of losing the prestigious ICC tournament due to security concerns.

Andrew Symonds, the Australian all-rounder, has made it clear he will not go to Pakistan despite fellow Australians Shane Watson and Nathan Hauritz confirming their availability.

And New Zealand may not even send a full strength side, with reports from New Zealand Player’s Association executive manager Heath Mills that several players approached him with a flat refusal to tour the troubled country.

A decision is set to be reached on the issue sometime this week, with a review of an independent security consultant to come under close scrutiny.

The ICC’s stance has not been fully confirmed, although they have expressed doubts over the abilities of either Pakistan or its original reserve venue, Sri Lanka, to control recent problems.

Pakistan desperately needs this tournament in order for its cricket to survive. Amid another drugs controversy involving Mohammad Asif, the exploits of Shoaib Ahktar, and the cancellation and rescheduling of the Australian tour, this is one they really need.

More to follow……

Ajantha Mendis- A new phenomenon

The retirement of Shane Warne left a large hole in the cricket world, with the greatest spinner of all time no longer affecting the game and delighting crowds with his immaculate control and big turn.

Around the world, the search for spinners to replace the old guard that is passing is underway. Murali is 36 and injuries are beginning to mute his effectiveness. Anil Kumble is 38 this year and not far away from retirement.

Dan Vettori has plenty of years left but is not as exciting as other spinners across the world, such as Monty Panesar, who has a decade worth of service still in him for England. And there is currently no other spinner in world cricket really creating a stir. Until now.

That man is Ajantha Mendis, Sri Lanka’s newest spin sensation earmarked as the new ‘mystery’ spinner, continuing a line from Johnny Gleeson all the way back to Jack Iverson, the original ‘mystery’ bowler.

Mendis has just shocked out India in the Asia Cup Final, cementing a win that Sanath Jayasuria set up with the phenomenal figures of 6/13. India, one of the most powerful teams in the world, couldn’t even make it to 200.

Let’s put these figures into context now. Firstly, spinners are usually subject to a great deal of punishment in one day cricket, with notable exceptions of course (Murali and Saqlain Mushtaq spring to mind).

Secondly, he was playing against India, renowned across the world as the best players of spin bowling. Warne and Murali, the best spinners of this era, cannot average under 30 against them in test cricket, and their ODI records against them weren’t much better.

Thirdly, the Asia Cup has produced featherbed pitches that have been in extraordinary favour of batsmen. 10 innings of 300 or more featured during the tournament, some of those coming in the same match. Mendis took 17 wickets in 5 games, six more than the more accomplished Murali.

Finally, he was introduced in the ninth over of the Indian innings. Bowling to Virender Sehwag, who had dominated the proceedings with his 60, Mendis had him stumped off his second ball, then bowled danger man Yuvraj two balls later for a duck.

He bowled a good length that left the batsman unsure whether to come forward or back (A tactic that made fast bowler Glenn McGrath legendary), then using his variation and a straight ball as a stock delivery, he ran through the rest of the team. Three of the six victims were bowled, beaten by the variation.

Mendis had already been making shockwaves in the Sri Lankan domestic scene, and his first class record is simply bemusing. From 19 matches he has a hardly believable 111 wickets, with a strike rate 32.9 and a ridiculous average of 14.54. Murali’s strike rate is 48, and his average 19.06. Still brilliant figures, but they pale in comparison to Mendis.

Figures like his have not been seen since the golden age of cricket and before, when pitches were uncovered and a bowler had everything in his favour, in this day and age, with the game favouring batsman, they are utterly amazing.

The test now for the young Sri Lankan is to not only maintain his sense of mystery, but to crack the Sri Lankan test team, dominated by that man Murali. His record suggests he could be the man that may challenge Warne and Murali’s positions at the top of the spinning tree.

This is the bowler cricket has been crying out for to lead spin into a new era. I truly hope he can establish himself now and challenge world cricket for his place amongst the greats.

To see his peformance in the Asia Cup final, click the link here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3iyoS0S1tU

SOS: Son of Swampy

A new talent was unleashed on the world a few days ago, and after a fabulous ODI debut, it seems he may have the ability to go all the way at the top level.

That talent is Shaun Marsh, son of renowned Australian stonewaller Geoff Marsh, who played for Australia from 1985 to 1992. His nickname around WA and in the Australian team is SOS: Son of Swampy.

Marsh has been playing first class cricket for a few years now, and only recently has his name become better known. He was a bright talent when first spotted all those years ago, when he charmed then retiring captain Steve Waugh with his maiden first class century.

He became, however, something of an enigma over the next few seasons, unable to hold a secure place in the side and inconsistent in the first class arena. Then along came Tom Moody.

In the 07-08 domestic season, he blossomed as a class batsman. In the Pura Cup, he managed 663 runs from the difficult no.3 position at the healthy average of 60.27. In the Ford Ranger Cup he was his state’s leading run scorer with 318 runs at 39.75. In the frenzied 20/20 competition, he was devastating, scoring 290 runs at the superb average of 58.
It was a sign of things to come for the junior Swampy.

The Chennai Superkings, in arguably the most genius purchases of the comp, bought Marsh and powerful teammate Luke Pomersbach for very little and from there Marsh proceeded to lead his team’s charge towards the final, winning the coveted Orange Cap for highest run scorer with his 616 runs at 68.44. More significantly, he was 83 runs clear of Gautum Gambhir, who had played three more games.

That tournament launched his name. It seemed he had come out of nowhere and dominated a competition with some of the finest international cricketers playing with and against him. Now he has excelled on his ODI debut to score 81, the second highest score by an Australian on ODI debut.

For those who saw him when he first started all those years ago, would they ever have doubted he would reach this peak?