AB de Villiers’ latest Twenty20 onslaught shows he’s currently the most nerveless all-round hitter of a cricket ball around

Abhishek Purohit02-May-2013There are hitters. There are finishers. There are sloggers. And there are, as Brad Hodge says, “cultured sloggers,” such as AB de Villiers, who have taken Twenty20 batting to another level. After his latest assault on Ashok Dinda tonight, “surreal slogger” is more like it. It wasn’t the fact that de Villiers took 26 runs off the Dinda over. It was the ridiculous regularity with which he kept coming up with different strokes for different deliveries and kept executing them.Sample these. Very wide ball slog-swept over deep midwicket. Wide ball carted straight over the bowler. Short slower ball smashed flat over long-off. Full delivery reverse-swept to fine third man. Length ball scooped from outside off over short fine leg. Forget Dinda. Last IPL season, de Villiers did the same to Dale Steyn, the highlight being a near-yorker on middle stump lofted over extra cover for six.It is very well to say that T20 frees the batsman from the bother of having to guard his wicket and in a way, forces him to innovate with the pressing need to score more all the time. While that means a great bowler like Steyn can easily have an off day in the format, it does not explain the almost eerie calm with which de Villiers’ scoops a fast bowler over short fine leg.This is an incredibly difficult shot to execute, even without the fear that you can get out. And there is also the risk of injuring yourself badly. Brendon McCullum did it with success against the extreme pace of Shaun Tait in 2010, and has said he knew he could have had his jaw smashed, but went for it anyway., as he did not think he could have scored in front of square.For many batsmen, the scoop is an option to break free. Many bend their knees and go across with clear desperation in their eyes, hoping to connect and avoid getting hit. De Villiers tries this shot regularly, and he makes it appear as normal as if he were going for a cover drive. There is absolutely no desperation about him, neither in expression nor in movement.And then the reverse sweep to the fast bowler. The way he turned Dinda miles clear of short third man, he might as well have been glancing one off his pads past short fine leg. These are no longer innovations for de Villiers, or ploys to unsettle a bowler. They are as normal a part of his arsenal as orthodox cricketing shots, of which he has plenty as well.Chris Gayle bulldozes attacks with sheer presence and reach, but he has his hitting zones marked out. Kieron Pollard will go hard and straight. Bowlers can attempt to deny these batsmen what they prefer. How does one attempt to control de Villiers, whose range is 360 degrees?The first time he was involved in a one-over eliminator scenario, against Delhi Daredevils, he and Gayle took singles off the first three balls. De Villiers couldn’t connect with the fourth. No problem. He sent the last two over deep midwicket for six.The absence of the need to guard his wicket would have been of little help at that moment. It is a combination of extraordinary skill, pinpoint execution and unbelievable clarity of mind that enables de Villiers to get away with he does. He has got to be the most nerveless all-round hitter of a cricket ball at the moment.

From legalised player dissent to big-screen reviews, international umpires are now on a hiding to nothing but humiliation

Brydon Coverdale at Chester-le-Street11-Aug-2013The DRS is meant to help umpires, not humiliate them. But Tony Hill was humiliated on the third morning at Chester-le-Street. There can be no other word for it. When Stuart Broad rapped Ryan Harris on the pads dead in front, Hill declined the appeal. Presumably, he felt Harris may have nicked the ball. It was not a ridiculous supposition, for the ball had struck both pads, creating two noises. Whatever the case, Hill felt there was doubt and gave the benefit of it to the batsman, as Test umpires have done for 135 years.England asked for a review, as is their right under the DRS. The replays showed that Hill had erred; Harris was plumb lbw. The process played out on the big screen at the ground. Ripples of laughter went around as Hill’s mistake was not only shown but magnified, replayed, every angle leaving him further exposed to ridicule. The final indignity came when the third umpire relayed the decision to Hill, who raised his finger to an empty pitch. The players had seen enough on the big screen and were halfway inside.It was impossible not to sympathise with Hill, who trudged off with all the haste and enthusiasm of a newly-dismissed Shane Watson or Jonathan Trott. He looked sapped of all confidence. There is no avoiding the fact that Hill’s call was wrong, and that the final outcome was correct. But the process left him embarrassed and must surely have compounded the existing doubts in his mind. How is that good for cricket, or for this match, or for Hill? How does that help anyone?”Throughout my career I never had a batsman dispute my decision,” Dickie Bird said in 2010. That may be a slight embellishment, or perhaps it’s true, but one thing is certain: Bird was never made to look a fool. Bird was a renowned “not-outer”. If in doubt, say not out. That’s what Hill did here. But in Bird’s day, what the umpire said was final. Had he given this same decision – and he would’ve done countless times over the years – the bowler might have felt aggrieved, the viewers curious, but all would have moved on.Nobody remembers the right calls, even the controversial ones. Kevin Pietersen’s caught-behind at Old Trafford will be recalled for Pietersen’s rudely-requested review and reluctance to accept the outcome, not for Hill’s correct decision to trust his ears in the first place. Or Australia’s unsuccessful review when Harris rapped Trott on the pads. Hawk Eye predicted the ball would have clipped leg stump on an “umpire’s call” margin. Rightly, Hill had given Trott the benefit of the doubt.Of course, Hill has made mistakes. He is human. Every umpire in this series has erred. Every umpire in every series throughout history has probably erred. Dickie Bird erred. David Shepherd erred. Tony Crafter erred. But commentators did not forensically dissect every aspect of a decision. That’s out, they said. Not, that’s out unless he hit it, and let’s see if he did, and unless it pitched outside leg, and let’s see if it did, and unless it was sliding down leg, and let’s see if it was.

The disdain with which Kevin Pietersen called for a review in the third Test was downright contemptible. Where was his respect for the umpire or for the game?Daryl Harper on the demands of the modern umpire

But technology creates unrealistic expectations. Mistakes are unjustly magnified, wrongly made to appear proof of complete incompetence. How could an umpire get wrong? That decision that we’ve just seen six times in slow-motion from four angles and with the help of technology? What a buffoon!”The DRS has certainly increased the pressure on umpires to get virtually everything right,” former Test umpire Daryl Harper told ESPNcricinfo on Sunday. “The high performance experts would tell you that an umpire must put a poor decision out of his mind and focus wholly on the next ball. Sure, it sounds easy enough. I haven’t known a single umpire who can do it.”In the eighties, the general television coverage of cricket was very basic. In the nineties, the quality of technology improved, but even then, decisions were not scrutinised to the degree that we see today. It was common practice to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt to any ball that was drifting towards the leg stump.”After the turn of the century, umpires made their lbw decisions, only to see replays on the big screen at the ground that suggested that the decision was wrong, before the batsman had even left the field. It isn’t a good feeling and definitely gnaws away at one’s confidence. After seeing so many replays of balls clipping leg stump in particular, umpires began to widen the target and gamble more often on that count.”And in modern times, our administrators have now legalised dissent. The disdain with which Kevin Pietersen called for a review in the third Test was downright contemptible. Where was his respect for the umpire or for the game? Having been told to go a second time after the review, how did he possibly escape a sanction for his parting words? I can lip read as well as anyone.”All of these factors can gradually erode the confidence of an umpire. An umpire like Hill, who by the ICC’s judgement is one of the best 12 in the world, a man who has made enough good decisions to get himself here, is made to look foolish. Yes, umpires choose this well-paid career. Yes, they accept the pressure that goes with it. But the expectations of players and viewers must remain realistic.Umpires are not machines. They are men, and men who do their job in increasingly trying circumstances. Once, they were inconspicuous, but never infallible. They never will be, yet cricket has reached a point where decisions and umpires and reviews and technology the story. It is an unhealthy situation for any sport, and it breeds self-doubt in men whose very job relies on backing their judgement.”With this respect for officials being stripped back to the bone, I have great sympathy for my former colleagues who are on a hiding to nothing,” Harper said. “Our administrators have snatched at the television dollars and sold the officials up the river without a paddle. As often as American sports are unfairly maligned, Major League Baseball allows its officials to make decisions, good and not so good. Replays of missed calls are shown but life goes on.”Life will go on for Tony Hill, and Aleem Dar, and Kumar Dharmasena, and Marais Erasmus. They have all made mistakes in this series. Some have been howlers. But none deserve ridicule. No official should have to raise the finger to an empty pitch. Respect must return. And unless it does, who’d be a Test umpire anymore?

James Anderson has been one of the most skilful bowlers of the modern age, but when George Bailey thrashed 28 off one over it was a reminder that Australia has not always been kind to him

Jarrod Kimber16-Dec-2013At the top of his mark at Trent Bridge, there was a broken man. Jimmy Anderson had bowled and bowled and bowled, and somehow Australia still hadn’t lost. There seemed to be a limp, but maybe you just expected one. Australia failed to pass 300, but he bowled more than 50 overs in the match. As Haddin and Pattinson inched Australia to victory, he was brought back.His physical demeanor was more like a man who had just completed 10 straight Tests, not someone in the first of ten. He took the wicket of Haddin, and won the game. It was his tenth wicket of the game. He beat Australia on his own.Since then, he’s taken 19 wickets at 47. Since then, across both series, England are 3-2 down.

****

****

Jimmy Anderson is no Dale Steyn. Dale Steyn fans will tell you about this for hours on end. As if Anderson should be ashamed of any good press he gets that isn’t lavished on Steyn. Dale Steyn is a god, a myth, created from a tree struck by lightning and found in a crater in small town America. Anderson is a skilful, smart bowler. There have few men ever in the entire history of our planet as good as Dale Steyn; Anderson is not one of them.Anderson is, however, a supreme mover of the cricket ball.Pictures of his wrist position should be X-rated. When he gets the ball to swing, it moves as if operated by a remote control. And he can bowl a ball so good that only the off stump can stop it.The ball goes where he wants it, and when he is at his absolute best, he can move the batsmen around the crease as well. When Robin Peterson was sent out at No 3 for South Africa in the Champions Trophy semi-final, Jimmy Anderson put on a clinic of swing bowling.Coming around the wicket to the left-handed Peterson, he bowled four straight outswingers to him. A fair skill in itself. But each was gloriously out of reach. All within a few inches of each other. The length and movement meant Peterson could only leave them. Peterson edged towards each ball, so while he started batting on leg stump, he ended up on off stump. The moment he was in front of the stumps, from around the wicket the wicket Anderson swung the ball the other way, Peterson was out lbw.That’s not good swing bowling, that’s a supervillain.

****

****

Anderson had to fight his way in. He’s not built like a fast bowler. He’s built like a greyhound. He’s not massively tall, he doesn’t have the fast bowler’s big behind, and his shoulders are like that of any mortal.His action is also unconventional. He doesn’t actually watch the ball. His head almost disappears. He’s partly front on, not fully front on or fully side on. His front foot goes off on a random angle like it is ignoring the delivery. He shouldn’t really work.But he was fast, and had an outswinger. So he made it to the top level. That is enough to take some wickets, but pace isn’t always enough unless you’re scarily quick. And top batsmen can handle consistent outswing, and sometimes the ball doesn’t swing.It was Troy Cooley who tried to fix Jimmy Anderson. The man who helped turn the ’05 bowling attack into a machine. But Cooley’s ways go in both directions. Mitchell Johnson produced his best deliveries under Cooley, but also lost his way. Kabir Ali never made it under Cooley despite blatantly obvious natural talent. And for Jimmy Anderson, his time with Cooley went very wrong.With Anderson, any bowling coach could see the flaws. Some will try and fix them, some will suggest he’s doing well even with them. Cooley tried to fix them. They were afraid Anderson would end up with stress fractures in his back. They changed his action – and Anderson ended with stress fractures in his back.It’s not that surprising that the scientific method didn’t work for him. Even now, Anderson’s run up is not done with a tape measure. It’s the same run up he has had since he was a 15 year old back in Burnley. When marking it, he starts midway between the crease and then leaps his first step, walks his next 13, and then leaps his last one. It’s about as unscientific as anything in Team England, it’s the opposite of eating kale or psychological tests.

****

****

At home, Anderson can monster teams. Swing bowlers from other countries drool when they think about England; Anderson had the good fortune to be born there. Whatever it is about the climate that makes the ball swing, it’s certainly helped him.He was pretty good when he had an outswinger, but a few years in he had a killer inswinger as well. Around this time he also mastered the art of hitting the seam when he needed too. That makes you a pretty good bowler on bowler-friendly wickets.But in recent years he’s been as good in the UAE and India. A series England lost, and one they won from behind. For a swing bowler to succeed in India or the UAE, that’s not about seam up and get it in the right areas, that’s bowling intelligence. The ability to learn new tricks, and things that will work on unresponsive pitches, is how Anderson helped England get to number one.

When he was called the most skilful fast bowler on earth, the Steyn fans took great fun in comparing the records of him and Anderson. But Steyn is the best fast bowler on earth, by a distance. Anderson is the most skilful.

Anderson has even learnt from other bowlers who aren’t as good as Dale Steyn. From Stuart Clark and Mohammad Asif, he learnt the wobble ball. A ball that misbehaves because even the bowler is not sure what it is going to do. Perfect for flat pitches and boring interludes. The sort of ball that bad bowlers deliver by mistake.From Zaheer Khan, he has learnt that sometimes on flat pitches you need to bowl faster, not slower. The modern wisdom is to bowl within yourself, with the occasional quicker ball. But Zaheer was the master of sometimes bowling as fast as his body would allow just to make something happen. For both of them, it often does.Zaheer also bowled reverse swing. Anderson spent time watching him doing that as well. Then he learned the art himself, even adding the hide-the-ball style that Zaheer and many sub-continental masters had used before. It means that the outswing bowler can wobble one off a flat pitch, or reverse one to cause damage. He has come a long way from the young kid who just swing it away for a few overs.When he was called the most skilful fast bowler on earth, the Steyn fans took great fun in comparing the records of him and Anderson. But Steyn is the best fast bowler on earth, by a distance. Anderson is the most skilful. One is superman, and is enhanced by the earth’s yellow sun. The other is Batman, flawed but really clever with endless resources that he uses to shield himself from the fact he’s not an alien with endless power.

****

****

There is a theory that in Anderson can’t bowl in Australia. Reputations are hard to change. And the Ashes of 2006-7 left lasting impressions for many Australians. That was a series where Anderson found five wickets at over 80 apiece. Somehow it seemed worse than those figures suggest. They next time he stepped on a plane headed for Australia he must have paused a bit himself.In 2010-11, he took 24 wickets at 26. There were no five-wicket hauls, although with Australian wickets falling so fast, it was hard for him to collect them all. He just spearheaded an attack, that was mostly without Broad, into completely and utterly smashing Australia consistently.The series was 0-0 on that morning of Adelaide. The run out of Simon Katich was annoying, but it shouldn’t have meant the end of all happiness for Australia. Jimmy Anderson did. He dragged Ponting into playing the wrong shot at the wrong ball. He tempted Clarke into playing a stupid shot at a beautiful swinging ball. And he allowed Watson to find gully with a normal Watson drive. He only took one more wicket that innings, and two more in the second innings, but that start to the game was something Australia could not recover from.In Melbourne, after England’s shock loss in Perth, he took four wickets in Australia’s series-losing 98 on Boxing Day. The wickets of Clarke, Hussey, Smith and Johnson: not a tail-ender between them. Any chance of a comeback, or even a less than embarrassing total, was gone with one Anderson spell.But that was by far Anderson’s best against Australia, home or away. During 2009 his bowling was mute, only 12 wickets. His last Ashes had the glorious start at Trent Bridge, but England won the series with him contributing only an occasional really good spell. And this one, well, it’s been better than 2006-7, but that’s about it.The Australians and Anderson don’t like each other. Anderson has enjoyed the good times over the Aussies, and his hand-over-mouth sledging technique gets to them. The ‘broken f*cken arm’ comment shouldn’t be looked at as a one-time thing. There is almost no time when Anderson is out on the ground when he isn’t having words with someone.The Australians probably enjoy it; they just enjoy it more when they’re winning. As Anderson does.

****

****

If Anderson were to retire now, which is unlikely given his age of 31, he would retire with a bowling average of 30. It seems very high for a bowler who at times has beheaded Michael Clarke’s off stumps with balls that were as deadly as anything ever bowled.Like his team, he is a player with a decent record which does not really convey how good he could be at his best. Like his team, he’s a bit flawed, but gets through it through bloody-mindedness and determination. Like his team, he was skilful and smart.Like his team, he looks tired.It would be stupid to write off England and Anderson right now. With South Africa having a great team, and India a team of greats, England still rose to the top of the world. hey did it with a spearhead with an average average, a splayed front foot and a head that yanks the wrong way. They did it when no one really expected England to be as good as they were, and no one really expected Anderson to do as much as he has.James Anderson has more Test wickets than every English cricketer other than Ian Botham. From the same amount of Tests, he has more than Willis. That skinny frame and dodgy action has got him there. There is something special about him. Even if he did have the misfortune to be more mortal than Botham or Steyn.Anderson, and England, can come back. If not now, then one day.

****

****

Anderson bowled a quality delivery to Chris Rogers that went off the edge towards Prior and Cook. Prior never moved. Cook jumped violently but couldn’t hold on. Anderson went back to his mark as the catch was trickling slowly behind them. Australia already had a big lead for no wickets, Broad was off the ground, the birds were gathering above England’s heads waiting for them to fall over.Anderson should have just kept walking past his mark and into the member’s bar.Instead he kept bowling, 19 overs in all. His first 18 went for 77. His 19th conceded 28.

****

Plays of the Day from the first ODI between South Africa and India in Johannesburg

Firdose Moonda at the Wanderers05-Dec-2013The billiards table
When Quinton de Kock scored the series’ first boundary, a crisp flick off the pads through midwicket, the ball raced across the Wanderers outfield so quickly that the umpire had barely turned to look where it had gone when it crossed the boundary. Fast outfields are not uncommon in South Africa but considering the amount of rain that has been around Johannesburg, it was a credit to the groundstaff that they prepared a carpet so smooth.The tee-off
De Kock played his entire innings with the freedom of youth, so when the first free-hit came with him on 92, there was a sense he would go big. Mohit Sharma bowled an innocuous length ball, and de Kock stood solidly, giving himself a firm base with his legs parted just enough to provide a platform for his body to swivel on. With a swing that would make the likes of Ernie Els proud, he struck the ball over long-on, high and hard enough for it go for six.The bad timing
One of the worst times to give a batsman a send-off is after he’s scored a century. De Kock’s aggressive knock came to an end on 135, when he handed Virat Kohli a simple return catch in his follow-through, and the bowler was so delighted with the scalp that he told the batsman where the dressing room was with his finger. De Kock walked in that direction but it was Kohli who looked silly.The shot
It appeared as though almost every delivery AB de Villiers made contact with found the boundary. His best came at the end, when India would have wanted nothing more than to get off the field. Mohit Sharma bowled full and de Villiers made room by backing away and sliced over point. The ball travelled flat and fast, not a typical slog but a calculated one that would have left India wondering how to stop the South African captain.The run
There were many more eye-catching runs scored than the ones Rohit Sharma got via a leading edge that beat the cover fielder. It was an unsure stroke from a man struggling to cope with Dale Steyn’s pace and swing, but the runs were significant. They were Rohit’s first after facing 16 deliveries from Steyn, all full and swinging away from the right-hander. They were also the first runs Steyn conceded in an opening spell laced with venom.The wicket
Ryan McLaren’s place in the South African side was considered to be in doubt because of Jacques Kallis’ comeback, but he proved his value with two wickets in his third over. His second victim was Yuvraj Singh, who was struck by a bouncer first ball before receiving a fuller delivery as a follow up. Yuvraj played all around the delivery and the ball brushed the pad before hitting the stumps, sending the bails flying and etching McLaren’s name on the team sheet for matches to come.The run-out
With South Africa’s bowlers proving difficult to handle, the last thing India wanted was to lose a wicket to their fielders. Rohit, however, was too slow to respond to a call for a single from Suresh Raina, who had pushed the ball gently towards cover and set off immediately. Rohit’s hesitation gave David Miller enough time to sprint in from cover, and as he dived he released the ball under arm to hit the stumps direct with the batsman short of his crease.

Plays of the day from the third and final T20 international at Stadium Australia

Brydon Coverdale02-Feb-2014Finish of the day
There are plenty of contenders but Jade Dernbach has made a late claim for the title of England’s worst tourist on this three-month trip. As a Twenty20 specialist who bats at No.11, it would be reasonable to expect Dernbach to pick up a few wickets or, failing that, to keep the runs tight. Nope. Dernbach’s first two games of the series brought 1 for 50 and 0 for 42; in this game he was looking better with 0 for 23 from three. Then Stuart Broad asked him to bowl the final over. Nearly everything Dernbach delivered was in the slot for George Bailey, who plundered 26. It meant he finished the tour with 1 for 141 from 11 overs at an economy rate of 12.81. As Kerry O’Keeffe tweeted: “If Jade Dernbach is bowling at the death you normally live.”Promotion of the day
Ben Cutting is primarily a bowler but is also renowned as a clean hitter of the ball and Bailey decided to use him as a pinch hitter during the Australia innings. Sent in at No. 4, which meant a demotion for Bailey and Brad Hodge, Cutting showed what he can do, hitting three sixes as he motored along to 29 from 16 balls. It was a gamble that paid off pretty well for the Australians.Delay of the day
The other matches in this series have started at 7.35pm but this one didn’t get under way until 7.40pm. The reason appeared to be that, with the TV ratings season having just started, Channel Nine were keen for as much air time as possible for the new series of , which the TV guide listed as finishing at the very specific time of 7.38pm. For the record, is not a reality show about finding Australia’s next Test opening batsman.Veteran of the day
Brad Hodge was not quite in the thick of the action as much as he was in the field during his comeback match in Melbourne, but this time he at least got to bat. There was a one, a two and an inside edge for four before he was out hooking for 7 off 7 balls from 7 minutes. On the slot machines in Las Vegas, 777 indicates you’ve hit the jackpot and for Hodge, simply getting the call from national selector John Inverarity for this series provided much the same feeling.

The Sydney Test could be viewed as a fresh start for England at the beginning of a new year, but the build up has not inspired confidence and it will take a colossal turnaround to end with a victory

George Dobell in Sydney02-Jan-20140:00

ZaltZone: I’m waiting by the phone, call me

Paul Downton could be forgiven for wondering what he had walked into as he started his new job on Thursday.Downton has just assumed the role of managing director of England cricket and made his first appearance at an England net session at the Sydney Cricket Ground the day before the fifth Test. Observing from the back, talking to head selector James Whitaker, Downton kept his thoughts to himself, but cannot have been overly impressed by what he saw.He might interpret recent events in a positive manner. He might conclude that, unlike David Moyes a few months ago, he is not inheriting a team in which there are unrealistic hopes or expectations. He might conclude that the only way is up. But he will also have seen how much work he has in front of him.He would have seen Jonny Bairstow, who will retain his place as England wicketkeeper for this game, kicking the stumps after dropping yet another chance in practice. He would have seen a listless warm-up, a long team talk and a joyless net session from which smiles and laughs were absent. England look as if they cannot wait to go home.Downton would also have seen Monty Panesar, who is said to be an injury doubt with a strained calf muscle, bowling without obvious discomfort. If Panesar does not play – and it seems highly likely he will not – it will have little to do with his fitness.Scott Borthwick is expected to make his Test debut in Sydney•Getty ImagesEngland still have a tough decision to make on selection. The Sydney pitch traditionally offers a little assistance to the spinners, though less in recent years, but this one is unusually green. If they go into this game without Panesar or James Tredwell, they will be reliant for spin upon Joe Root and Scott Borthwick. Both are talented young cricketers with many positive qualities, but neither is yet a specialist Test spinner.Among the other decisions England have to make is whether to include Gary Ballance and Boyd Rankin. The evidence of the training session suggests both will play with Ballance likely to displace Michael Carberry and Rankin likely to displace Tim Bresnan. Three debutants doesn’t just speak of a new era; it speaks of desperation. It has happened only once since the chaotic 1990s, at Nagpur in 2006.It would be tough to drop Carberry. He is currently England’s second highest run-scorer in the series – only Kevin Pietersen has scored more – and, though his strike-rate (38.20) has attracted much attention, it is higher than Root’s (33.27).But in desperate times, players are afforded less patience. Carberry could well be a victim of the management’s need to find some positives from such a disappointing tour. In the longer-term, his omission should be cause of reflection for the selectors. No-one should be surprised if an unproven opener, thrust into an away Ashes series, struggles.Root and Pietersen hit the ball beautifully in the nets on Thursday, but Root, in particular, needs to start justifying the faith expressed in him by the England management. In retrospect, it was a mistake to move him from No. 6 ahead of the last Ashes series – a decision that also saw Nick Compton dropped – and, in an ideal world, he would still be able to continue his development against the softer ball in the middle-order.As it is, though, Root looks set to move to the top of the order with Ian Bell moving to No. 3. Some might say that is how it should have been since Jonathan Trott went home; others that England are in chaos and might as well pick the batting order out of a hat. Root has passed 30 just three times in 16 innings when batting in the top three.And that’s the problem for England. For if you claim an attention to detail that includes the publication of a cookbook, that requires more than £20 million of investment each year, that requires an army of support staff so vast that it may as well include a lumberjack and horse whisperer, then you have to show more for it than a team that changes each game, a random batting order and a collection of out of form players who look as if they’ve rather be stacking shelves. Somewhere, somehow, this England environment has started turning fine players into mediocre ones.Cricket would not be the beautiful, beguiling sport we love if it was predictable. But England require a miracle of Biblical proportions to earn a ‘consolation’ victory in this game. And it’s hard to see how even a plague of locusts can help them now.

A maiden ton to Kithuruwan Vithanage at almost a-run-a-ball was the most telling personal contribution, as he joined the wave of young players suggesting Sri Lanka’s future is more secure than previously imagined

Andrew Fidel Fernando in Mirpur29-Jan-2014As the Sri Lanka middle order, led by Mahela Jayawardene, ground Bangladesh into the Mirpur dirt on day three, perhaps little was revealed about the extent of their skill, or the depth of their character. Jayawardene did not admit this had been the easiest of his seven double-centuries – even if it had brought the most muted celebrations – but he did concede that, at times, the hosts’ efforts subsided to allow his team easier progress.Jayawardene has also prospered in such conditions before, and had already been in fine touch in the approach to the series. Angelo Mathews’ 86 was further evidence of increasing batting maturity, but also perhaps of a frustrating tendency to fall when three figures are in sight – he had already hit two scores in the 90s in the past month.A maiden ton to Kithuruwan Vithanage at almost a-run-a-ball was the most telling personal contribution, as he joined the wave of young players suggesting Sri Lanka’s future is more secure than previously imagined. Vithanage has a reputation for power and positivity in first-class cricket, but few Sri Lanka batsmen translate home success into such emphatic Test returns in as few Tests as he has had. Far sterner examinations await him than this friendly surface and tired attack, and he will probably never again arrive with 554 runs already on the scoreboard. But there was technique and intelligence to match his spunk, and to outscore Jayawardene – already batting on a ton – during their 176-run partnership is a praiseworthy effort.”The way Kithuruwan batted today – that’s the first time I batted with him – he looks very promising, very confident out there, the way he was striking the ball,” Jayawardene said. “All in all we’ve got some young talent coming through. It’s important we give them the opportunity and guide them in tough situations and they’ll carry forward the good work we’ve done.”Day three did reveal, however, something of Sri Lanka’s mentality. Not content with a first-innings lead of 400 the visitors spurned the chance to have half a session or more, bowling to Bangladesh. That Sri Lanka plays conservative cricket is no surprise to fans who followed their tour of the UAE. Although a deterioration of that approach had ended with Sri Lanka receiving an almighty shakedown in Sharjah, they proved they remain committed to the grind, against Bangladesh.That outlook is not without merit, but a strong argument may be presented that a 498-run lead is overkill, particularly against a team that has never come close to defeating Sri Lanka. In their last Test match less than a year ago, 240 and 265 were the totals Bangladesh managed. The pitch had flattened out since the hosts were dismissed for 232 on day one, but it has also become more profitable for spinners, of which Sri Lanka played two.The team might argue though, that mounting a mammoth total not only served to demoralise opposition batsmen, it also ensured Bangladesh would begin on a pitch that was in worse shape. The wicket of Tamim Iqbal, whose leading edge caught a ball he did not expect to turn so much, may be presented as supporting evidence.”We were looking at a 400-run lead because the wicket still looks good,” Jayawardene said. “So we needed as much as we could get. We had to make a call to try and give them about 15 overs, but the way Kithuruwan batted, the management and the captain decided to give us a few more overs. We got the message that we’d get another four-five overs max to try and get a hundred and a double-hundred. It wasn’t easy because they had fields spread. We had to bide our time a bit longer, and that was the call. Having as many runs on the board as we’ve got gives us the opportunity to attack more tomorrow.”It is difficult to imagine this team would choose to pursue the quickest, most emphatic win they can manage. On this occasion, they have a chance of dealing the final blow on the fourth day, particularly as some deliveries had begun to misbehave towards the end of Sri Lanka’s innings.”There’s a bit of rough being created so there’s a bit of spin,” Jayawardene said of the surface. “Shakib Al Hasan spun quite a few yesterday and today. We just needed to make sure we keep putting the ball in the right areas as many times as possible and try and wait for those opportunities to come our way and try and create that pressure. That’s what we did to them in the first innings, so we’ll try and do the same.”Fans will note there has been no public concession that negative strategy brought Sri Lanka’s downfall in Sharjah. The team has not been anywhere near as defensive in this match, nor is there much chance Bangladesh can turn this Test around, as Pakistan did. There are also good reasons for delaying Wednesday’s declaration – it is just hoped that Sri Lanka know boldness and intent can put an opposition under pressure just as well as a blown out scoreboard.

Alex Tudor, the former England fast bowler, talks about his foray into coaching, 99 not out, and why he jumped at the chance to visit India

Kanishkaa Balachandran24-Dec-2013The opening day of the Saurashtra-Baroda match in Khandheri, on the outskirts of Rajkot, had an unlikely visitor. At the foot of the pavilion steps, several kids wearing identical uniforms clustered around the distinctive 6ft 4in figure of Alex Tudor, the former England fast bowler. A few other trigger-happy spectators, who had braved the cold Sunday morning, took out their camera phones, scrambling to get the best shot. Tudor is in the country for ten days on a coaching assignment with G Force, a cricket academy based in Dubai, and the 29 teenagers under his tutelage are in Saurashtra to play against local teams and experience Indian conditions.Tudor, who played ten Tests for England between 1998 and 2002, went off the radar in the late 2000s, when he was released by Surrey. He has since then taken up coaching full time and admits he finds the experience of being around youngsters stimulating.”I just seem to have a good relationship with kids, wherever I go,” Tudor says with a laugh. “Maybe it’s because I’m tall. I suppose I behave like them at times, I’m quite young at heart. I just enjoy seeing them with smiles on their faces, playing the game I love. If they go away learning something new from something I’ve taught, that gives me more fulfilment than a five-wicket haul or any runs I’ve got.”Tudor’s international career was only restricted to games in England and Australia. On pitches with bounce, he was a handful. When the opportunity came to tick off a box and visit India, albeit as a coach, Tudor wasn’t going to pass it up. A mutual friend introduced Tudor to Gopal Jasapara, who runs the academy and Tudor was on board.”As soon as he spoke of the opportunity to work in India I was sold,” Tudor says. “I had never been to India before. I told my wife about it and she was very accommodating.”I’ve always wanted to sample India, to see the kids looking happy, though not having the facilities that some of our kids have back at home and still enjoying the game, not moaning about the state of the outfields etc. I’m just really happy to be here and hopefully it won’t be my last visit.”

‘Thorpey, what the hell have you done?’

Though a fast bowler, Alex Tudor is probably best remembered for an incredible Test innings – a freakish unbeaten 99 to help England win a Test against New Zealand at Edgbaston in 1999, on a pitch that had earlier seen 21 wickets falling in a single day. Tudor’s run riot as a nightwatchman took him within inches of a century, but Graham Thorpe was jeered for not giving him enough of the strike. What do the two men feel about that moment 14 years on?
“When Thorpey talks about it now he still says it’s one of his regrets. But he was in a single-minded mentality from the pressure of not qualifying for the World Cup. He wanted to come out and score some runs. There wasn’t a lot of runs left for me to score a century. But if I look back 15 years, it’s just one run! I was over the moon initially because I had just won a game for England. I remember Phil Tuffnell looking at Thorpe and saying, “Thorpey, what the hell have you done?”
As you would imagine, it all was a bit crazy for me and everyone wanted a piece of me. It was only a few weeks later when I realised that my dad and his friends were just not happy at all. Even now. I tell them, ‘look, it was 15 years ago. Leave it!’ I say to Thorpey that he shouldn’t drive at Wandsworth, because there will be people looking for him!

In the short time he has been here, Tudor has already noted a few aspects his students can learn from, particularly on the fitness side. “Our guys played a game yesterday and I was very impressed with the locals, with their fielding and attitude. I told my guys to take a cue from these kids. Twenty years ago, the fitness levels would have been different. The guys now are fit and I think the intervention of the IPL has helped because you can’t hide in the field any more.”Saurashtra has traditionally been a graveyard for fast bowlers, with pitches in Rajkot producing stale draws. Bowlers have had to go the extra mile, beyond their levels of patience, to fetch wickets. Tudor says that on flat tracks, a defensive line and length tactic will not work. The key, he says, is to induce mistakes by getting the batsmen to drive.”You need to bowl fuller, mix your pace up because it skids on. Keep close catchers and set straighter fields. You shouldn’t be cut and pulled on these wickets. Sometimes set silly fields, like my captain Adam Hollioake used to do at Surrey. He wasn’t a tactical genius but he would never let the game dwindle and be boring,” he says.”I find bowlers nowadays want to do too much. The art of bowling six balls on the same place is also a skill. But I think bowlers should look to bowl top of off stump repeatedly and bowl maidens. I don’t see too much of that.”While passing by the Baroda dressing room, Tudor had a quick chat with Irfan Pathan, who is playing only his second Ranji game of the season after returning from a rib injury. Irfan’s return is being monitored, and he is playing purely as a batsman for the time being. When asked about the injury-management tips he would pass on youngsters, Tudor says that fitness training should be non-negotiable. Tudor’s career was ravaged by injuries at various points and he said there were lessons learnt from his own experiences.”Prevention is paramount. Some people don’t like doing fitness training but if you want a long career, it has to be done. It’s not about looking like Hercules. You have to be supple, have good tummy muscles so that will help the back. You don’t have to go a gym for everything. Just do some running. Dennis Lillee would say that if you had 15 minutes in a day, just do sit-ups.”As for those who aspire to be allrounders, particularly of the seam-bowling kind, Tudor says players have to give every part of their skill the same amount of respect. Tudor was not a genuine allrounder but was still a handy lower-order batsman, scoring an unbeaten 99 in a Test and two first-class centuries.”For me, an allrounder is someone who is good enough to play as a batsman if he can’t bowl and vice-versa,” he says. “He isn’t someone who can just score 30. That doesn’t pay the bills.”

Faced with an improbable target, Netherlands went after everything, and it all came together in spectacular fashion. Now, their captain Peter Borren says they can repeat the feat against their Super 10 opponents

Firdose Moonda21-Mar-20142:07

Wasn’t thinking about merely winning – Myburgh

A decent target in a 20-over match is generally regarded as anything that requires a chase of more than eight runs an over – 160-plus. Thirty more than that is considered a tough ask. That requires a chase of more than nine runs an over. Chop the overs to 14.2 and you’ve got an almost improbable challenge.That’s 86 balls in which to score 190. A required rate of 13.25 runs an over. More than two runs a ball. Boundaries have to rain. With someone like Chris Gayle or David Warner in the side, it may seem doable but still difficult. Without, who knows.The Dutch knew that. They also knew they had no choice but to try. Winning the match after 14.2 overs would be meaningless. It would give them the same result as losing – a ticket back home. The only choice was to go for it. “We had nothing to lose and in T20 cricket that can be a dangerous thing,” Peter Borren, their captain said. “It just came off tonight.”But Borren refused to pin the result of his side’s chase down to luck alone. Instead, he said it was reward for what has gone on behind the scenes. “I am very proud of the boys. I know how hard this team has worked,” he said. “We came here to make a statement and so far we have. The effort and energy that has gone into this – I feel as if we deserve some luck.”After a few setbacks at the start, Netherlands’ luck changed, with Tom Cooper going on to smash a 15-ball 45 after being dropped on 1•ICCFortune. They had some, but first of the bad kind. Their best bowler in this competition before this match, Timm van der Gugten, was the most expensive of the front-liners today. He conceded at more than 10 runs an over and overall, the Dutch allowed the Irish batsmen too many. Borren was not happy.”At half-time, I was a little disappointed,” he admitted “It was our worst bowling performance of the tournament so far. I thought we bowled really beautifully against Zimbabwe and then well against UAE. But today, we gave away 25 or 30 runs too many. We dished up a few too many half volleys in first six overs.”Then there was fortune of an even worse kind. Michael Swart, the regular opener, hurt his hand and could not open with Stephan Myburgh. Borren decided to promote himself. “We just went hell for leather,” he said.The Irish were stunned. “Everything just disappeared,” William Porterfield said.With Myburgh seeing the ball like a watermelon. the good fortune began. Netherlands scored 91 runs in the powerplay, before they had lost their first wicket.Then it got better. After three quick wickets a fourth was avoided when Tom Cooper was dropped on 1. He went on score 45 off 15 balls and hit six of the team’s 13 sixes. Borren was nervous. “Any time you are chasing that many runs and you need that many runs per over and you lose wickets, you think that’s the end of that dream run,” he said. “But everyone went in there and did it on the day.” Luck? Maybe.Borren understands luck, in any sense, only befalls a team sometimes. “It won’t happen every time but I think this is reasonable reward,” he said. “We can look at this 14-over chase and say that was remarkable and it won’t happen very often or we can look at it and say we played good cricket in the other two matches and things went our way now.”We know which way Borren will be looking at it, especially after Netherlands failed to qualify for the 2015 World Cup earlier in the year. “We didn’t have luck in New Zealand and we let ourselves down there,” he said. “We’ve done much better here.”The reward of qualifying for the main draw also brings a burden: that of living up to the expectations that come with having knocked out of contention some of the teams who were expected to qualify. Netherlands lost to the full member in their group, Zimbabwe, but did not do them the favour of beating Ireland narrowly. And by defeating Ireland by that unbelievable margin, they forced a team that had looked unstoppable to fly home.For Borren, the Dutch have to play in the main draw for both the teams who exited at their hands “I hope this shows what Netherlands cricket can do and what this team is capable of and I hope we can justify our qualification,” he said. “I hope we can do them (the other teams) the justice of performing credibly in the next round.”Netherlands are the only non-Full Member in the main draw, which may come as a relief to the four teams they are up against – Sri Lanka, England, New Zealand and South Africa.”Initially I don’t think they will be too concerned. Hopefully they will have a good look at what we do, actually hopefully they don’t,” Borren said. “But, without mentioning names, I can see a couple teams that we can knock over.”England will likely top that list, especially after Lord’s 2009 but there seems to be someone else in Borren’s sights. Immediately after being asked about his team’s chances in the main draw, Borren made reference to another country when asked how he would celebrate with Man of the Match Myburgh. “We’ve got a nice bottle of South African red and we’re going to sit in his room and have a glass,” he said.South Africa are battling injury and expectation and could be another side Netherlands will look to target. For now, they’re going to party in a city they’ve said made them feel at home with people they’ve never met before who dotted the stands in orange. “We don’t know who they are,” Borren said about the Dutch contingent in the crowd. “They’ve come from the embassy or somewhere. It was fun to have a little orange section. Without that atmosphere it would have been difficult. They got us over the line.”Whether they will travel to Chittagong remains to be seen but the Dutch have promised to take some of their brave approach with them, tempered with sensible cricket. “I don’t think we can just go there and swing at every ball and it will come off every time,” Borren said. “I would love it if it could happen more often but a fearless approach can be very dangerous. I don’t think we can get away with it every day. We got away with it today. But this is not a real fluke.”I hope people have sat up and noticed these matches. Whilst there are limitations to our cricket, we can also play.” That they certainly can.

Plays of the day for the match between Mumbai Indians and Delhi Daredevils in Mumbai

Karthik Krishnaswamy23-May-2014The last-minute change
Sometime during the half hour between the toss and the start of play, Praveen Kumar was injured. Mumbai Indians had named him in their XI, and, with moments to go for the match to begin, they wanted to name a replacement. They wanted to bring Pragyan Ojha in, and they hadn’t even named Ojha as one of their four designated reserves for the game.Cue a long discussion – involving the umpires, the match referee, the IPL COO Sundar Raman, and Delhi Daredevils’ captain and coach, Kevin Pietersen and Gary Kirsten – and a long wait for Mumbai’s opening batsmen, Michael Hussey and Lendl Simmons, helmeted and ready to bat. If Pietersen had said no, Mumbai would have had to play with Praveen in their XI, but he agreed to let them change their team and so Mumbai brought in Ojha.The statue
Mumbai Indians had lost two wickets in the previous over, but were still going at close to 10 an over. Fourth ball of the 16th over, bowled by Shahbaz Nadeem, Ambati Rayudu didn’t really have to try and clear long-off. But he did just that, didn’t really get hold of the shot, and ended up hitting it straight to the fielder, who didn’t have to move an inch to take the catch.The man at long-off was M Vijay – a man who puts a whole lot of effort into looking effortless – and he literally didn’t move an inch as the ball came to him. He stood absolutely still before taking the catch, and only moved his hands into position at the last moment, when the ball was a foot or so from him.The distracted umpire
Wayne Parnell dug it in short, and the ball bounced way over Jasprit Bumrah’s head, giving him no chance of connecting as he flapped at it with his bat. S Ravi, the square-leg umpire, promptly turned towards his colleague at the bowler’s end to indicate that it was a wide. In doing so, however, he missed all the action at his end.The batsmen had tried to sneak a bye, in an effort to get Shreyas Gopal – who had looked in good touch in scoring 11 – on strike for the last couple of balls of Mumbai’s innings. It was a risky bye, with the batsmen punting on the wicketkeeper missing the stumps with his throw, but Dinesh Karthik did no such thing. Gopal gave up halfway down the pitch, and was nowhere near the crease when the ball hit the stumps, but umpire Ravi hadn’t seen any of this, and signaled for the third umpire.The switch-miss
In Twenty20, it’s hard to tell if the wicket you just saw was the result of a calculated risk not quite coming off or of a genuinely bad shot. Watching this match, though, you could easily tell that a lot of dismissals came about from brain-fades and unnecessarily risky shots. Mumbai’s innings was full of these, but it was a Daredevils wicket that summed up the trend.Harbhajan Singh was barely into his delivery stride when Kevin Pietersen jumped around in his stance, switched his hands around on his handle, and assumed the position of a left-handed batsman with only one thing on his mind – clouting the ball over what had now become cow corner. Harbhajan, though, had all the time in the world to make it difficult for Pietersen to achieve his aim. He tossed it up extra slow, and a completely unbalanced Pietersen was bowled as he swung across the line.