Australia need to combat their fear, so evident against England at Edgbaston, if this summer is to be the sort of contest that the Ashes deserves

Daniel Brettig11-Jun-2013It was not only for his catching that David Boon made a great short leg fielder for Australia. Crouched under the helmet, he looked as ready to smother a grenade as a cricket ball, and was not shy of the odd verbal rejoinder. Legend has it that on one occasion in the West Indies in 1991, a vision-impaired Desmond Haynes turned towards Boon for a moment’s assistance. Asked Haynes of Boon: “Can you see something in my eye?” Came the retort: “Yeah. Terror.”England looked Australia in the eye at Edgbaston in their Champions Trophy opener and glimpsed something similar. It was unsettling to watch Australia’s performance in the first match of 26 to come against England over the next seven months. The tourists’ response to the middling total they were asked to chase, in particular, was feeble. While the search for Test match portents in 50-over matches can be a fruitless exercise, the one recurring theme that kept bubbling to the surface on the Australian side was fear. Fear of failure, fear of losing one’s place, fear of looking silly, and fear that Michael Clarke may not be able to save them.This fear was not manifested necessarily in body language or posture – Matthew Wade went after Jonathan Trott in a manner that suggests his own personal preparation for the match was to listen to the coach Mickey Arthur’s scathing critique of the ODI team this time last year as “submissive” and susceptible to “bullying” by England. Instead it was evident in less demonstrative but more critical and instructive areas, like a selector’s choice of team, or a batsman’s choice of shot.Xavier Doherty was picked for this tournament as the lead spin bowler but found himself left out, most likely due to fear he would be toyed with by England in the same manner he had been in 2012, even though the pitch was dry and very likely to spin. England’s batsmen do not fear Doherty, but they had even less reason to be wary of Adam Voges. Then in the first over of the match, Mitchell Starc trotted in nervously for his opening spell, and grew even more twitchy when his first ball did not swing as he had hoped, whirring straight into Alastair Cook’s pads for a boundary.These portents were none too encouraging, but the team’s collective efforts in the field were sound enough to keep England to a tally of around 250. That another 20 or so runs were scampered by Ravi Bopara and Tim Bresnan was merely the marker of England as a quality unit, one that will press for an advantage at every reasonable opportunity.The contrast with Australia’s batsmen was not to be long in coming. Though the consensus at Edgbaston was to laud Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad for their accuracy, Shane Watson and David Warner had the task of wresting the advantage with bold early strokeplay. Cook and Ian Bell had motored past 50 without stretching themselves too far, and Australia’s IPL-approved openers needed to match them at least. Instead they began with a careful torpidity that suggested the ball was swinging around treacherously, and that they were taking block after tea in a Test match.No wonder the English gloated. Some of the most defining Australian Ashes innings have been characterised by decisive attacks on the bowlers at times when others – Englishmen, certainly – may have chosen a more conservative path. Allan Border at Headingley in 1989, Michael Slater at the Gabba in 1994, Steve Waugh at Old Trafford in 1997, Ricky Ponting and Matthew Elliott at Headingley in 1997, Slater again at Edgbaston in 2001, Matthew Hayden practically anywhere in 2002-03. The likes of Andy Caddick, Phil De Freitas and Martin McCague cowered then, but all would have fancied themselves at Edgbaston this time.

Afterwards, Bailey spoke frankly of what worried him most. In his mind, too many batsmen had been worrying about not getting out, about keeping their spots, and about keeping England’s bowlers out rather than scoring from them. And that word, fear, was mentioned without prompting

Allowed to settle, Anderson and Broad constricted the innings, Warner eventually choosing the wrong ball to go after – an increasingly common trait of his – and Watson squeezed out when Bresnan arrived at first change. Neither Warner nor Watson played with the sort of confidence their seniority in the team demands, and their anxiety would be felt down the order.Other fears and phobias in the team would then play out with disappointing inevitability. Phillip Hughes was caught up in the homely offspinner’s web spun by James Tredwell and Joe Root. Adam Voges worked the ball around neatly but was found wanting when required to hit out. Wade snicked behind in the manner that reminded many of why Brad Haddin will don the gloves for the Ashes. Only James Faulkner added to his reputation. All had the most insidious, creeping fear at the back of their minds also: the horrid thought that Clarke’s back will continue to fail him.George Bailey was becalmed in Hughes’ jittery company but at least found a way to greater fluency later on. Afterwards, Bailey spoke frankly to ABC Radio of what worried him most. In his mind, too many batsmen had been worrying about not getting out, about keeping their spots, and about keeping England’s bowlers out rather than scoring from them. And that word, fear, was mentioned without prompting.”Stuart Broad and James Anderson really gave nothing, no width, hit a really good length, but I guess the balance in one day cricket is you’ve got to find a way to put pressure back on the bowlers,” Bailey said. “The fear for us is … concern about losing your wicket and not starting to play your natural game. That’s what I certainly don’t want us to fall into the trap of. I think it’s really important that guys continue to back their individual plans and the way they play, and we’ve just got to find a way to score big partnerships.”So it has taken only one game for the world to see Australian anxiety about facing England. The match-ups with New Zealand and Sri Lanka can help this team find their footing, but they will have to confront and combat the fear so evident at Edgbaston if this summer is to be the sort of contest the Ashes deserves.

An arbitrary decision about when it is safe to play has endangered Australia’s chances of reclaiming the urn

Brydon Coverdale04-Aug-2013Last year, the ICC legalised day-night Test cricket. It didn’t seem to matter that a suitable ball had not been found. By the letter of the law, agreement between two countries is all that is required. If Pakistan and Bangladesh feel like playing from 6pm in Dubai with an orange ball, they can. If West Indies and New Zealand want to play from 2pm in St Lucia with a pink ball, that’s allowed. Cricket wants to modernise at any cost, appeal to a wider audience. A television audience.Perhaps cricket can start by satisfying the audience it already has. And they were far from satisfied on Sunday evening. The Ashes is Test cricket’s shop window and over the past four days at Old Trafford, the players have delivered an enticing product. But at 4.25pm, Tony Hill and Marais Erasmus unilaterally put up the ‘closed’ sign. It was, they said, for the good of the players. Someone could have got hurt. But every ball lost from the match hurt the Australians far more than any James Anderson might have sent down in the gloom.And it can only be the Australia batsmen they were worried about. That became clear when Erasmus confirmed that play would have continued had England bowled spin. The shadow, then, was not enough to endanger England’s fielders, or the umpires themselves. A vicious Michael Clarke drive would have sent the red ball flying towards them as quickly off Graeme Swann as it would have off Anderson. No, this had to be about the safety of the batsmen.The playing conditions stipulate that the umpires can abandon play when the light is “so bad that there is obvious and foreseeable risk to the safety of any player or umpire”. But Australia’s No. 9, Ryan Harris, didn’t have much trouble handling Anderson when he faced what became the last few deliveries of the day. Clarke was seeing the ball fine. He made that clear to the umpires at length during an animated discussion after they had made their call.”When we start losing it completely from square leg, we give the skipper an option, as we did out here, to bowl spin and he didn’t want to do that,” Hill said. Of course Alastair Cook didn’t bowl spin. He is not an idiot. Every delivery lost from the match tightens England’s grip on the urn. He’d have been happy with an 11.01am abandonment.”For a while there the England fielders were asking about the light and the possibility for when they bat,” Erasmus said. “It was fine, but it kept on dropping and dropping then we eventually told the captain to bowl spin and he decided not to which pushed our hand. There was a safety issue and we can’t carry on.”Of course they could have carried on, and should have. Cricket wants to modernise but these judgements, these arbitrary decisions not to play, do nothing but hurt the game. Traditionally, batsmen were offered the choice of playing on or leaving the field due to bad light. But in 2010 the ICC altered the rule, in part so that batsmen could not make tactical decisions to go off. The change has sent cricket further back into the dark ages.Handing control to the umpires is a common-sense approach only if the umpires use common sense. And there has been precious little of that shown by the officials in this series. Of course, if the abandonment costs Australia a chance at regaining the urn, it will do so only because of their own failings at Trent Bridge and Lord’s. That is why they are in this position.But the half hour lost on Sunday – rain arrived at 5pm – could make all the difference in a contest that might go to the wire on day five. Thirty minutes of moderate dullness could cast a gloom over the Tests at Chester-le-Street and The Oval if they become dead rubbers.There was a frustrating postscript: from 7 to 8pm the sun was shining at Old Trafford and the rain had well and truly cleared. The conditions were perfect for cricket. But by then, the players and umpires were back at their hotels, perhaps with a tray of room service. If they had the TV on, they might have been watching themselves on replay, while millions of viewers could have been seeing them live in prime time.The ICC seems to have a approach to the day-night Test prospect. Perhaps it could throw a little of that flexibility the way of old-fashioned red-ball Tests.

Steven Smith has shown more development than any other young Australia batsmen this year and after missing out at Old Trafford now has a hundred to show for it

Brydon Coverdale at The Oval22-Aug-2013It was fitting that Steven Smith brought up his maiden Test century with cricket’s equivalent of a home run, for at times he looks more a baseballer than a cricketer. He gets batters out with full tosses, takes one-handed catches and, when the bowler runs in, stands with his bat bobbing up and down ready for a big wind-up. When he clubbed Jonathan Trott over long-on to move from 94 to 100, he rode the shot and punched the air like he’d hit a World Series-winning grand slam.There is much about Smith that seems made for the short formats. Like others of his age, he emerged in the Big Bash before first-class cricket. He has played nearly twice as many Twenty20 matches as four-day games. Smith is a more compulsive twitcher than Bill Oddie. Between deliveries he taps his helmet, left pad, box, right pad, thigh pad, helmet again, glove, right pad again. It is tempting to think he is a man with no attention span, a pyjama cricketer.That would be unfair. Batsmen cannot stay alert non-stop for long periods, they must switch off between deliveries, reset their brains. Habits and rituals help maintain that focus; Trott walks halfway to square leg, Alastair Cook marks his guard and twirls his bat, Smith fidgets. More important is his stability and balance at the crease and apart from his nodding bat, he is much stiller than he once was.It was notable that when Chris Rogers wrote last year of the flawed techniques of many of Australia’s young batsmen, including Phillip Hughes, Usman Khawaja, Shaun Marsh and Callum Ferguson, he singled out Smith as a man who seemed “to be sorting things out”. Notably, his six over Trott’s head to reach a hundred was not a slog, it was a through-the-line drive, smart and relatively safe against a part-timer.Steven Smith’s shot to bring up his hundred was adventurous, brave, and technically very good•Getty ImagesIt is no wonder Smith was pumped at achieving the milestone, for he might have felt his chance had slipped after a horrible cross-batted swipe ended his innings on 89 at Old Trafford. When the coach Darren Lehmann spoke of batsmen needing to play straight after the collapse at Chester-le-Street and of careers being on the line at The Oval, without naming names, it was clear that Smith was one of the men under pressure.In many ways he was lucky to be here. In many ways he has had a lucky year full-stop. Smith was part of Australia’s 17-man squad for the tour of India in February-March but seemed the least likely to play; instead, he got his chances after the homework suspensions and showed his class against spin with 92 in Mohali and 46 in Delhi. Still, it wasn’t enough to earn him a Cricket Australia contract for the 2013-14 season, or a place in the original Ashes squad.But Smith was added to the touring party ahead of the first Test, when the captain Michael Clarke was battling his ongoing back injury, and having scored 133 for Australia A against Ireland, he pressed his case further with runs in the tour match in Worcestershire. Suddenly, he had jumped from outside the squad in front of Khawaja and the banished David Warner and found himself in the side for the first Test.Still, in the lead-up to this match he had shown glimpses without grabbing his chances, and was averaging 25 for the series. But the selectors gave him another opportunity – one that was not afforded Khawaja, Hughes or Ed Cowan – and he nearly threw it away first ball with an ill-considered slash outside off that was lucky not to have been edged behind. It was the shot of a man feeling the pressure, but gradually Smith calmed his nerves and found his rhythm, leaving and playing on merit.He showed some fight, and that was what Lehmann wanted after the Durham debacle. Smith survived for 567 minutes – nearly enough time for three full Twenty20 matches – before Clarke declared with him on 138. At 24, he was Australia’s youngest Ashes centurion since Ricky Ponting. He has also become Australia’s second-highest Test run scorer this year, with 499 at 41.58. Only Clarke has made more, or faced more deliveries, or passed fifty more times.In the latter part of his innings, as the declaration approached, he brought out a few baseball shots. There was even the occasional overhead smash – not surprisingly, Smith was a talented junior tennis player. But importantly, for most of Smith’s innings he played not tennis nor baseball but cricket. Test cricket. The No.5 position is now his. He has earned it.

South Africa’s reputation of being arguably the most professional and respectable team has taken a hit by the ball-tampering episode

Firdose Moonda in Dubai26-Oct-2013Once the anger has subsided, there may be some time to appreciate the irony. Pakistan, the last and only other team to have penalty runs awarded against them for ball-tampering in a Test match, were on the receiving end of another side’s wrongdoing.Despite AB de Villiers’ insistence that South Africa “play in a fair manner”, Faf du Plessis pleaded guilty to the Level 2 offense of changing the condition of the ball. His misdemeanour is in cricket circles what not wearing your seatbelt is in real life – it’s the wrong thing to do but it’s so widely done that it only really matters if you get caught.All teams look after the ball in ways they think will advantage them. That is allowed. What they are not allowed to do is change the ball so much that it disadvantages the other team disproportionately. That sounds confusing because it is and with so much grey area, there have been some arguments over the years to legalise “preparing” the ball.That is the term Allan Donald, the current South Africa bowling coach, used to describe what bowlers need to do to ensure they are not shut out of a game that has increasingly grown to advantage batsmen. Four years ago, Donald said bowlers need a defence mechanism to “fall back on” so that they are able to generate reverse swing on flatter pitches. While he said he knew the ICC would “shoot me for saying it”, Donald advocated getting the ball “in the dirt” to accelerate the scuffing up of one side while protecting the other.Televisions pictures showed du Plessis was doing exactly that. He was rubbing the dry side of the ball on his trousers, in “vicinity of the zipper on his trouser pocket” as the ICC’s release put it. Du Plessis’ actions were brazen, they were easily found out by the cameras, immediately picked up by the television umpire, conveyed to his on-field colleagues and quickly acted on. The changes made to the playing conditions at the beginning of this month allowed Ian Gould and Rod Tucker to deal with the issue as soon as it happened.Perhaps South Africa were not aware that could happen. De Villiers revealed he did “not know all the facts of the matter” when runs were added to Pakistan’s total and the ball was changed. He was certain South Africa had not done the wrong thing, even though the ICC immediately called it a case of ball-tampering. That was how the questions began.Why would a team 351 runs ahead, who had their opposition three down with more than two days left in the match on a surface that was deteriorating, feel they needed to do something extra? Yes, the Dubai surface has not got a drop of moisture the seamers can take advantage of, neither has it cracked open. But South Africa should not have been in that much of a hurry.All teams look after the ball in ways they think will advantage them. What they are not allowed to do is change the ball so much that it disadvantages the other team disproportionately•Getty ImagesWhat they may have experienced was extreme frustration, particularly since they had dismantled their opposition for 99 in the same match and have become accustomed to ending Tests swiftly. De Villiers jokingly said South Africa would have liked to finish the match “in two days if we can”. Even though that may be a reflection of what they really expected to happen, it reveals something about their impatience.Given the match situation and the nonchalance with which du Plessis conducted his mischief, could also be a sign this is something that they have become accustomed to doing. And that thought could be the most damaging thing to happen to South Africa in the aftermath of this incident.It means their previous performances will be scrutinised and their many fine achievements in the recent past examined with this incident in mind. Take, for example, just this match and you will find people wondering how it was possible that Dale Steyn managed to find reverse swing from the 20th over of the Pakistan first innings while Pakistan’s bowlers barely found any for the 163.1 overs they were in the field.Having become the world’s No.1 team on the back of a reputation for being a group of cricketers who conduct themselves arguably in the most professional and respectable way, to have a blight of this nature on their reputation will hurt South Africa. They are seen as a team who do the right thing, now one of them is seen as a culprit who got away.Du Plessis was fined 50% of his match fee after David Boon was “satisfied that this was not part of a deliberate and/or prolonged attempt to unfairly manipulate the condition of the ball”. Boon called the sanction “appropriate”. More severe sanctions attract a higher percentage of money being docked – up to 100% – and a match ban of one Test, two ODIs and two Twenty20s, but none of those were meted out to du Plessis despite the visual evidence suggesting he was aware of what he was doing.On the same day as Saeed Ajmal was officially reprimanded for excessive celebrations – something few people even noticed – it seemed as though the variance in the punishments for offenses was too great. When considered in the context of previous players who have been suspended for the same, such as Shoaib Akhtar and Shahid Afridi who had to sit out two matches each, du Plessis can be considered to have got off lightly.There may be other consequences and South Africa’s clothing manufacturer may be among the parties involved. The zipped pockets could come under scrutiny and the mechanism may be removed. There may be a debate sparked about the various methods used to shine the ball and possibly another wave of lobbying for ball-tampering to be less regulated.For now, it remains a breach of the code of the conduct and if players are found doing it, they will probably be punished in some way. That is what happened to this South African team. Their defenders will say they just did what everyone else is doing and were not smart enough to hide it. Their critics will call them cheats. Like the other c-word they are called, it’s not a label they will wear with pride.

Plays of the day from the third ODI between India and Australia in Mohali

Abhishek Purohit19-Oct-2013The controversy
Aaron Finch had provided another sturdy beginning when Vinay Kumar banged one short in the 11th over. Finch went for the pull, but could not get hold of it. There were two sounds as the ball seemed to snick his top edge before pinging his shoulder and lobbing towards point. Virat Kohli ran in, dived forward and plucked it inches from the ground. Even as Kohli celebrated, umpire C Shamsuddin remained unmoved. Kohli turned his attention to Finch now, imploring him to walk in characteristically colourful language. Finch was going nowhere.The power
MS Dhoni went berserk at the death, and James Faulkner went for plenty. In the last over, Dhoni stayed back in the crease, targetting the straight boundaries, trying to get under full deliveries. The third ball of the over, the helicopter shot made an appearance, the ball disappeared over long-on and Mohali shouted hoarse. Next delivery, Dhoni flashed his arms again, and the ball went over long-off for six more.The dismissal
Soon after Suresh Raina came in, Australia brought back Mitchell Johnson. And then began the expected short-ball examination for India’s new No 4. Raina hopped, jabbed and missed. He tried hooking half-heartedly but could not put bat to ball at Johnson’s extreme pace. When he did, off another weak attempt at a hook, he only edged to slip.The repeat
Yuvraj Singh walked in on his home ground and walked back first ball, his dismissal a replay of the manner in which Johnson had dismissed him in the first ODI in Pune. Johnson banged it in short of a length. The ball pitched outside off and moved away. Yuvraj followed it instinctively, had a waft far away from the body and got a healthy edge through to the wicketkeeper.The timing
Fresh from making the fastest hundred for an Indian in the previous game, Virat Kohli showed off his touch early in his innings. The fifth delivery he faced was a fast yorker outside off from Mitchell Johnson. Kohli calmly bent his knees in the crease and opened the face of the bat. The ball raced past point for four.

Twin failures in the Abu Dhabi Test left Mahela Jayawardene without a half-century in his last 14 innings. At 36, he finds his place in Sri Lanka’s team under question for the first time

Andrew Fidel Fernando06-Jan-2014Layoff not behind Abu Dhabi failures – Mahela

Mahela Jayawardene had not played a Test in almost a year and had only played two List A matches in the five weeks leading up to the first Test, but said lack of preparation was not necessarily to blame for his failure. “Difficult to say that the long break had a big effect. I trained hard but in a Test match you can have a great match or a poor one. It’s difficult to pinpoint why exactly things didn’t go right. I got two good balls and I couldn’t avoid getting out to them. I prepared well for that match and I’m preparing for the next one.”
On Bilawal Bhatti, who dismissed him in both innings: “He’s a new bowler, so I hadn’t played against him before. My team-mates had told me that he bowled well in the ODI series as well. When you face a bowler for the first time there is always a small challenge. He bowled in really good areas when I went to bat, so that’s also a factor. I had watched how Bhatti bowls, but watching him and playing him are very different things.”
On what remains for him to achieve in Tests: “This year there are only five or six Tests remaining. I have short term goals about how I should play and how I can contribute to the team. When you get to this stage in your career, it’s not easy to have long-term targets.”

Out three times off the last three balls he has faced, all to a 22-year-old on debut. It can’t feel great to be Mahela Jayawardene right now. Given he became a father only a month ago, perhaps there is only so low Jayawardene can feel. To his credit, cricket has never consumed him to the extent it defines so many other players. But it is the kind of Test match a 36-year-old really does not want to have, not even if he owns more than 10,000 runs and 30 hundreds, not even if he has been a no-brainer choice in every Sri Lanka side for 15 years.That he let Misbah-ul-Haq’s paddle sweep slip through his fingers after having anticipated the shot in the first innings will only strengthen whispers that Jayawardene’s mind remains sharp but his reflexes and hand-eye coordination are beginning to wane. After all, besides the wristy flicks and slow-motion drives, Jayawardene has also taken more international catches than any other fielder. If he takes 17 more in Tests, he will surpass Rahul Dravid’s record in the format.If it seems ludicrous to even consider dropping Jayawardene, that’s because it is. Detractors point to an average of 22.27 in his last nine away Tests, stretching back to May 2011, but omit the vital innings he has played at home since. Jayawardene’s record outside Asia is famously poor, but he has played in 53 of Sri Lanka’s 66 Test victories – second only to Muttiah Muralitharan who played in 54. It would also be a mistake to assume runs in Sri Lanka means runs on flat pitches. Galle is as stern a Test of batting technique as the Gabba or Headingley. Of Jayawardene’s record 2698 runs at the Sinhalese Sports Club, over half have been in wins and just over 8% in losses.Yet, there is significant stress on Jayawardene as he seeks to contribute in the remaining matches. Forces within the team’s governing body have gathered against him for some time, and while chief selector Sanath Jayasuriya has been immune to such pressures in his 11 months in office, he will find Jayawardene’s inclusion harder to justify if the batsman has a poor series.The young players’ rich returns in the first Test also tighten the tourniquet on Jayawardene. He was the only batsman in the top seven not to get a start in either innings, and if the likes of Angelo Mathews and Dinesh Chandimal sustain success on their own, the inspiration and encouragement of an older man at the other end becomes less necessary. Nothing makes a senior player seem beyond his best like younger, less-decorated batsmen enhancing the magnitude of his failure.Adversity has coaxed the best from Jayawardene before, even if he has rarely faced the sort that challenged his future in the side. He is by some distance the lead contributor to the Sri Lankan subset of great Test innings. His 119 at Lord’s in 2006 reeled the team out of an almighty whirlpool after they had surrendered a 359-run deficit in the first innings. His 374 against South Africa in a winning cause later in the year speaks for itself, but the 123 in the next Test of the series is vastly underrated, having come in Sri Lanka’s highest successful chase – a match in which no other batsman scored a century.More recently, he made 180 in Galle to help topple the then No.1 England team, in a Sri Lankan innings in which no one else managed more than 27. A few months earlier, against Australia at the same venue, he had scored 105 on a dusty, broken, fright of a pitch. It is often said of good innings that the batsman appears to have played on a different surface from the one his team-mates have encountered, but in full flow, Jayawardene’s wrists and blade are governed by an altogether alien set of physical laws.So perhaps it is unfair to compare Jayawardene’s six months and 14 international innings without a half-century with Kumar Sangakkara’s enduring – even improving – consistency. You don’t rate Hendrix on his prowess with the French horn, nor a Tarantino film on its realism. Opinions vary wildly on whether Jayawardene is a great player, but as has been written about Kevin Pietersen, there is no doubt he is a player of extraordinary innings.For the remainder of the series at the very least, Jayawardene’s place will be rightly unquestioned. Not only will Angelo Mathews resist making such a bold call on his first full overseas tour as captain, he will also likely balk at the thought of spurning a mentor that way. But cricket’s most exquisite surviving stylist and one of Sri Lanka’s finest match-winners does not deserve to have his twilight marred by talk of decline, and two good Tests will ensure Jayawardene does not suffer that indignity.

The world will now have to judge ICC chairman N Srinivasan on his actions. Not because he has suggested we do so, but because we are left with no other choice

Daniel Brettig27-Jun-2014All week, the major question hovering over the ICC annual conference was not whether N Srinivasan would become chairman. That result had been signed, sealed and delivered the moment the BCCI mailed its confirmation of his position as the Indian board’s chosen representative. Pre-meetings with the game’s Associate and Affiliate nations were less about consultation than confirmation: the gist being “we’re going with or without you, but we’re offering you the chance to come with us.” A unanimous vote, by lions and lambs alike, duly followed.Instead, the greatest mystery surrounded whether or not Srinivasan would deign to speak publicly following his coronation. While his acceptance of accountability to the full council of the ICC was clear, no one seemed entirely sure if he would follow that up by conveying his sense of duty, vision and lack of guilt about the concurrent Indian Supreme Court investigation to the world. The opaqueness of the BCCI stands as a reminder that Srinivasan has not always felt the need to explain himself.Consequently, ICC media releases about events on Thursday remained artfully vague, only confirming the fact of a press conference a handful of hours before the 3.45pm assembly time. Even then there was the line that “the time of the media conference cannot be confirmed because it will directly follow the Annual Conference”. Two rooms at the MCG had initially been set aside – the Olympic Room for an electronic media conference, and the Jim Stynes for print. Television would be seen to first, before a lengthier dialogue away from the cameras. But uncertainty about whether or not two separate events would be held at all brought reporters together in a state of considerable curiosity about what would happen next.Conference delegates had been streaming out of the Members Dining Room for some time, and around 3.40pm Srinivasan appeared, accompanied by the BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel. Stories vary as to why – including the rumour that this so sparsely covered conference might actually be benefiting from a live television link with India – but it was soon apparent that earlier plans would be set aside. Srinivasan spoke briefly first to print and radio at a table beside the television cameras, and once more even more fleetingly to the TV networks. And then it was over, before so much as a single decent follow-up question could be asked.Dressed in his tweed, country club-styled jacket and the only non-ICC tie among executive board members in the room (he has seldom donned the blue and green striped marker of the organisation he now chairs), Srinivasan batted away queries about his fitness for the role. He enlarged a little on how he came to bestride world cricket, what his vision for it might be, and on how he had little time for those who believed corruption was a major problem in the game, as match-fixing investigations and allegations tainted not only those involved but all those around them.Most of all, though, Srinivasan spoke of his rightness, and his record. He had done “nothing wrong” to bar him from taking up the post, even if the Supreme Court had asked him to step aside from his BCCI work, a fact he massaged into the expression that he had “voluntarily” stood aside, without mentioning subsequent court appeals against that volunteered action. He needed to be judged on his record, whether it be the growth of the game’s commercial value in India under his watch, or whatever progress is made at the international level over the next two years. A critical question Srinivasan was asked surrounded whether he would now act as the game’s global overseer rather than simply as the BCCI’s man. His response was indirect.

What is his attitude to cricket at the Olympics? Why had other nations, and indeed his own board secretary, stated that India’s threat of leaving the game was very real? Would he comply with the ICC’s new ethics code if he were to be implicated by the Supreme Court investigation? When will the BCCI respond to requests by Afghanistan and Nepal to use playing facilities in India? But these questions had to be left for another time and another place.

“Cricket is a very old game,” Srinivasan said. “It has evolved over time, from Test cricket we went to ODI cricket, on to T20 cricket. One of the issues that is facing cricket is we are, in many countries, not seeing the kind of attendances at grounds that we are used to in the past. Some forms of cricket are more popular and see more spectator attention. Having said that, I think the most important thing we must look at is how to make cricket more interesting by making it more competitive. You will find in this new structure there is a lot of emphasis on meritocracy. The glass ceiling has been broken, the Associates and Affiliates, up and coming teams, they can come up and play the longer version.”As the public sees there is greater competition, I think cricket will also improve. That is something we will drive.”Signing off with a declaration that India would never “have even dreamed” of leaving the ICC, Srinivasan left plenty of other queries hanging in the air. What is his attitude to cricket at the Olympics? Why had other nations, and indeed his own board secretary, stated that India’s threat of leaving the game was very real? Would he comply with the ICC’s new ethics code if he were to be implicated by the Supreme Court investigation? Does his view that smaller cricket nations should concentrate more on indigenous game development mean that he prefers tournaments played by fewer nations? When will the BCCI respond to requests by Afghanistan and Nepal to use playing facilities in India?But these questions had to be left for another time and another place, as Srinivasan went about the work he has been in such a hurry to do that he insisted he be allowed to begin acting as chairman from the moment the conference concluded. Previous convention had the ICC president handing over to his successor not when the change was announced at annual conference but several months later. This time, Srinivasan moved straight from his press conference into meetings, and after appearing briefly at evening drinks eschewed the showpiece annual conference dinner in favour of a commercial rights tender meeting.The engagement of Srinivasan and other chairmen of major nations with the Associates and Affiliates was a major selling point of the week. ICC management figures were encouraged by how they witnessed more face-to-face contact between all countries great and small this week than at any time in the past. Srinivasan has offered to show his own brand of leadership on growing the game by chairing the ICC’s development sub-committee – and actually turning up to meetings. But as one Associate member pointed out, the glad-handing and flesh-pressing may simply have been a matter of smoothing the changes that are now gospel. It is all a question of taking the powerful on good faith that they will do what is right. Checks and balances have been replaced by cheques and balance sheets.Much as it was for the journalists who waited outside MCG meeting rooms all week to discover what was transpiring at the annual conference, cricket must now wait for, and wait on, Srinivasan. There are sure to be times when no one will know what is happening until it has already happened, and when the decisions of the few will be imposed upon the wills of the many. The world will now have to judge Srinivasan on his actions. Not because he has suggested we do so, but because we are left with no other choice.

A new-look England side came within one wicket of winning at Lord’s and two balls of salvaging a drawn series at Headingley, but while there were promising signs there also remain significant worries

George Dobell25-Jun-2014

8

Gary Ballance (201 runs at 67.00)An excellent century at Lord’s – solid when required and accelerating when appropriate – underlined the impression that Ballance should enjoy a long career at this level. He also registered a half-century at Headingley and, if he experienced second-innings failure, there is mitigation in the fact that he was asked to bat in the unfamiliar position of No. 3 to accommodate more senior players. Fitness permitting – and he appears to be growing fitter all the time – Ballance is a certainty for the first Test against India.Liam Plunkett (43 runs at 14.33 and 11 wickets at 30.09)An impressive return to Test cricket after a seven-year absence. Plunkett hurried the Sri Lankan batsmen with his pace and bounce even on the sluggish Lord’s surface, before taking nine wickets at Headingley. While he did play one of the worst strokes imaginable by a nightwatchman at the end of the fourth day of that game, he was picked as a bowler and, by demonstrating unusual pace and hostility, he offered England an edge they have not had since Steven Finn was at his best.

7

Moeen Ali (162 runs at 54.00 and 3 wickets at 60.33)Moeen proved his worth by batting throughout the final day of the series as England battled to save the game. His century was a masterpiece of elegance and restraint. He needed the innings: a pleasing 48 on debut had been followed by two low scores brought about by loose strokes and his place was beginning to look fragile. He had hardly been trusted to bowl. While he did enjoy one good spell on the third afternoon at Headingley, claiming two good wickets, it was hard to avoid the impression that he did not enjoy the full confidence of his captain and, on the fourth day, he struggled to contain the Sri Lankan batsmen. Still, during that third afternoon, as his confidence grew, he unveiled what is believed to be the first doosra delivered by an England player in Test cricket. He is clearly not the finished article, with the ball in particular, but he did enough to suggest that, if England persevere with his bowling, he may repay their faith. Whether he is ready to go into a Test series against India as the No. 1 spinner is debatable, though.James Anderson (12 wickets at 21.50)It may be that Anderson has become a victim of his own consistency. He was very good at Lord’s and finished the series as the top wicket-taker on either side as well as being named England’s man of the series. But, so reliant upon his excellence have England become – even when he has not taken wickets he has generally remained reliable – that his under-par second innings display at Headingley was shocking. It may be that his captain asks too much of him: Cook routinely asks for eight overs at a time, sometimes more, and it may be that, aged 31, Anderson is no longer able to shoulder such a burden in back-to-back Tests.Stuart Broad (75 runs at 18.75 and 7 wickets at 34.57)While never at his absolute best, Broad bowled well enough at Lord’s and almost won the game for his side with his final spell. He also produced a valuable innings in the first Test. But, at Headingley, when his captain needed him most, he went missing, perhaps paying for a lack of cricket ahead of the Tests due to his knee injury. Fears remain that his workload in all formats is diminishing his effectiveness and his long-term future.Joe Root appeared more comfortable back in the middle order•AFP

6

Sam Robson (171 runs at 42.75)One good innings in the series. Robson appeared understandably nervous on debut at Lord’s, drawn into poking at one he should have left in the first innings and being beaten between bat and pad in the second. But he looked much more solid at Headingley, registering a maiden Test century in only his second game and displaying the patience and discipline that could serve him well at this level. He squandered a good start in the second innings, though, pushing hard at one he could have left. Sure to start the series against India, but has not done enough to cement his place.Joe Root (259 runs at 86.33)Back in the No. 5 position in which he appears most comfortable, Root registered a maiden Test double-century at Lord’s. For a man who had been dropped at the end of the Ashes tour, it was an important contribution and cemented his place in the plans of the ‘new era.’ He was less impressive at Headingley, though, falling to a loose stroke in the first innings and appeared to be worked over by the short ball in the second before nicking off. He is only 23, so some setbacks are probably inevitable.

5

Ian Bell (137 runs at 34.25)Two pleasing half-centuries might have been enough for the 22-year-old Bell, but England require more from the 32-year-old version. Bell continues to look in supreme form and timed the ball as well anyone but, as a senior figure, he will be required to provide far more substantial contributions.Chris Jordan (92 runs at 23.00 and 5 wickets at 54.60)A slightly disappointing debut series. Jordan bowled nicely at times, displaying good pace and consistency, and and nice timing with the bat. But he only claimed five wickets in the two Tests and was among the seamers to lose their way on the fourth day at Lord’s. While he clearly has ability with the bat, he also displayed a propensity to chase the ball outside off stump and put down a chance in the slips. Ben Stokes will be pushing him hard for a place in the first Test against India.Alastair Cook’s form and captaincy remain England’s biggest issue•Getty Images

4

Matt Prior (139 runs at 46.33 and 14 catches)Batted well in his comeback innings at Lord’s, but endured a wretched game with the gloves at Headingley and was twice bounced out by Sri Lankan bowlers. It may be that Prior, who was able to play little cricket ahead of the series due to injury, was simply out of form. Or it may be that he is a player in decline. Either way, he is far from assured of a place in the side for the first Test against India, though the lack of rivals pressing for his place works in his favour.

3

Alastair Cook (78 runs at 19.50)With only 78 runs in four innings, this series extended Cook’s poor run of form with the bat. He was also unable to summon a good performance from his side at Headingley and most be held partially accountable for the slow over-rate that might have cost England at Lord’s. The decision to allow Angelo Mathews singles and put back the fields at the start of the fourth day did nothing to dissuade his critics that he was a negative captain, while his testy response in interviews suggested the pressure was beginning to wear him down. He was, however, let down by his senior players in Headingley and obliged to captain a team containing several inexperienced players. The fact that are few viable candidates for his place in the side or his position as opener mean that it would still be a major shock if he was not captain in the series against India.

Despite a heavy defeat, India had Mohammed Shami at his yorker-firing best at the death at Headingley, pointing the way for the rest of the Indian attack

Sidharth Monga at Headingley05-Sep-2014India lost their first and only ODI of the series. They fell short by more than a few. Most of it was down to conceding 143 runs in the last 15 overs. Most of their bowlers struggled once they were put under pressure by Jos Buttler and Joe Root. It might sound ridiculous, and will be easy to miss, that those final few overs involved some of the best death bowling by an Indian fast bowler in a long time.Mohammed Shami, who had an ordinary Test series, ran in hard and speared in yorker after yorker to bowl five overs, from the 42nd on, for just 34 runs and took two wickets. In that spell he went for five boundaries, one of which was the direct result of a horrible bounce for Shikhar Dhawan at the 30-yard circle at midwicket.Mohammed Shami has proved a reliable death bowler for India•Getty ImagesThe best part about Shami’s spell was it was classic, simple old-fashioned death bowling, which relied on the principle that if you bowl straight yorkers, batsmen can neither get under them nor have the space to open the face on them. The only aspect missing was that these were not the deadly yorkers of the Pakistani variety, but then again it is difficult to reverse-swing them with a ball that is going to get no older than 25 overs. While not the mean possessed toe-crushers, these weren’t the soft wide-outside-off ones either.Dhoni could give Shami mid-off and mid-on back for most of his spell so he had cover of some sort if he erred in length when striving for that yorker. And once you start getting them right with the regularity of Shami today, the only real option you leave the batsman is the ramp over short fine leg. It was tried three times against Shami in that spell. One brought him Root’s wicket, one nearly bowled Ben Stokes, and the third went for four.Once you get into this bowling rhythm, the only errors you make are by bowling too full, but once you have the batsman on the leash these low full tosses are hard to hit, and you have cover at long-on and long-off. Shami began the spell with a low full toss, which was driven for a single. Another similar delivery later in the spell went for four, but it took a special effort from Stokes to whip it past midwicket. These are less demoralising than length balls, slower or otherwise, which are deposited rows back into the stands.Shami was at his best in the 48th over, bowling to Chris Woakes. The first ball was a yorker just outside off. Woakes had no room to play. He tried a drive, and missed. Next ball tailed in a little, at the same length. Woakes was lucky to survive this one. You could feel the leash tightening. You feel this with many bowlers and many batsmen in modern cricket, but then the bowler tries a cute slower ball for some reason. But there was no respite from Shami. The third ball was even straighter, and cleaned Woakes up.In contrast, at the other end, Umesh Yadav tried too many things, and went for a plenty. Some of it could be put down to the confidence of the two bowlers. Yadav was making a comeback and had only this game whereas Shami has had a good ODI series, and he is also Dhoni’s trusted man in the last 10 overs. Since the start of India’s overseas tours with South Africa last year, Shami has bowled more balls in the last 10 overs than any other India bowler. Bhuvneshwar Kumar with 128 is a distant second to Shami’s 245. And you would have thought from his first two overs that Bhuvneshwar had played one match too many on a creditable tour for him. Dhoni just bowled him eight at the top, and didn’t bother him with another spell.”His execution was great, which I feel is lacking in some of our other fast bowlers,” Dhoni said of Shami. “Definitely he bowled really well today, especially those yorkers. Whenever I needed him or asked him to bowl, he bowled really well.”Dhoni would ideally have bowlers who can keep it simple by just going for those yorkers and not wander into the cute variations, but he knows how difficult it is. “The yorker is keeping things simple, but it is very difficult to execute,” he said. “It takes a lot out of you, to bowl a yorker at a good pace. Especially with third man and fine leg inside, people look to use the ramp shot. You have to be aware of what is happening. To play that shot a lot of the batsmen get down very early, so you have to be aware of the field and at the same time be aware of what the batsman is trying to do. Still I feel most of the successful slog-over bowlers today are the ones who bowl the yorkers well.”After India had won the series with another facile win at Edgbaston, Dhoni said the series had been a complete performance, except that their bowlers had not yet been tested at the death. His bowlers as a unit might have taken some pasting at Headingley, but if more of them can be like Shami, and if Shami can replicate what he did here, Dhoni can be hopeful in the future.

MS Dhoni maintains that India have made progress in England and will continue to focus on processes rather than results. But they might ask ‘Did we give it our all?’ at the end of the Oval Test

Sidharth Monga14-Aug-2014The Oval on a sunny day can be a welcoming place to be. There is a general air of friendliness around. It seems within reach of travellers. Unlike Lord’s, its brow is not high. You can enter from any gate. It used to be a quick pitch but has now become slow. Often two spinners can play here. There is no side ground so the practice pitches are on the main square, which means abrasiveness and reverse swing. Not when it rains, though. It can be cold, dank, and prompt people to call it ugly.It rained when India arrived for their pre-Test training. Rain has not been India’s friend on this trip. It has brought India reminders of missed opportunities. After Old Trafford, which India lost in three days, it rained for a day and a half, telling them if they had batted for another hour, they might well have saved the match. Here, India had three possible days of training before the Oval Test. The team missed one together as a unit, MS Dhoni stayed away from the second. He went to a firing range instead. And it rained the only time India’s No. 6 might have got to bat before the Test.Last call for India: Duncan Fletcher runs for cover as the rain comes down at The Oval•Getty ImagesThe Oval usually hosts the last Test of a series, bringing a general wistfulness which is compounded on rainy days. If you are trailing after having led in the series, like India are, you tend to look back more than ahead. Did we give it our all? Did we get desperate enough? Did we overstep any lines? Did we under-step any? What else could have we done? You don’t want to leave with a feeling you could have done things differently.Dhoni is not likely to think about all that. He says he likes to stay in the moment. Being able to draw a Test each in South Africa and New Zealand, he says, was a step in the right direction. A five-match series is foreign territory for every player in this team, so it is natural that that one win at Lord’s might be considered another step in the right direction. Even after Old Trafford he said he was happy with the team’s progress. Hopefully that is just for a feel-good façade for the public. For there have been problems of technique, of temperament, and of strategy that have led to this stage.Not enough for desperation, says Dhoni. The openers are going to remain even though India have yet to add 50 for the first wicket since the start of South Africa tour late last year. “We will have to see whether that [extra] middle-order batsman has really contributed,” Dhoni said. “We have played quite a few matches with five bowlers, which means he hasn’t got much opportunity so all of a sudden in a big game to come with an application like that will have its own consequences.”The big factor in not having big opening partnerships is that you expose the No. 3 batsman, irrespective of whether No. 1 or 2 gets out. And [Cheteshwar] Pujara has to face that pressure. He is always batting close to the third, fourth or fifth over, so he gets more pressure. But he is also getting more chances of facing the challenges in such conditions so it will only improve him.”The process continues to remain more important than results. “It’s never that the result is more important than the process,” Dhoni said. “It is always the process that will be the key because it puts less pressure on the team. As you said, rightly, it is an important Test match but at the same time still it is the breaking up of the sessions that matters because that will give us an advantage. So we will still be looking more into the process than the result.”India have chosen to trust what they have been doing over the Investec series. They will be pleased Ishant Sharma is fit. Bhuvneshwar Kumar, though, has been bowled into the ground. Stuart Binny could come in amid talks of a damp pitch, but India surely have to question this policy of playing a bits-and-pieces player. In three of the four Tests, India have gone in with five “bowlers” but at least one of them has always been neglected.It was a bold move, but bits-and-pieces is not working. Yet, either Binny or Ravindra Jadeja are all set to play. An outsider might legitimately ask the question: do they care enough to revisit and reassess their plans and their openers, or put in extra hard work in the nets, or is one Test win – a significant improvement on previous tours – satisfying enough for them?As India waited in vain for the rain to stop – some of them had a hit in the indoor nets – Ramesh Mane, their masseur and general good old man in the team, was seen sticking images of gods and chants in the dressing room. He always does that, and also plays devotional music before the start of matches. There is not much in his hands, though, apart from the massages. Hopefully the rest of the team, who have a more direct bearing on the result, are not thinking like him.