Partnerships were crucial to England’s success in 2005, and they will be key again in 2009

S Rajesh06-Jul-2009After being edged out 2-1 in a closely fought and outstanding series in 2005, Australia – and Ricky Ponting, the captain then and now – get an opportunity to reverse that result. For England, on the other hand, it’s a chance to avenge the 5-0 drubbing handed to them when they toured Australia last. There’s plenty riding on the 2009 Ashes, and not just because this rivalry is the oldest in the sport.England had the upper hand the last time the two teams played here, but historically, Australia have held the advantage in their head-to-head contests – a considerable one overall, and a slight one in England, winning 46 and losing 43. England’s win in 2005 was their first in a home series against Australia in 20 years – the last one had come in 1985.

England v Australia over the years

PlayedAus wonEng wonDrawOverall3161319788In England151464362In England since 200010532Australia have toured England twice for an Ashes series since 2000, and while their overall numbers are much better than England’s, that is almost entirely due to their convincing win in 2001. In 2005, the stats were much closer, with hardly anything to choose between the two teams – Australia averaged 31.57 per wicket, to England’s 31.84. Four years before that Australia had dominated completely, averaging 49.11 with the bat and 26.44 with the ball.

England and Australia in the last ten Ashes Tests in England

Runs scoredWkts lostAverageRun rateAustralia541314238.113.96England542118629.143.69A look at the partnership stats for England in those two series indicates the areas in which they made significant progress. The biggest difference was the opening partnerships: in 2001 Michael Atherton and Marcus Trescothick struggled to put together substantial ones, managing a highest of 58 in ten innings. The overall average per stand was a disappointing 23.70. In 2005 Trescothick and Andrew Strauss were far more impressive, averaging 53.80 – an improvement of 127% – with two century partnerships and three half-century ones.The other significant difference was the manner in which the lower order came to the party. The stands for the third and fourth wickets weren’t so impressive, but those for wickets five through eight were significantly better in 2005 than in 2001, disproving the commonly held belief – often corroborated by facts – that their innings tends to crumble once the top half falls. There were two century stands for the fifth, one for the sixth and one for the eighth, giving Australia the kind of resistance they weren’t used to from England line-ups of the past. On an average, wickets five to eight added 133 in 2005; in 2001, they’d only contributed 74.

Wicket-wise partnerships for England in the last two Ashes series in England

Wicket2001 – ave stand100/ 50 p’ships2005 – ave stand100/ 50 p’shipsFirst23.700/ 353.802/ 3Second41.001/ 136.201/ 2Third46.601/ 230.902/ 0Fourth33.300/ 420.800/ 1Fifth27.110/ 141.802/ 0Sixth24.110/ 238.401/ 2Seventh7.110. 027.660/ 1Eighth15.550/ 025.251/ 0Ninth23.110/ 213.250/ 0Tenth17.501/ 023.251/ 0What was also impressive about England’s performance in 2005 was the manner in which their bowlers controlled Australia’s power-packed middle order. Matthew Hayden and Justin Langer got them off to reasonable starts, though their only huge partnership – of 185 – only came in the last Test of the series. However, the big difference was in the partnerships for the third, fourth, fifth and sixth wickets: where Ricky Ponting, Michael Clarke, Damien Martyn and Adam Gilchrist would have usually dominated, here they were forced to struggle for runs. The average third-wicket stand was down from 77.42 to 23.44, while there were significant dips in the other middle-order stands as well. The overall average runs per innings for wickets third to sixth in 2001 was 289.17; in 2005 it dipped to 134.31, and that meant Australia never had the kind of scores on the board they could dominate with.

Wicket-wise partnerships forAustralia in the last two Ashes series in England

Wicket2001 – ave stand100/ 50 p’ships2005 – ave stand100/ 50 p’shipsFirst51.871/ 149.111/ 2Second43.251/ 243.330/ 4Third77.422/ 123.440/ 0Fourth70.502/ 145.441/ 1Fifth69.501/ 226.661/ 0Sixth71.751/ 138.770/ 4Seventh11.250/ 013.550/ 0Eighth24.250/ 128.880/ 2Ninth24.000/ 120.660/ 1Tenth18.500/ 125.120/ 1If England are to repeat their results from 2005, much will depend on their top-order batting. The overall records against Australia of those who are in the mix for this series isn’t very impressive, though. Apart from Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood, most of the others have patchy records. Andrew Strauss has topped 50 only three times in 20 innings, while Alastair Cook has struggled similarly, with one century and no half-centuries in ten innings. Ian Bell has done better in getting fifties, but his problem has been an inability to convert them into huge scores: he’s got six fifty-plus scores in 20 innings, but none better than 87. On the other hand, 11 times he has been dismissed for less than ten, including four ducks.

England batsmen in Tests versus Australia

BatsmanTestsRunsAverage100s/ 50sKevin Pietersen1096353.502/ 6Paul Collingwood645040.901/ 1Andrew Flintoff1065634.521/ 5Andrew Strauss1064032.002/ 1Alastair Cook527627.601/ 0Ian Bell1050225.100/ 6Australia’s batsmen, meanwhile, have impressive records against England, though that’s largely because of some big runs at home. Ricky Ponting has an overall average of 48.24 against England, but in England it drops to 42.63; in Australia it climbs to a more imposing 54.73. The difference is even more stark for Michael Clarke – an average of 37.22 in England, and 77.80 at home.

Australian batsmen in Tests versus England

BatsmanTestsRunsAverage100s/ 50sMichael Hussey545891.601/ 4Michael Clarke1072451.712/ 3Ricky Ponting26197848.247/ 6Simon Katich626326.300/ 2The story is similar for Australia’s most experienced bowler too: Brett Lee has poor figures overall against England, but they’re even worse when he’s playing in the opposition’s home. In ten Tests in England, he has taken 29 wickets at 45.44; in eight matches at home the average is 36.36. Significantly, in 18 Tests against England, Lee hasn’t yet taken a five-wicket haul – his best is 4 for 47.

BowlerTestsWicketsAverage5WI/ 10WMStuart Clark52617.030/ 0Brett Lee186240.610/ 0Among England’s bowlers, Andrew Flintoff has good numbers, which become even better when he plays Australia in England – 24 wickets at 27.29. It remains to be seen, though, if he can get himself to top fitness in time for the series. Monty Panesar has one five-wicket haul but not much else, while James Anderson won’t have too many happy memories of his three Tests against Australia.

England’s bowlers versus Australia

BowlerTestsWicketsAverage5WI/ 10WMAndrew Flintoff103532.451/ 0Monty Panesar31037.901/ 0James Anderson3582.600/ 0With Cardiff hosting its first Test, there aren’t any stats from international cricket here to fall back on, but from the recent of Ashes series in England, it appears the winner of the first Test won’t have that much of an edge. In two of the last three series, the team winning the first Test has lost the series.

Openers are a neglected breed on the country’s domestic circuit, and that’s been a key reason for the team’s failures in Tests in recent times

Sidharth Monga09-Jul-2009This is not a post-mortem. One frame on TV during the Galle Test, though, summed up a bulk of Pakistan’s problems. The screen was split in two, each one showing the stances of Salman Butt and Khurram Manzoor, the former’s weight too far forward and the latter’s back. Those who follow Pakistan cricket will say, “What’s new?” Those who follow Pakistan cricket will know there haven’t been solid Test-match openers since Saeed Anwar and Aamer Sohail, and very few before. Even Anwar was a naturalised opener: he used to play in the middle order in domestic cricket.There is no better feeling in a small chase than the knowledge of having reliable openers, especially when the bowlers have finished their stupendous work in the final session, with an edgy period to follow. In the first innings in Galle, Pakistan lost Butt and Manzoor before the half hour was out on the first day; in the second they lost Manzoor in the evening and Butt first thing in the morning. There is no way the openers should solely be blamed for the dramatic loss, but
No’s 1 and 2 have always been a lottery since Sohail and Anwar opened together for the last time in March 2000.Nineteen different openers have been tried since that period – and 37 combinations – including Abdul Razzaq, Azhar Mahmood, Kamran Akmal, Shoaib Malik and Shahid Afridi. That even by Pakistan’s standards is a fairly big number: 56 players opened in their 48 years of Test cricket before that.Younis Khan’s response to the issue tells a story. “If you see, this has been the story for the last four-five years,” he said moments after the defeat. “Sometimes they do well, sometimes they do badly. That’s not a big issue – anybody who’s played there. It keeps going up and down like this.” In the land of reverse-swing, masterful spinners and great middle-order batsmen, opening the innings has been a neglected art, perhaps non-glamorous. Heroes do play a big part, and
Pakistan simply haven’t had enough heroes opening the batting.Ramiz Raja, himself a fairly successful naturalised opener, wants an emergency declared on the opening front. He has seen over the years that in all levels of cricket in Pakistan the opener is the most neglected entity. “It has never been given importance by captains,” Ramiz told Cricinfo. “It was thought that on docile subcontinental pitches, where you played almost 70-80% of your cricket, specialist openers were really not required. That has been the thinking of most Pakistan captains, but it doesn’t help.”The approach perhaps comes right from the domestic circuit, where more such pitches mean the openers are hardly tested, and anybody does the job. The business, as is the case in Indian domestic cricket, starts in the middle order. Sohail, one of the more traditional openers, has an interesting theory.”Ultimately reverse-swing hasn’t helped Pakistan cricket at all,” Sohail told Cricinfo last year. “How many new-ball bowlers have you seen who are very good? Reverse-swing has helped Pakistan achieve things temporarily, but when you look at it in the long term, it has actually hampered Pakistan cricket. You are not getting good new-ball bowlers. If you are not getting good new-ball bowlers in your first-class structure or club cricket or at the top level, how do you actually think of getting good openers?”

“You need a special temperament for the job. Different levels of energy for different situations and times. There isn’t enough emphasis on that at the domestic level, or at the academy level. Openers are not made at Test level.”Ramiz Raja

But if that be the case, why aren’t there openers scoring thousands of runs in domestic cricket and putting pressure on Butt, who can’t complain of not having been given a full run? “I have no plausible reasoning,” Ramiz says. “The players in the seventies, even in the
eighties, had a chance to hone their skill in county cricket, so that helped Pakistan batsmen to rise to a certain level. When it got stopped, our domestic set-up was not of a certain standard that provided a strong base for openers to grow.”It’s just that we have got to develop openers,” Ramiz said. “There is not enough importance given to that aspect. When I say that, I mean both technically and temperamentally. You have to leave a lot of balls, you have to be technically correct, you have to see off tough
situations like batting in the last half an hour of the day. You need a special temperament for that job. Different levels of energy for different situations and times. There isn’t enough emphasis on that at the domestic level, or at the academy level. Openers are not made at Test level.”Times changed, foreign coaches came and went, but the callous attitude towards openers didn’t. In the 2005-06 series against England, under Bob Woolmer and Inzamam, Pakistan went with Butt as the only specialist in the squad of 16, with Akmal, Malik and Afridi as options.Butt, who’s enjoyed the longest run in the post Sohail-Anwar era, had the promise, but needed a better opener to learn from. Openers grow together. They are a team within a team. They are often good friends, they often sit and discuss their batting and the bowlers even after
the cricket. They are honest enough to ask the other to farm the strike against a particular bowler who’s troubling one of them. They point out to each other the mistakes they are prone to making. They are almost a couple, and Butt has been pretty polygamous there, though not by his choosing.There is an interesting story about how Sohail chose to become an opener. When he was fairly young, Wasim Raja, his captain at Lahore, told him if he wanted to play for Pakistan he needed to start opening the innings. Sohail hesitated. Raja said, “Do it. Pakistan won’t be needing middle-order batsmen in the next four or five years. There is Saleem Malik, there is Javed Miandad; it will be hard for you to get in. Start opening the innings, you will play for Pakistan.”By that logic, chances of a 16-17-year-old starting to open the innings look bleak. From the current middle order, Yousuf and Younis are nearer to the end than the start. Pakistan better start doing something about it, as Ramiz said, at the school level, club level, academy level and first-class level.

Tendulkar turned it on, but the Australians stuck to their plans

Ramesh Soundararajan06-Nov-2009Favourite player from the two sides
It has to be Sachin Tendulkar. His remains the only name from those of a billion-plus to be chanted with pride by tens of thousands of Indians in unison.Key performer
Shane Watson. He started off steadily before hammering three sixes and a few boundaries. He set up the platform with Shaun Marsh. Watson faced the first ball, from Praveen Kumar, and 99 overs later, bowled the last over to him. His three wickets were critical too – especially Yuvraj and the breakthrough one of Suresh Raina. While this will be remembered as Tendulkar’s match, Watson ended up on the winning side.Biggest absence
Never since the days of Imran Khan calling additional players on a whim to Sharjah have we seen a floating side like Australia. What is essentially an Australia B team is leading India 3-2. They might field Dennis Lillee in the last ODI, but they are not really missing anyone.Any reason, Pragyan Ojha has been sidelined? He would at least have tried like a genuine spinner to get wickets.One thing I’d have changed about the match
Praveen Kumar got Ricky Ponting bowled and Watson got Harbhajan Singh caught behind. Other than these, every single wicket fell to the batsmen’s indiscretion or over-ambition. One does not want to see wickets like the one at the Kotla, but this one was overloaded in favour of batsmen. Make the pitch a little tougher to bat on. And can we erase Tendulkar’s Misbah moment?Face-off I relished
I was looking forward to Hyderabad versus its reputation and Asoka de Silva versus Indian batsmen. Bless the man, he was tempted but stood firm. And Hyderabad continues to be a nemesis for the home team.Bright young thing
Raina looks a compact player. Good balance, shots round the wicket, and has the big shots too. He could be a good No. 3 if someone can sort out his issues with short-pitched bowling.Marsh continues to impress in India. And it was tough to believe Clint McKay was on his international debut. He was the best bowler on show.Graham Manou was quite impressive as well.Wow moment
MS Dhoni, Virender Sehwag and Yuvraj all dropped catches. Off the last ball of the innings, Cameron White swung hard. A familiar figure ran in from the cover boundary and got his dive just right to take the catch. It was the first positive moment for the home fans in three hours, and Tendulkar kept the mood buoyant for the next three.Player watch
Ball goes to his left, Ashish Nehra runs around and gives two. Ball goes right, Nehra still gives two. The ball is hit in the air to him. A diving catch, maybe? No, Nehra times it well enough to concede two. The crowd really gets after him and starts booing. Is Mark Twain his favorite author?Shot of the day
White’s six over extra cover was extraordinary, but the match was like 20 years of Tendulkar consolidated into 175 runs. The front-foot pull, straight drive, step out and loft, and paddle sweep were all brought out. The best four were a couple of cover drives along the ground, a late glance to fine leg, and a late cut. All of them went in the vicinity of fielders, but they too were part of the audience for these shots.

The match was like 20 years of Tendulkar consolidated into 175 runs. The front-foot pull, straight drive, step out and loft, and paddle sweep were all brought out. The best four were a couple of cover drives along the ground, a late glance to fine leg, and a late cut

Crowd meter
It was likely the biggest crowd for a cricket match in Hyderabad. The noise was deafening when Tendulkar and Raina were on song. Lots of national flags, and faces painted with the tricolour. There was a noisy DJ as well, asking the crowd to do Mexican waves and chant. Harbhajan seems to have gotten more popular, going by the ovation he got on arriving at the crease. Much more than Gautam Gambhir, India’s top-ranked player. It was also good to see a crowd of about 200 people on the hill abutting the ground.Entertainment
The DJ played music in Hindi and in Telugu.There was also a deal – if you sent an SMS to a certain number, the message would be displayed on the big screen. Nothing sensational there, though. Big cheers greeted the trumpet tune from the IPL in South Africa.Hardship factor
The stadium as you see it on TV is very good, but the innards are dirty. It almost feels as if they painted the stadium and ran out of cash for the rest. Rs 1000 will get you a buffet in a five-star hotel with personal attention. Here it makes you feel you’ve gone to a first-day show of a blockbuster film without a reserved ticket. Too much pushing and shoving, and the entrances are badly designed. Every edible item was overpriced by 300%. I like it better in Bangalore. Maybe the authorities did not envisage the turnout.ODI v Twenty20?
The consolidation phase of the Australian innings was very boring. Don’t get me wrong but muscular batting is not easy on the eye. I thought Tendulkar had a point in suggesting ODIs have two innings. But that would be manufacturing excitement, like with a lot of Twenty20 cricket. Good cricket is all about exciting match-ups and great performances. Twenty-overs cricket limits that scope and so does not have a hook to engage the viewer, most times. When you think of ODIs, you would think Sachin; but you are most likely to think of an administrator when you think Twenty20. Go figure.Marks out of 10
8.5. The final margin was just three runs, thanks to one of Tendulkar’s top ODI knocks. (This will be the sad 175, to go with Kapil Dev’s happy 175). Australia seemed to have a plan for each Indian batsman and stuck to it. Barring a few fielding glitches, they were professional. The Indian approach was disjointed from the time Watson hit his second six. If in Indian conditions, this is the best we can do, the 2011 World Cup could be a lot tougher than anticipated.

The final Test at the Wanderers brought the thrilling combination of Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel terrorising England

Andrew McGlashan in Johannesburg17-Jan-2010There is nothing more exhilarating than the sight of fast bowlers steaming in at batsmen. Raw aggression versus survival instinct; it is cricket stripped down to its most primal form and it has always been a feature of touring South Africa. The final Test at the Wanderers brought the thrilling combination of Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel terrorising England and they rightly shared the Man-of-the-Match award. That the pair can forge a long partnership is a tantalising prospect for a world game shorn of high quality pace.Steyn’s position was already well established and he remains the No. 1 ranked bowler in the world. Yet he began the series with an injury and wasn’t fully fit for Durban when South Africa were heavily beaten. What is more, this series was against the one Test nation he had never shown his true colours – his previous wickets against England had come at more than 40 each. It was time to put that right.However, it is the development of Morkel that has really boosted South Africa’s firepower. Someone with height and pace is an invaluable asset and it is why England, for so long, tried to be patient with Steve Harmison. During the early stages of his career Morkel was compared to Harmison after some wayward spells and a loss of confidence, but his second stint in the national side is promising riches indeed.”England were the one side I hadn’t really performed well against and really wanted to put that right,” Steyn said. “After not playing at Centurion I knew I had to lift my game for the remaining three and make a massive contribution. But watching Morne bowl throughout the series has been the highlight for me. With Makhaya [Ntini] falling away Morne has stepped up and he’s bowled tremendously. I think he deserves all the credit and I have actually been bowling behind him. He’s been the spearhead.”Graeme Smith knows he’s a fortunate captain to have such strike power at his disposal and with Wayne Parnell making an encouraging debut the loss of Ntini suddenly doesn’t look so drastic for South Africa.”Dale has performed unbelievably well for a period of time, deserves his ranking and has led our attack well,” Smith said. “But the fact is that Morne came back from being left out, worked on his game and came back a far better bowler. He was able to have really good series so credit to him for that.”Parnell is 20 and was on debut. There’s a lot of learning for him to do and a lot of developing this attack needs to do. But to have two spearheads with pace and bounce, certainly on a wicket like this, does look great.”Morkel was far more modest about his achievements as he sat at the opposite end of the table to his new-ball partner. “It isn’t really something I can put my finger on,” he said of his improvement. “After being left out I went back and had a good look at my action. The main thing for me was to keep it simple and not confuse too many things or try too hard. I wanted to have one simple, clear goal to run up, hit the deck hard and enjoy my cricket again.”Morkel’s fearsome spell of 5-2-15-3 on the fourth and final morning at the Wanderers – which included 3 for 0 in seven balls – meant he finished the series with 19 wickets at 21.47 and Steyn, despite his slow start, took 15 at 23.80. Compare that to England’s two leading quicks; James Anderson managed 16 wickets at 34.25 and Stuart Broad 13 wickets at 33.46. They both performed up to their career averages, but that’s the problem for England who can’t find a bowler to average in the mid-20s.Andrew Strauss said conditions were tailor-made for the South Africa pair and that they proved too good. “On wickets that have a bit of bounce and swing, that’s playing into both their hands – Morkel with the bounce and Steyn with the swing. We’ve always felt their first spells are as good as anything you’ll see in world cricket. We’ve always felt if you can get them into the second and third spells, things get a bit easier. But we weren’t able to do that often enough without losing a number of wickets.”Team-mates believe the duo have the ability to go on and dominate the game in a similar way to Allan Donald and Shaun Pollock. “They are different sorts of bowlers to those guys, but all I can say is I’d rather be catching the ball rather than facing them,” Mark Boucher said. “They still have a lot of learning to do, they are young and will learn quickly, but have the potential to be up there with the best to play the game.”That is high praise indeed, but on the evidence of recent weeks it is not misplaced.

Their collective tenacity and professionalism has helped the visitors match up to the challenge of playing the world’s No. 1 team

ESPNcricinfo staff16-Nov-2010They were of varying length and in different guises but most of the questions put to Daniel Vettori after the Hyderabad Test was drawn were born from a common sentiment: one of surprise at how a team ranked No. 8, having been humiliated in one-day internationals by Bangladesh, had managed to hold the No. 1 Test side to a 0-0 scoreline after two matches. They sought to determine whether Vettori was relieved at the results, whether New Zealand felt a sense of achievement, and whether they would spend the hour-long bus ride back to their hotel feeling satisfied and contented. The more pertinent question, though, is: how has this come to pass?The bulk of the blame from the Indian camp, and the captain MS Dhoni is the primary finger-pointer, has been slathered on the unresponsive tracks prepared at Motera and in Hyderabad. A fair share of the criticism is justified since the pitches at both venues stayed unreasonably flat on all five days and made bowling as appealing as going to the dentist. A weaker reason is the injury to India’s primary wicket-taker Zaheer Khan on the fourth day of the second Test. He would have been dangerous, but not dangerous.To not credit this New Zealand team as a whole for their collective tenacity, and the individuals comprising it for their strength in overcoming unique challenges, however, would be to ignore the fundamental reasons for their success across time and formats: their whole has always been greater than the sum of the parts.A statistic bandied about in the lead-up to the tour was that the entire New Zealand squad had fewer Test runs than Sachin Tendulkar. At present, seven New Zealand batsmen have more runs in the series than him. And they have been made in adversity.In Ahmedabad, New Zealand were in strife during their response to India’s strong first-innings total when Jesse Ryder and Kane Williamson began their partnership. Ryder was returning to Test cricket after an injury layoff, Williamson was beginning his Test career. Failure at that juncture would have been a disappointment but it would also have been understood and forgiven. In Hyderabad, the heroes were a batsman who had just made a pair, another who had been dropped for the first Test, and a third who was new to the challenges of being a Test opener.Ryder responded by batting with a calmness that had traces of Inzamam-ul-Haq to it. He is unflustered at the crease, and he has all the shots. And speed. Tim McIntosh proved he possessed the temperament to handle a struggle and play aggressively once on the other side of it. Martin Guptill spoke of the preparation he had put in to cope with Indian spin, and though his test wasn’t of the highest standard, his efforts showed. Brendon McCullum used his attacking skills in his new role to wipe out New Zealand’s deficit quicker than most would have expected, and as a result they were under extreme pressure for a shorter duration. And Williamson, whose genial celebration of his maiden century won hearts in this age of aggression, exhibited his forcefulness by striking Sreesanth for three fours in the first over of the final day. Those boundaries effectively signalled the end of India’s victory aspirations, even before Zaheer trudged off the field.”The top order came here under pressure from what had happened in Bangladesh but they’ve responded exceptionally well,” Vettori said. “Particularly the two openers in this game, Brendon in his second Test match as an opener and Tim McIntosh coming off a pair, were outstanding and really set up the platform in both innings to allow us to score some pretty good totals. So the likes of Williamson and Ryder in the first Test, and McIntosh and McCullum in this one, have really allowed us to be at our best.”The batting apart, New Zealand were also expected to struggle to take 20 wickets. They managed it in Ahmedabad, and they’ve also bowled with rigorous discipline that disrupted the pace at which India are accustomed to scoring at home. Vettori didn’t grumble about the pitches either, despite bowling a total of 142.3 overs, the most in the series. He’s toiled manfully, like a captain should, bowling until his arm is sore and has 11 wickets, again the most in the series, to show for his efforts. He granted himself the luxury of a rest when India had a jolly hit during the final session of play in Hyderabad, but has otherwise been the crux of New Zealand’s campaign.

New Zealand haven’t complained about pitches and the lack of UDRS, or made too much about adjusting to Indian conditions. They’ve played the series in wonderful spirit – heartily applauding Harbhajan’s game-changing innings and not responding to Sreesanth’s prickly behaviour

New Zealand’s pace attack – led by Chris Martin and Tim Southee – has not attempted to overachieve on these deadest of pitches. They’ve bowled to well-set fields designed to save the single and worn India’s batsmen down. An inspired spell from Martin aside, during which India crumbled to 15 for 5 at Motera, they were unlikely to cut through the most-celebrated batting line-up in the world. Instead, they relied on a relentless accuracy and it has brought them steady results. The key to New Zealand’s bowling success, however, has been their fielding and that is one discipline no one expected them to struggle in. The flying Kiwis have taken sharp catches at slip and prevented countless boundaries with precise anticipation, agile movement and a well-timed dive in the in-field. McCullum provides the energy and is at the heart of the fielding effort. On his watch, few shots get past cover.The underpinning factor that has made all this achievable, however, has been their mindset and the utter professionalism with which they prepare and play. They haven’t complained about pitches and the lack of UDRS, or made too much about adjusting to Indian conditions. They’ve played the series in wonderful spirit – heartily applauding Harbhajan’s game-changing innings and not responding to Sreesanth’s prickly behaviour. Their approach has been one of understated grit.New Zealand have now held India to draws in their last four Tests. In two of them, India had to do the surviving. Vettori’s team will still be expected to lose in Nagpur, though. If they don’t, it will be a surprise again. That is the lot of this hard-working team that has punched above its weight.

If Brad Haddin had settled with a half-century in this innings his contribution still would have glowed. By stretching it so far he delivered the greatest performance of his life

Peter English at the Gabba27-Nov-2010Brad Haddin was on 77 when Richie Benaud, a man who has watched more Test cricket than anyone, called it “the most valuable innings he has ever played for Australia”. Benaud rarely over-states a situation and initially it seemed a premature rating. Nobody knew it at the time, but Haddin was only just halfway done.He had stepped out to join Michael Hussey at 5 for 143, with Australia well in arrears, and eventually left after 398 minutes with the side in such comfort that it felt like previous one-sided Ashes Tests at the Gabba. Haddin’s 136 contributed towards his record-breaking stand of 307 with Hussey, which was 47 more than England managed in their first bat.This position was not handed to Australia. Often Haddin looks like a man for easy runs, but before his century they were as difficult as any he has earned in a baggy green. He had fought on the second afternoon to be 22 off 71 balls, an unusual tempo for him, and the second morning began in a similar hard-working fashion. Ground was taken slowly until the pitch turned white, the bowlers wilted and the fielders grew sloppy. Then Haddin’s attacks became more frequent.The one stroke Haddin will be remembered for is the six he unveiled to reach his third Test hundred. When he lofts down the ground everyone else on the field is a frozen object in a photograph. Haddin is the only one who seems to move, slowly, his foot striding forward and his bat dropping and then rising with the ball. There is no more graceful sequence in the game.Graeme Swann was tempting Haddin to launch him straight and the batsmen obliged. Haddin likes risk and regularly finds himself succumbing to an early rush. On 94 there was no danger, despite the fielders peppered inside the boundary.”Get out of the 90s as quick as I could,” he said of his thought process. “They cut my areas off pretty well. I could see what they were doing. I just had a clear head and went for it.” The extravagance had been earned.The stroke was so perfect that the man at long-off was not in play, even though the ball landed on his side of the sightscreen. Haddin arrived at a neat 100 and after a second bear hug of the day with Hussey, he looked towards the dressing room and rehearsed a straight-bat shot.There were no gaping holes between bat and pad when he had aimed cover or off drives, and the tighter technique was partly responsible for his hundred coming in 222 balls, an age for a Haddin innings. While he was content with his output, Haddin continued to power on until after tea, when he pushed at Swann and was well taken by Paul Collingwood at first slip.Previously, more down-the-ground artwork was delivered with a straight punch in the air off Swann after he raised three figures. He had already done the same to James Anderson before reaching the milestone. The productive shot created a moment of tension when he pushed too early at Collingwood on 63, but the ball stayed just far enough away from Alastair Cook at deep mid-off. Another boundary sailed towards long-on later in the over.At 33, Haddin has entered a new stage in his 28-Test career. The winter was spent recovering from tennis elbow, which prevented his left hand from lifting a bat, but no longer bothers him. During Haddin’s time away Tim Paine appeared in four Tests and impressed with his glovework and batting temperament. No wicketkeeping understudy has received so much game time in Australia’s Test side since the 1980s, leaving Haddin to worry about the strength of his position. Paine now has a broken finger and Haddin has shut down all the challengers.There was a dropped catch off Peter Siddle on the opening day but nobody could complain about the effectiveness of his batting. It was intelligent and cautious, muscular and beautiful. He has opened both his Ashes series with centuries, but the one he rushed to in Cardiff began with his side at 5 for 474.If Haddin had settled with a half-century in this innings his contribution still would have glowed. By stretching it so far he delivered the greatest performance of his life. Benaud realised that well before everyone else.

Australian cricket is undergoing a major review of its structure, and Paul Marsh, the players’ association chief, talks about its outcomes, the academy’s identity crisis, his hopes for the new Big Bash League, and more

Interview by Daniel Brettig14-Jun-2011Players like Steven Smith have not got the necessary guidance of senior players in state cricket because of the exodus to the ICL•AFPYour relationship with Cricket Australia is a functional one, despite frequent differences of opinion. How important is it to keep that state of conciliation?
At our core we have both got the best interests of the game at heart. I think CA would say that about us, and we’d certainly say it about them. There are times, however, where we have differing views on how to reach that objective, and we do have our moments where we don’t agree. But the one thing we have always been able to do with CA is find a way forward. We have never had a situation where players have gone out on strike. I think that’s a real credit to the relationship between the two organisations.What, to you, are the major problems that have caused Australian cricket’s slide from the top of the global game?
I think there are two major issues. I think we lost 10 players from the Australian first-class system to the ICL, and those players were, in most cases, our senior state cricketers. So we lost the likes of Jimmy Maher, Michael Kasprowicz, Jason Gillespie, Ian Harvey, Stuart Law, Michael Bevan – those types of players, who were year in and year out making nearly 1000 runs and taking close to 50 wickets. They were the core of experienced players in our state system who improved the standard of state cricket. You take a number of senior players out of the state system and the standard has to drop.Those guys were the ones who were maintaining that standard, and therefore the experience that guys like Steve Smith or Phil Hughes are getting is not what it used to be. Those guys have missed out on the development opportunities that the generation before them got.There have been three periods in Australian cricket in my lifetime where we have had below-par results: the first one being World Series Cricket and the Australian Test team around that particular time, the second being the rebel tours to South Africa, on the back of the retirements of Dennis Lillee, Rod Marsh and Greg Chappell. And in recent times the players going to the ICL.There are very similar circumstances in each case, where a group of experienced players were taken out of our state system, and you could only choose your state teams and your Australian team from what was left.The second issue is this push towards youth in our system – I think an artificial push towards youth. I honestly believe you need to have a mix of youth and experience, and we have gone too far towards youth. The Futures League, with the restriction of only having three players over the age of 23, has made that a very weak competition, and the players would say almost universally that the gap between grade and first-class cricket has never been larger than what it is now. So the Futures League or second XI competition, which sits in between those competitions, is more important than ever, yet it’s being made artificially weak by these age restrictions.One of the outcomes of the playing conditions committee meeting was that they will lift that restriction to allow six players over the age of 23, which is a step in the right direction. From our perspective I’d prefer to see no age restrictions in there.You only need to have a few good young players coming through your system, but you want to make sure that they are getting the best possible development opportunities. If we are filtering one new player into the Australian team every year, you’ll have a very strong team. You want them to have the best possible development through that pathway. I think we have gone away from what has made us strong through our grade system and through our first-class system.I think we’ve got a responsibility to make sure each one of the pathway competitions is as strong a standard as it can be so that these players are getting the best possible development they can get. I don’t think that’s happening as well as it used to.Do you feel the ambivalence towards the group that disappeared to the ICL, and then the introduction of measures like the Futures League by Cricket Australia, result from the comfortable feeling that comes from being the world’s best for a long time?
What you’re asking me is: did Australian cricket become somewhat complacent, and I think the answer to that is yes. I know my dad, having run the cricket academy for many years, when he left, one of the things he said to CA was that he had real concerns about the quality of batsmen we had coming through, and his view was that that wasn’t taken on board seriously. I think what we have seen in recent times would back up the concerns he had at that time. I think there was a view certainly that “we’re going to keep on keeping on, we have the best pathway system in the world” etc.But it’s international sport, it’s competitive. There are international boards, particularly the Indians, who have far more money than we have got, and it was only a matter of time before they started to get their act together.

“The Centre of Excellence really needs to be offering a programme that is a level above what the states are offering. Then the states will want to send their players there, because they will be getting a better development experience than possibly what they are getting at the moment”

I think CA have now recognised that and this review they are going through is very comprehensive. They have got good people involved in it, and I know they are trying very hard to get to the bottom of what the issues are. I’d expect there are going to be some very strong recommendations that come out of that review.Your father’s close involvement with the academy was at a time when it was used as a finishing school for talented juniors who were on the cusp of first-class cricket. Was that a better model than the present one geared towards preparing state players for the international arena?
There are some really good people at the Centre of Excellence (CoE), but I would say it’s got an identity crisis. Ask 10 people what it is supposed to be doing and you’re quite likely to get half a dozen different responses. And that makes it very difficult for the people who are running it. My view is that it needs to go back to what it was initially set up to be, which was to get the best players from the Under-17s and Under-19s and prepare them for first-class cricket.One of the issues we have got here now is that when it first started up, we didn’t have the contract system we have now got in place. That complicates things because the state associations are contracting players on an annual basis, and they are questioning why they should send those players to the CoE, when, what they would say – it may vary a little from state to state – is that the CoE is basically replicating what they can and are doing in their home states.I think by going back to these younger players who aren’t contracted, you kill two birds with one stone. You’re then getting kids of the right age into the programme, and you don’t have the complications of the contract system, where you’ve got this ongoing arm-wrestle between CA and the state associations over the CoE.The CoE really needs to be offering a programme that is a level above what the states are offering. I think that needs to become part of their focus. Then the states will want to send their players there because they will be getting a better development experience than possibly what they are getting at the moment.Concern about the governance structure of Cricket Australia has manifested itself in a review of that governance. What do you think needs to change there?
We have major concerns – and I wouldn’t just limit this to Cricket Australia, but with Australian cricket’s governance model. I think this governance review needs to look at not only CA but the state associations as well. Our very strong view is that cricket needs an independent governance model at both CA and state levels. This is just about making sure that those organisations running the game are making decisions in the best interests of the game, and not just along state lines or at a state level along club lines. You want to get the best people into a structure that’s making decisions with the best interests of the game at its core.If we can get to that point, I think first, you’re going to see Australian cricket move ahead very quickly, and second, all the key stakeholders are going to be happy. I don’t think we’re getting that at the moment. There’s a fundamental flaw, putting aside the composition of the boards of the states, in that to be on the CA board you have to be on a state board. Straight away there’s a conflict of interest there that is unavoidable. The people who are on these boards are all decent people, but when you have to make a decision on the state association board and the CA board, you’ve just got this automatic conflict of interest.Secondly, because of that structure, where you have to, in many cases, come through the club structure to get on the state board to then get on to the CA board, it’s just too hard a pathway for some quality people to want to go through. I think we’re actually missing out on the calibre of board member we could be getting because of the structure and the path they’ve got to go down to become board members. We would certainly like to see an independent commission at CA level, where you’ve got a good mix of cricket people, commercial people, financial people, legal people etc., covering all the skill sets the game needs. Then we’d like to see at state level a similar structure, where you’ve got independent expertise on all the state boards.We have seen a very dramatic week surrounding the removal of Simon Katich from the list of CA contracts. Michael Beer, the incumbent Test spinner, was also missing. Did the re-jigging of the rankings to include Twenty20 cricket come at a cost to Test specialists?
I don’t think that’s a fair conclusion to draw. The rankings for players are still weighted heavily towards Tests. So if you’re ranked 10 in Test cricket and you don’t have a ranking in one-day cricket or Twenty20, or you’re ranked No. 10 in limited-overs cricket, but don’t have a Test ranking, you’re going to get more money as a Test player. The second point is, I don’t think there are any of the players you’d consider Test players who won’t also get a Big Bash contract. Simon Katich or Marcus North or Phil Hughes – each one of those guys will get a Big Bash contract, assuming they want one.The Big Bash League will have eight city-based teams to start with. Marsh hopes the format will help the game spread to other regions of Australia as well•Cricket AustraliaThe total player-payment pool is going up by 10%. There’s a 6% reduction in the CA retainer pool, the state retainer pool is reduced by about 30%, but then you’ve got this new pool of Big Bash money. So everyone will get two contracts: the traditional contracts are going to be less, but they will get a Big Bash contract on top of that. So all things being equal, players are going to push forward here. We have thought of all these different scenarios, and I honestly think we have maintained that prioritisation of Test cricket as well as we can. There is a market force here for Twenty20 cricket that was unavoidable. The BBL is an important future competition for CA and the players and we can’t ignore that. But we have tried to balance Test and one-day cricket in this model so players are still motivated to play all three forms of the game.A lot of money and time is going into the expansion of the Big Bash League. The introduction of city-based teams means abandoning a state versus state structure that has the benefit of history.
State cricket, for the last three decades or more, really hasn’t had any cut-through with the public. This new format has been reinvigorated to a degree, but I think that’s been largely to do with the format rather than necessarily the identity of the teams. So, in short, yes it can work. If we had launched this competition with six teams, there was nowhere to go from an expansion perspective – you can’t introduce a seventh state to Australia. So going to city-based – they have gone to eight teams and there’s no reason that can’t increase going forward – means you can get teams into the Gold Coast, far north Queensland, Geelong, or wherever it might be, and get cricket to new audiences.The trick is going to be how well this is promoted. Now that we have signed off on the deal, there’ll be a player recruitment period coming up. From there the challenge for CA and the franchises is to make some noise and get the public excited about what’s coming. Once players are linked to the teams, it’s going to be an easier thing to do.There is a heavy use of the Indian Premier League as the example for the BBL to follow. Yet the reasons Australians and Indians go to cricket in their countries is quite different. How optimistic are you about the new competition?
You can draw on how successful the Big Bash has been over the past few years. I don’t hear anyone who has been going to Big Bash games say they’re not going to watch the new format of the Big Bash because they have changed to city-based teams. I’m not hearing that from people, so I’d like to think we will at least continue at the levels of interest we have. But more optimistically than that, you’d think it’s going to grow, and I would expect high-quality overseas players in this competition, now that we have got money to attract them. And we’re going to have Australian players hopefully available for parts of the competition in the short term and for the whole thing in the longer term. There’s plenty of optimism and opportunity around this competition.

The Australian dressing room is the last place many expected to see Craig McDermott.

Daniel Brettig17-May-2011Thirteen years ago, Tim May wrote , a “true-ish” story of the Australian cricket team on tour. Names, dates and places were changed to protect the innocent and the guilty, but one character emerged more sharply drawn than most. “Alistair Barterman” read as a thinly-veiled depiction of Craig McDermott, who is portrayed across the tale as a pathologically meticulous fast bowler with a long history of injuries both major and minor. He is ultimately withdrawn from the team when a scorpion bite causes his head to swell to twice its usual size.Flattering it wasn’t, yet May’s portrait carried the essence of truth. McDermott both meticulous and ambitious, carving out a personal sponsorship deal with Bartercard before many players were looking that far ahead. He also launched into a property investment business, Maxen Developments, that became his major focus after he played his last match for Australia in 1996. Within the Australian team he was his own man, respected for his bowling but never quite loved in the way others like Damien Fleming or Jason Gillespie would be. His best friend in the team was Merv Hughes, but then Hughes was everyone’s friend. For such an obviously ambitious character as McDermott, the comparatively basic pursuit of cricket coaching looked about as likely a career path as relationship counselling would be for Shane Warne. Retirement was swiftly followed by riches and real estate.So how exactly did Alistair Barterman evolve into Craig McDermott the bowling coach? Hard times were a catalyst, certainly, causing him to call on the knowledge gained as a cricketer but neglected as a former player. The maturing medium fast of his son, Alister, might also have played a part, as the advice handed down to offspring stirred the thought in McDermott that others might also benefit from his advice. Now he is Australia’s bowling coach at a time when the national selectors are fumbling around in the dark to find a new pace spearhead, not quite sure of where to go exactly for the first time since, well, McDermott’s uncertain early days in the Australian Test team. His return to the fold involved some searching lessons in humility.First, there was an extortion attempt that resulted in embarrassing personal details being aired in the courts. Later a Queensland property bust saw much of McDermott’s interests go up in smoke. He was embroiled in the collapse of his property business at a cost of millions to creditors and declared bankruptcy, selling his home. At the nadir of his business troubles, McDermott was paraded as a financial disaster by Australian tabloid television on Channel Nine, the same network that had once, via PBL, used him as a face of its cricket promotion. In the report he was last sighted ducking questions and escaping an underground car-park in his 4WD, seemingly destined for ignominy and obscurity.At the time his name was becoming a byword for failed investments, McDermott had already begun to chart his rehabilitation. Given a chance by the man who first selected him for Australia, the Centre of Excellence coach Greg Chappell, McDermott was hired on a part-time basis in late 2009. It was something of a probationary post, and a tentative step towards a second chance in cricket after he had kept away for more than a decade since injuries forced his retirement.Gradually, McDermott won the trust and respect of those he worked under at the CoE, including Chappell (since replaced by Cooley) and the manager Belinda Clark. His role grew from occasional to near full-time, albeit at modest rates of pay. The fact McDermott had worked alongside so many of the young bowlers expected to file into the national team over the next few summers gave him a head-start to the senior job that none of the other candidates, Allan Donald included, could offer. Bowlers under McDermott’s tutelage have included Josh Hazlewood, Peter George, James Pattinson, Luke Feldman, Nathan Coulter-Nile, Mitchell Starc and Ben Cutting. Alister McDermott has been a part-time scholar, forging a path into the Queensland state squad.Of particular use to them will be McDermott’s experience as the Australian attack was re-built in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Unsurprisingly, life before Warne rather resembled life after him. Before he arrived the Australians had lacked the once-in-a-lifetime talents they are unable to conjure now, but managed to shape a bowling unit capable of running through all but the very best of batting line-ups. McDermott, Hughes and Bruce Reid (when fit) offered an ideal balance of skills, heights and temperaments. Hughes and Reid acted as foils for McDermott at various times, all moving the ball in various ways and from different angles, whirring down short balls or pitching it up in the expectation of swing. On the 1991 West Indies tour a succession of flights and the recurrence of back gremlins severely affected Reid’s performances, but McDermott stood up in Caribbean climes to be the outstanding fast man on either side.

The fact McDermott had worked alongside so many of the young bowlers expected to file into the national team over the next few summers gave him a head-start to the senior job that none of the other candidates, Allan Donald included, could offer.

Apart from technical knowledge befitting a bowler who possessed one of the more classical actions of the past 20 years, McDermott’s tactical acumen, particularly the ability to judge the right method for the prevailing conditions, is sharp. The final phase of his playing career was speckled with admirable efforts on wickets that were less than helpful – Allan Border’s last Test on a dead Durban pitch in 1994 featured a particularly meritorious spell – and McDermott was also adept at gaining swift and repeated breakthroughs when turf and atmosphere were in his favour. He gleaned 42 wickets at 27.66 from eight Tests at Adelaide Oval, perhaps cricket’s best example of an occasionally helpful but more often punishing surface for a pace bowler.Worthwhile too, of course, are the battle scars of McDermott’s life outside cricket. In the “real world” he aimed to become a big deal, and for a time managed to do so. The subsequent collapse of McDermott’s business means he has plenty of sobering thoughts to offer a generation that now counts dollar signs and Twenty20 contracts almost as readily as baggy green caps. Fellow coach Justin Langer emphasised McDermott’s life outside of the game as a strength, rather than a weakness.”I think he’ll also bring quite a worldliness to the group, because he obviously went away from the cricket scene for some time and had varying degrees of fortune in his business life,” Langer said. “Often young professionals now, they gain this change-room existence where they come in and they become professional cricketers and all they really get to know is the change-room and their team-mates. I think any outside sources or influences who can talk to them about life after cricket and about being a good person off the field, or the different challenges that come with being a professional cricketer and the rewards that come with that, will be valuable.”Over the next 12 months, McDermott faces a task almost as vexing as the saving of a business. The Australian attack ended the Ashes looking so innocuous it might have struggled to bowl out anyone. Mitchell Johnson may be the most explosive of Australia’s bowlers but he is also among the least consistently reliable, while there is no stand-out new ball pair given that Doug Bollinger and Ben Hilfenhaus have succumbed to injuries and indifferent form. McDermott says he is intent on looking forward – “it is part of my charter” – but also has ideas about how to remedy what he saw against England. Most of those will be grounded in hard work and sound planning, to master the many skills of fast bowling and then ensure they are repeatable under the fiercest of pressure.Given the widely held view that bowlers decide Test matches, it is possible to conclude that McDermott walked out of the Australian dressing room as Alistair Barterman and returned as the holder of the most vital coaching job going. Australia sorely needs a return on its investment in him.

Cricket at Lord’s is some experience, even with overzealous stewards, pedantic umps and lots of rain

Nick Campion22-Jul-2011Choice of game
I picked this game last winter as soon as the tickets went on sale. I wanted to see a Lord’s Test and see some of the best players in the world come together in a potentially explosive and series-shaping day of cricket. But that wasn’t quite how it turned out.Team supported
England.Key performer
The rain, unfortunately. After a very steady 49 overs, it felt like things were about to happen. A jumpy Kevin Pietersen was battling his desire to launch Harbhajan Singh into the stands, while the run-machine Jonathan Trott was picking up the pace. Ian Bell was due next, with his silky smooth strokes, and Eoin Morgan was practising his reverse-sweeps in the changing rooms. Alas, the rain struck before the story unfolded.One thing I’d have changed
Waitress service. Not just to save ourselves trips for beer, food and ice-cream, but so everyone else on our row could do the same, and therefore not keep having to ask us to stand up to let them past. It was more like an exercise class than a cricket match sometimes.Interplay I enjoyed
Between the spectators and stewards. Although unfailingly friendly and polite, the stewards seemed to have developed an obsessive-compulsive ticket-checking disorder. Being on the top tier of a stand, we had to pop downstairs if we wanted to get anything to eat or to use the toilet etc. When we returned five minutes later, the steward we’d just passed asked to see our ticket. Then when we got to the top of the stairs, another one had to see it again! What did they think happened between the bottom of the stairs and the top? The worst was when people were balancing their beer carriers while trying to find their tickets – one man lost all four pints when they slipped from his grasp while he tried to get the ticket out of his pocket. Oh how he laughed as £18 worth of beer ran down the drain. At least he had his hands free to show his ticket to the steward at the top of the stairs.Filling the gaps
During the lunch break we watched the kids play Kwik Cricket, and witnessed the first and only sixes of the day. We also saw some very dubious bowling actions that were clearly more than 15 degrees of bend in the elbow – about 75 degrees more.At lunch I made my choice of food purely by length of queue than taste. The system worked well, as within 15 minutes I had pie, chips, peas and gravy of no little quality.While on the subject, I can confirm that despite stiff global competition, the snack of choice for the nation’s Test match spectators remains the humble, yet great, British pork pie.Wow moment
When the umpires walked onto the field, we finally knew we had beaten the forecasts and were going to see some cricket. Either that or my first mouthful of steak-and-ale pie.Crowd meter
Lord’s just has a different crowd to any other Test match venue in the UK. Blazers and ties sit next to t-shirts and shorts, panama hats next to baseball hats, champagne flutes next to cans of lager – all bonded by the love for the game.The wine and beer were out of the coolboxes before the covers were off, and the next few hours were punctuated by the reassuring pop of champagne corks. One gentleman misjudged his champagne a little, spilling some all over the floor. Another spectator mopped it up with his copy of the .Lord’s is to be commended for treating grown-ups like grown-ups and allowing spectators to take in a reasonable amount of alcohol, unlike other Test grounds. This indulgence is rewarded by spectators enjoying their drinks and having their fun but never letting anything become unsavoury.Entertainment
The best entertainment during the rain break was a group of young lads playing cricket under the stands and using an umbrella as a bat. You had to admire their ingenuity but wonder if their parents would be so pleased next time it rains.Regulation irritation
The authorities seem to be trying harder than before to keep spectators happy, but still they drive us mad sometimes. There was no reason to delay the start until 11.30am today. It should have been 11.15 at the latest. Then, after three hours waiting, we were all geared up for a resumption for an hour at 6.30pm but three small drops of rain fell at 6.26, so the covers went back on and because the restart hadn’t happened by 6.30pm the day’s play was called off. That’s the regulations, you see. Never mind the fact that they could have started at 6.35pm and played for 55 minutes. I think the 10,000-15,000 spectators who had waited three hours in the rain would have appreciated that.Overall
The cricket was absorbing but we were robbed of half the day and a potentially fascinating passage of play. Being there, though, was a pleasure – to experience the ebb and flow of play, the warm embrace of Lord’s, even the rhythm of each delivery: the hum as the bowler walks back, the rising “Wooaaahh…” of anticipation as he runs in, a crescendo followed silence as he delivers, and an “Ooohhh” as it passes the outside edge. Then the hum begins again.Marks out of 10
7. Damn you, rain.

You felt sorry for New Zealand, you felt happy for Sri Lanka. You felt sport

Sidharth Monga in Colombo29-Mar-2011Sport can be cruel, sport can bring immense boundless joy. Sometimes it can do both at the same time. Tonight was a night when sport hurt and uplifted in equal measure.As Thilan Samaraweera’s outside edge bisected the wicketkeeper and slip to win Sri Lanka the semi-final, the whole New Zealand team sank to their knees; something just left them, the spirit that had kept them alive when they had no business being alive had now gone. For the first time on a humid, sapping day, they looked tired. For the sixth time they had lost in a World Cup semi-final. As they walked off the field, having shaken the winners’ hands, they quietly shook hands with their support staff who had come to the edge of the dressing room, and were no doubt impressed by the fight the players had put on for the last three hours. The players’ faces told a different tale, though. They wanted more than just that honourable defeat.Around them, a party had begun. In fact it had begun in earnest. Moments before those winning runs came, Samaraweera had thought he had got them through a much more convincing strike through the covers. It turned out Aleem Dar had been distracted by the fireworks outside the stadium just as the bowler passed him, and had called it a dead ball. Mahela Jayawardene, running for Angelo Mathews, couldn’t believe it. The hands went up, the shoulders were shrugged, even though a win was near-certain, with four runs required off the last three overs. The tension had surely become too much to take for him. New Zealand had put up one hell of a fight.As Samaraweera’s outside edge bisected the wicketkeeper and slip, the whole Sri Lankan team rushed onto the field. Inside the dressing room they had sat tense from the moment New Zealand started clawing their way back. A Sri Lankan flag sat over each players’ seat, which they themselves bring and place before every match. Muttiah Muralitharan was padded up to come next, ahead of his batting order, because he wanted to finish it off. This was Murali’s last match at home, and he had earlier signed off with a wicket off his last delivery. The pads could be taken off now, and his team-mates lifted him on the shoulders and carried him around the ground. Every time Murali thought the noise in the stands had gone down a notch, he raised his arms asking for more. The crowd responded every time.Kumar Sangakkara, their captain, would put the victory in context. “Cricket has healed all wounds in Sri Lanka,” he said. “Whenever cricket was played, it seemed life was normal. We carry that responsibility with us whenever we play.” It is a huge responsibility for a sport to carry, and not ideal, but that’s how it has turned out to be. The life tonight was indeed normal. The bands played, the people danced, the fireworks went off as the proud cricket team thanked them. The noise was deafening, who could blame Dar for having pulled out of that delivery?Some time before Samaraweera managed those winning runs, there was a huge appeal for a caught-behind against Mathews. He was not given out. New Zealand challenged the call. Poor technology, which is a shame for an event for this magnitude, didn’t give New Zealand a fair chance to get it overturned. Sitting with a ball in his hand on an icebox behind the fine-leg boundary, Allan Donald lost his patience.Donald, the great bowler and competitor that he was, never made it past a World Cup semi-final as a player. Tonight, as New Zealand’s bowling coach, he was almost as involved as the players out on the field. He was just as desperate as the players diving all over the field. He made sure the bowlers fielded close to him, constant chat happened, advice and ideas exchanged. When the final runs came, he finally got up, shuffled the ball from his left hand to his right, then from right to left, then from left to right, gathering himself, then under-armed it to nowhere particular on the field, and went to shake the hands of the victors and the vanquished.Unlike football, where World Cup knockouts invariably end in similar scenes, neither the victors flung their shirts over their heads, nor did the vanquished shed a tear. The joy and the disappointment ran deeper. Yet the emotion could be felt, for not every knockout game in cricket World Cups makes for such a mix. This one needed a fight from the underdogs, and the favourite’s ability to take the punches. This was a special game of cricket.Sri Lanka, through the sheer quality of their side, had strangulated the New Zealand batting, and were on their way as their top three kept things under suitable control. New Zealand, who didn’t quite have the bowlers to run through a mentally strong Sri Lankan side, kept fighting, kept refusing to die, and pounced on the first opening they got. They converted one wicket into two, two into three, three into four. Against a team much higher in quality and with varied weapons, through their sprit and their fielding, they had made it clear the road to final will go over their diving bodies, and that included Jesse Ryder’s, who has often been ridiculed for his weight and his drinking.If that was what it would take, Sri Lanka would do it. They would bring New Zealand down to their knees. The final shot summed it up. Behind Samaraweera’s raised arms was Ross Taylor with his weight on his knees and his face in his hands; a distraught Ryder from point would have seen Mathews celebrate at square leg; Daniel Vettori, playing his last match as captain, finally took his Black Cap off and went to congratulate Jayawardene. You felt sorry for New Zealand, you felt happy for Sri Lanka. You felt sport.