On Sunday, Sachin Tendulkar played the perfect innings in the perfect chase, when it mattered most

Nagraj Gollapudi at the SCG02-Mar-2008
Sachin Tendulkar played the perfect innings in the perfect chase when it mattered most © Getty Images
“He has scored 16,000 runs. I haven’t even played 16,000 balls.” That was the pithy comment from Mahendra Singh Dhoni when asked, halfway through this CB Series, whether he was bothered by his senior-most batsman failing to make big runs. After topping the run-charts in the Tests, Sachin Tendulkar seemed to have lost his rhythm – until Sunday, when he played the perfect innings in the perfect chase when it mattered most.Perhaps the signs were there on Saturday, when he followed up the regular outdoor nets with a session indoors for another 45 minutes. The evidence of his extra preparation was seen early enough; he saw off Brett Lee’s short ones with respect but stole tight singles by dropping the ball with the softest of hands. Last year he withstood some of the best swing bowling in England; today he took on sheer pace. Anything full on the leg was dispatched with that eye-catching turn of the wrist, the ball reaching the boundary almost as soon as it came in contact with his heavy blade.Spin wasn’t spared either; he stepped out to Brad Hogg, whom he has often dominated, and hit him over extra cover. He drew on all his experience to upset the bowlers, especially when they tried something different. Mitchell Johnson came round the wicket and pitched it short into his body but Tendulkar simply arched back to shoulder the ball over the empty slip region – just enough to beat third man.His batting was glorious in itself; even better, though, was the way he shepherded his partners, some of whom were toddlers when Tendulkar first played for India. He opened with Robin Uthappa and they played confidently; the lack of a good start, and the subsequent pressure on the middle order, had hindered India in earlier matches but today the openers never gave the opposition attack any room to capitalise.That helped, and also the fact that Tendulkar was around when a couple of wickets fell in quick succession. India needed another partnership and Rohit Sharma, who has shown on this tour a maturity and wisdom beyond his age, was perhaps the best person to join Tendulkar.On Saturday, Tendulkar was taken to the cricket museum of the SCG Trust and was handed the bat used by Don Bradman. “It was an experience, a special moment, to hold Sir Don’s bat, the one that he actually played with. Nice to follow that up with a hundred.”Tendulkar, understanding the fluidity of the situation, guided his junior team-mate expertly. As the ball got old in the middle overs, the priority was on preserving wickets and so a drop in the run-rate didn’t matter. Instead, the batsmen found the gaps and rotated the strike and, by the time Rohit was out, their fourth-wicket stand of 123 had all but sealed the win.Later, Tendulkar spoke about Rohit. “I’ve played a few games with him but this was the first time we had a long stand. He is extremely calm and composed and that’s his strength. He showed terrific character and has a wide range of shots. What’s more his shot selection was also very good.”All the while, plagued by a groin niggle, he was compiling his first ODI century in Australia. On 98 he pushed one down to fine-leg and ran for a single; at the last moment, he turned back for the second but better sense prevailed and he stopped just in time. He stuck out his tongue and presented his shy smile. He didn’t need to wait much longer.On Saturday, after that practice session, Tendulkar did an interview with Channel Nine. He was taken to the cricket museum of the SCG Trust and was handed the bat used by Don Bradman. “It was an experience, a special moment, to hold Sir Don’s bat, the one that he actually played with. Nice to follow that up with a hundred.”

All of a sudden the favourites going in to the tournament find themselves one defeat short of being ousted from the event.

Sidharth Monga in Karachi02-Jul-2008The possible scenariosIf India win against Sri Lanka, they go through to the final, and the Pakistan-Bangladesh match becomes inconsequential.If India lose, and Pakistan beat Bangladesh, Pakistan go through. This scenario will have both India and Pakistan tied at four points, but Pakistan would head into the final by virtue of more wins in the Super Four stage.If India lose, and Pakistan lose to Bangladesh, India’s higher points tally will see them through.If either of the India-Sri Lanka or Pakistan-Bangladesh games is tied or has a no-result, then Pakistan won’t be able to catch up with India on points, and will be out of the final.Another flat subcontinent pitch, another ineffective performance by the Indian bowlers. And all of a sudden the favourites going in to the tournament find themselves one defeat short of being ousted from the event. If India lose to Sri Lanka on Thursday, and if Pakistan, as expected, beat Bangladesh the day after, both teams will be tied on four points. In that scenario, by the virtue of having won more matches in the Super Four stage, Pakistan will go through.However, India still haven’t reached a stage where they rely on some other match. All they need to do is beat Sri Lanka, something they did twice in three matches during the CB Series in Australia. Therein lies the story: the CB Series was played in Australia, the Asia Cup is being played in Pakistan. And the Indian bowlers react differently to the two types of conditions.When they lost to Pakistan today, it was the tenth time in the last one year that they conceded a total of 300 runs, seven of those in the subcontinent. While most of the Indian bowlers boast of a better record overseas, Chaminda Vaas’ statistics are slightly better in the subcontinent than outside. Muttiah Muralitharan’s effectiveness on subcontinent pitches can hardly be overstated.Even today, it was the Indian fast bowlers who perhaps made the target look about 20 less than it was. Praveen Kumar, who has almost always got the new ball to do something so far in his career, was out of sorts bowling to two left-hand openers. Ishant Sharma, who came in to replace Praveen, gave away 16 in his first over. Irfan Pathan, with his reduced pace, was always going to struggle on pitches that give him zero assistance. Dhoni thought the bowlers gave it their all, but the pitch was just too unresponsive. “They tried everything, whatever they had in the armoury they tried,” Dhoni said. “On a wicket like this, the only way you can stop batsmen from scoring runs is taking wickets. While we were batting we lost three quick wickets when we were batting, and all of a sudden Rohit and I were under pressure.”Apart from the continued ineffectiveness of the fast bowlers, Piyush Chawla looked quite innocuous too. But to ask someone so inexperienced to deliver on a pitch so doped might be a bit harsh, Dhoni reckoned. “There is no assistance, especially for spinners, on this wicket. You have to be an experienced spinner with a lot of variations. You have to exploit [whatever little the pitch has], and bowl according to wicket. If you have someone like that you can put pressure on batsmen, otherwise even 330 can be difficult to defend.”To set all this right India have about 13 hours after having played a gruelling match in tough conditions. Dhoni, who has been critical of the schedule, which has Pakistan playing the last match against Bangladesh, chose to look only at what was in his side’s control. “It’s definitely tough, especially if you are playing Sri Lanka,” Dhoni said. “But it’s very rare that you get to play back-to-back matches. And as a professional cricketer you have to be ready.”The playing conditions also, in a way, render the points carried forward from the first round ineffective by making Super Four wins the tie-breaking criterion. In last year’s World Cup, by contrast, teams carried forward points but didn’t face their first-round opponents in the next stage. Dhoni and his team, though, would not want to think about these things for the next 13 hours, and during the match.

Some were mesmerised, some scandalised, some repulsed; ignoring KP’s switch-hits was not an option, though

19-Jun-2008

“I covered my eyes as soon as he turned his body around. I was quite surprised and went ‘Oh no’, but he smashed it. In fact, he smashed it twice. He did actually come up the wicket and say, ‘I was thinking about that in bed last night.’ So at least we know the visualisation was there.”
Paul Collingwood was there“I just take my hat off to him and say ‘nice shot’. All it’s done is make me go back and change and get better and come up with a new tactic.”

Scott Styris, the unfortunate bowler, takes it on the chin“To even it up, bowlers should be able to bowl down both sides of the wide line. Then it brings your skill into play…”It’s one of those freakish things, and if it happens again it might go straight up in the air. It’s a difficult shot, so we’d almost encourage it.”
Daniel Vettori another bowler, and the opposing captain, sees both sides“That’s ridiculous. Absolutely stupid. The reverse sweep has been part of the game for however long. I am just fortunate that I am able to hit it a bit further.”
Talk of the stroke being unfair did not please Kevin Pietersen“Funnily enough, Chris Benham and I were practising KP’s new shot in the nets a few days before he pulled it out of the bag.”The right-hander’s left-handed hit over long-on is the natural progression from a reverse-slogsweep.”

Hampshire’s Nic Pothas creates an intellectual property-rights issue“Now that he has played that shot against Styris, I can finish off what I tried to say so many years ago. The argument is, if the batsman can change from being right-handed to left-handed, there shouldn’t be a problem with a bowler changing from being right-handed to left-handed, either, without having to tell the umpire, nor should he have to tell the umpire if he is going over or round the wicket.”

Michael Holding sums up the bowlers’ predicament“A bowler must advise a batsman when he’s changing direction, why should the batsmen not; given that where the bowler’s aiming will depend on the placement of the off stump.”

Gideon Haigh seconds Holding“It just should be outlawed straightaway. If you want to hit to one side of the field, you’ve got to do it in a cross fashion, and not swap the way you’re facing or your grip. Otherwise you are going to start to allow the bowlers to go round the wicket, over the wicket, and keep swapping during their run-ups.”

We know which side Ian Healy is on“The lawmakers have to be mindful of innovation versus convention, potentially what is good and entertaining and what is prejudicial to the game… He has just set a standard at the moment that no one else has been prepared to try in a game. Others might have been prepared to practise it, but he has actually taken the next step, had the courage to take that risk.”
John Buchanan respects innovation when he sees it“As a cynical old bowler myself, I can see bowlers just stopping in their run-up. I am amazed that Styris didn’t do that on Sunday, at least the second time. One way of doing it would be to get rid of the whole idea of leg side if the batsman switches his stance. So the bowler has a reasonable amount of latitude on wides on both sides of the wicket. And it doesn’t matter where the ball pitches when you go up for lbw.”
Dickie Bird is in the bowlers’ corner too“The truth of the matter is that there is a thing called flair in cricket… As far as I am concerned there has got to be a bit of flair in cricket. The more the merrier, as far as I’m concerned, is the way they should go.”
Tony Greig is all for experimentation“I wasn’t working on that game. I was watching it on television and I nearly jumped out of my seat. I thought he was absolutely brilliant, and it was a stroke of genius.”
The ever-excitable David Lloyd manages to get even more excited“That was outrageous. I hope he tries it on me. I might have more chance of getting him out.”
Shane Warne, KP’s former Hampshire team-mate, seems to indicate that he may yet come out of retirement if this is the way cricket is headed “If he [the batsman] is going to do that then you tell your bowler to bowl short into his ribs – and we have three leg slips and a gully [in case you have three slips and a gully to begin with]. If the batsmen is being so cute and clever, then I am going to say, ‘Right, you are having a bit of Bodyline son’.”
Nasser Hussain speaks with his Jardine cap on “It incurs a great deal of risk for the batsman. It also offers bowlers a good chance of taking a wicket and therefore MCC believes that the shot is fair to both batsman and bowlers.”
The MCC, after much deliberation, rules in favour of Pietersen

Don’t let anger at the official from Down Under distract from appreciating the batting of the man from Wakenaam Island

Fazeer Mohammed02-Mar-2009

Don’t let anger at the official from Down Under distract from appreciating the batting of the man from Wakenaam Island. It would really be an injustice if the penultimate Test of an unexpectedly competitive series between West Indies and England is remembered more for the controversial interventions by third umpire Daryl Harper than the class, composure and powers of concentration of Ramnaresh Sarwan.Were the home side in danger of sliding to defeat on the final day today at Kensington Oval, you could rest assured that the Australian’s erroneous interpretation of evidence presented to him via television technology that led to the dismissals of Shivnarine Chanderpaul and Brendan Nash on Saturday afternoon would be the source of much public fury.Thankfully, there doesn’t appear to be any chance of that. No doubt, though, the ICC needs to either reassess the quality of some of their elite officials or do away with the referral system altogether if they want to avoid generating even more bacchanal than there is already when you’re dealing with a sporting contest that extends for a full five days and therefore increases the risk of human error – with or without any technical assistance – making a critical difference.So instead of joining in the rush to cuss Harper, let’s celebrate the full flowering of a talent that has infuriated us for so long for its previous inability to stay in bloom consistently. Indeed, it’s most appropriate that Sarwan’s finest Test innings has come at the same ground where he announced himself to the world with a debut knock of such quality nine years ago that no less a personality than Sir Vivian Richards hailed the arrival of a truly special batsman.Of course, Kensington Oval is barely recognisable from the wonderful old venue where he stroked his way to an unbeaten 84 against Pakistan in 2000, playing with maturity beyond his 19 years in getting the better of a bowling attack comprising Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Mushtaq Ahmed and Saqlain Mushtaq. Even amid the wreckage of the defeat by an innings inside two days to England at Headingley three months later, Sarwan looked a class apart with unbeaten innings of 57 (out of 172) and 17 (out of 61).Yet for all that bountiful ability he, until 11 months ago, only had nine centuries from 67 Tests and an average below 40. Not only was it a classic case of gross under-achievement, but it never appeared to bother Sarwan too much if he gave it away when well set, whether to a miscued hook, a slash to backward point or some other mode of dismissal that betrayed an unwillingness to temper his repertoire of sumptuous strokes with judiciousness.There isn’t so much that is technically different from his batting over the years. He still leaves you with the suspicion that on a juicier pitch against bowlers prepared to bend their backs and really let him have it – as can be expected in Australia at the end of the year – his tendency to get too square-on will have the slip cordon anticipating an edge at any time.So what has brought about the transformation, to the extent that his monumental effort at Kensington Oval follows on scores of 106, 94 and 107? Don’t forget as well that last year he sealed a domineering two-Test series against Sri Lanka with a match-winning hundred on the last day at Queen’s Park Oval and, captaining the side in the absence of Chris Gayle, compiled a patient 128 to help ensure a draw against the Aussies in the first-ever Test at the Sir Vivian Richards Stadium.Sarwan’s five hundreds and five other scores over 50 in his last nine Tests in the Caribbean have produced an average almost twice his overall under-achieving figure of 43.02. It should not be bypassed that he contributed just 20 runs in three innings in New Zealand and therefore needs to show that he is more than a flat-track hometown bully. Still, his consistency, concentration and burgeoning appetite for big runs in this series suggest a significant change in a fundamental aspect of his game.May I suggest that the key to all this success is maturity. Whether he has matured as a person is for others to assess. But, as a batsman, he clearly values his wicket and now tempers an attacking and often reckless nature with an appreciation of the circumstances in the middle and that facing his team.Rumours abounded when he gave up the job of deputy to Gayle in New Zealand, but his role in guiding new vice-captain Denesh Ramdin to a maiden Test hundred yesterday reinforces the belief that he acknowledges his duty as a senior player above and beyond personal objectives.Nine years after bursting onto the international scene, many will say it’s about time. But, still short of his 29th birthday, he should have more than enough opportunity to make amends. It’s hard to believe that the man who walked off the ground just before tea with 291 runs to his name in one innings (598 at 149.50 in the series so far) was dropped by then captain Brian Lara for the second Test in Pakistan at the end of 2006, ostensibly for selling his wicket too cheaply in the previous match.Has Ramnaresh Sarwan turned the corner? Like West Indies, we just have to wait and see, even if the signs are very, very encouraging.

In a cricketing world given over to the sensational and the glamorous, and a Caribbean environment fixated with style and machismo as much as substance, Chanderpaul is almost always judged very harshly

Fazeer Mohammed10-Sep-2008
In a desperately weak West Indies side, the pressure is almost always on Shivnarine Chanderpaul to deliver © DigicelCricket.com
Surely they can’t bypass Shiv this time.Not that he needs any formal acknowledgement to validate another prolific 12 months, but there can really be no other option for International Cricket Council “Cricketer of the Year” than Shivnarine Chanderpaul.Amid the darkest period in the history of the West Indian game, Chanderpaul has emerged from the considerable shadow of Brian Lara to confirm to everyone what most discerning observers already knew: that he is one of the premier batsmen of our time and, at the age of 34 and with 8,001 runs in Tests and 7,573 in one-day internationals to his name, must be ranked among the very best Caribbean batsmen of all time.Of course, in a cricketing world given over to the sensational and the glamorous, and a Caribbean environment fixated with style and machismo as much as substance, Chanderpaul is almost always judged very harshly.Few would pay money just to watch him and his crab-like shuffle across the crease. There are suggestions of selfishness and an unhealthy preoccupation with the asterisk (in other words, not to get out) that jeopardises opportunities to win or at least save matches. And on top of all of that, he isn’t a personality, a media-savvy character who can sell the game and sell himself.But, and this is the critical point, he scores runs, plenty of them and in all forms of the game. So, when comparing him with the other contenders for the major prize at today’s ICC awards function in Dubai, Chanderpaul seems to be doing a Richard Thompson in holding off the rest of the field, although he doesn’t have to worry about the equivalent of a Usain Bolt well clear of the chasing pack and already celebrating victory.Let’s look at the numbers, shall we?For the period under review – August 9, 2007 to August 12, 2008 – Chanderpaul has compiled 819 runs in eight Tests at an average of 91 with three hundreds and six fifties. In ODIs, he has tallied 598 runs in 13 matches at an average of 74.75 and a strike-rate of 74.19 with one hundred and five fifties.The stats on the other contenders for “Cricketer of the Year” are as follows:Mahela Jayawardene: Tests – 10 matches, 1127 runs (ave 75.13), five hundreds, three fifties; ODIs – 22 matches, 504 runs (ave 26.52), five fifties.Graeme Smith: Tests – 16 matches, 1476 runs (ave 56.76), five hundreds, four fifties; ODIs – 21 matches, 920 runs (ave 48.42), one hundred, nine fifties.Dale Steyn: Tests – 14 matches, 86 wickets (ave 18.10), six 5WI, two 10WM; ODIs – seven matches, nine wickets (ave 37.00), economy rate 5.13 per over. Chanderpaul, Jayawardene and Smith are also in the running for the “Test Cricketer of the Year” award along with Jacques Kallis, whose numbers for the review period are: 16 matches, 1331 runs (ave 57.86), six hundreds, four fifties; 27 wickets (ave 27.37), one 5WI.Of course, this isn’t just a numbers game. But, even in the case of context, Chanderpaul still compares very favourably with the Sri Lankan captain and the trio of South Africans. His hundred in Port Elizabeth laid the foundation for a historic first Test victory in South Africa, while centuries against Australia at Sabina Park and the Sir Vivian Richards Stadium reflected the courage and determination that are his trademarks. An unbeaten 86 perfectly complemented Ramnaresh Sarwan’s hundred in guiding West Indies to a deceptively easy series-levelling victory over Sri Lanka in Port of Spain.In one-dayers, who could ever forget those final two deliveries of the match at the Queen’s Park Oval when, with ten runs needed to win, he drove Chaminda Vaas straight for four and then hoisted a low full-toss for six over Jayawardene’s disbelieving head on the midwicket boundary?While his lack of articulation and unassuming manner rule him out as an ICC poster boy, it is his constant flow of runs and not intermittent dribble of words that makes him worthy of being its “Cricketer of the Year”More than these considerations, however, is the burdensome reality, as Lara experienced before him, that in such a desperately weak West Indies side, the pressure is almost always on Chanderpaul to deliver whenever he walks out to the middle.Yet such has been the effectiveness with which he has first blunted and then prospered off the very best attacks, sometimes it almost appears that the opposition, recognising him as a virtual immovable object, concentrate their firepower on the man at the other end.This is not meant to minimise the stellar 12 months that Jayawardene, Smith and Steyn have enjoyed, but their efforts are considerably enhanced as key members of much stronger and more successful teams, where responsibility is not resting so disproportionately heavy on their shoulders.Jayawardene plundered big hundreds off England in consecutive Tests and followed that up with another century in the first-ever Test at Providence in Guyana. Apart from his batting prowess, Smith’s maturity as a leader was reflected in notable series triumphs in Pakistan and England.Steyn, for his part, continues to reap handsome rewards with his pace and accuracy. Just being in such an elite shortlist is an achievement in itself. But having delivered with the bat in previous years and then missing out on international recognition in highly questionable circumstances, Chanderpaul is truly deserving of this highest accolade, firstly on merit, and secondly on sentiment.It’s not his fault that the West Indies are in such a mess, and while his lack of articulation and unassuming manner rule him out as an ICC poster boy; it is his constant flow of runs and not intermittent dribble of words that makes him worthy of being its “Cricketer of the Year”.

Right posture? Quick reflexes? Decent tolerance for pain? You were born to field at forward short-leg and silly point

Aakash Chopra13-Aug-2009What does the close-in fielder focus on?
While standing at short leg or silly point, I focus on the body language of the batsman, his foot movements and his back-lift. These three aspects give away the length of the ball and the kind of shot the batsman is looking to play.Most catches come when the batsman is playing a defensive shot, and the likelihood of those is a lot higher if he’s on the front foot. The back-lift is a lot shorter if the batsman is playing a defensive shot, except when the batsman has a very high back-lift. Fielding to someone like Yuvraj Singh or Virender Sehwag is extremely difficult because the high back-lift doesn’t give away anything: every time they lift the bat you think they’re preparing for an aggressive shot, but it could just as well end up being a defensive prod.Personally I don’t like to look at the bowler to gauge the length of the ball because it involves moving my neck, which in turn means shifting focus to the batsman once the ball is released. It is not only taxing but could also hamper your concentration on the subject, the batsman.The right posture
A lot of players go into a full squat while fielding at short leg, but I prefer a half squat. The disadvantage of going down fully is that the moment the batsman plays the shot, your first reaction is to get up. Your eye level changes the moment you get up, which makes you lose focus. But if you are in a half squat, there is no need to get up. Such a posture is slightly more crouched than the one used while standing in the slips.The key is to stay low, with the hands close to the ground, which means that the back is perpetually bent. This is very taxing both on the lower back and thighs.Not being too tall is also an advantage. It makes staying low easier, and the lower centre of gravity allows the shorter person to be more agile compared to taller men. No wonder most good close-in fielders weren’t the tallest men around.Evasive action
A key difference between fielding at short leg and silly point is the way the fielder protects himself when the ball is hit. At short leg you must go down as much as possible and become as small as you can: batsmen rarely try to keep the ball down while pulling or sweeping.

I have been scared a few times. For example, while fielding at short leg when Matthew Hayden and Justin Langer were sweeping almost everything. The shots were so ferocious that the fielders at long leg were ducking for cover

At silly point the fielder must jump to defend, because batsmen rarely try to hit the ball in the air on the off side. They aim to keep the ball along the ground, and hence you can avoid the line of the ball by jumping. While jumping you must remember not to turn your back towards the batsman because all your protective gear (shin-pads, abdominal guard and helmet) are worn on the front. Keeping an eye on the ball helps too!Why is it only batsmen who are close-in fielders?
We see only pure batsmen taking up these positions. One of the reasons is the need batsmen feel to contribute in the team’s success by fielding and cheering. Not that the bowlers are not required to field and cheer, but I personally think that it’s the duty of batsmen to lead the pack in these aspects. A batsman’s contribution is a bit of a gamble: even the best succeed only about six out of 10 times, and we lesser mortals even fewer. Practically, as a batsman you simply can’t contribute in every game, and that’s where fielding and cheering comes in.The second reason is to with temperament. Standing close to the bat requires a certain amount of concentration, and it can also be quite demanding on the legs.Yet another reason is that fielding in catching positions can hurt your fingers, and bowlers’ fingers and hands are far more precious than those of batsmen.Also, the bowlers need to conserve their brains and energy to plan their wickets, rather than waste them on the chatting that is part of the job when you field close to the bat: you need to constantly remind the batsman of your presence.Why only young batsmen or newcomers?
Close-in fielding positions are considered dangerous and physically demanding, and that’s why – though no one likes to admit it – the job falls to the juniors. It’s a system I’ve been part of, and I don’t have any complaints about it. I used to be a regular in these positions for a few years after my first-class debut. But when I graduated to senior level I started fielding in slips, which I was pretty good at right from the start but never got the opportunity at.It’s what happened with Rahul Dravid as well. He’s one of the finest fielders at short leg, but when new guys like me came into the side, we took up the responsibility. I felt it my duty to give him a break.The only problem I faced from time to time was that as an opener I got only 10 minutes between innings, and it takes much longer than that to get rid of the tiredness of fielding up close . I’d always try to talk someone else into fielding at short leg once the opposition had lost eight wickets, but unfortunately it didn’t work every time.Side effects
At times batsmen take the chat from the close-in fielders personally. I remember once, Lou Vincent, fed up of my chirping, telling me to either shut up or face the consequences. I didn’t stop, and the next ball, from Anil Kumble, was hit directly into my knees. It was a short-pitched delivery, and Lou was batting on 100, so instead of hitting it to the fence he chose to target me. It hit my knee, which had been operated on a while ago, and caused quite some pain, but I couldn’t show it, and I didn’t. It was a little mean of him to react that way, but that’s how the game is played at the highest level. He got out to the next delivery and I celebrated as if it was my first Test wicket.The importance of the bowler
Your confidence while fielding at short leg or silly point depends on the quality of the bowler, and the way a particular batsman plays. I’d feel extremely confident when Anil bowled, because he rarely bowled a short ball that could be pulled, and he’s a tough bowler to sweep. But when a part-time bowler was on, I’d be praying incessantly.Now that’s what I call daredevilry: Solkar and Gavaskar at it without protection•Getty ImagesI remember fielding at short leg for Ambati Rayudu on an A tour. He’d bowl a full-toss or a half-tracker between good-length deliveries. Abhijit Kale had already been hit on the head off Rayudu’s bowling, and I was naturally wary. The moment he pitched short (and these were the only times I’d turn to watch his release), I’d lie flat, face down, on the ground. Everyone laughed, but the balls were so short that squatting there would have made me a sitting duck.Is it scary?
The correct answer would be a firm “no”, but the honest answer is “yes”. I have been scared a few times. For example, while fielding at short leg when Matthew Hayden and Justin Langer were sweeping almost everything. The shots were so ferocious that the fielders at long leg – and this was at huge grounds like the MCG and SCG – were ducking for cover. A few yards left or right of them meant a boundary.I got a real fright once when the ball hit my helmet on its way to crashing into the fence, bouncing only once in between.I truly enjoyed my stint at short leg, but it would be inhuman to not be scared – and that has nothing to do with being cowardly. Besides, I did not fear the pain a blow might inflict; I feared something scarier: getting hit on the arm or fingers, which might jeopardise my batting in the next innings, next Test, or perhaps the rest of my career.I’ve been hit many times and don’t fear the pain. I’ve dropped my wrists plenty of times on purpose and allowed the ball to hit me in the chest or on the shoulder. I have also made the odd error of judgment by ducking when the ball wasn’t all that short or didn’t bounce as expected, and hence have had the ball smash into my body.I recognise the pain a cricket ball can cause, and trust me, it isn’t threatening. The key is knowing where the ball is going to hit you and at what speed. The moment I decide to allow the ball to hit me, the brain processes that information and prepares the body. It might sound weird, but once you know it’s going to hit you, it doesn’t hurt all that much.Expecting the ball
What has always worked for me is that, regardless of where I’m fielding, I expect the ball to come to me. While standing at short leg or silly point, I would try to put my hand to every ball that went past me, barring the full-fledged pull, sweep or cover-drive. Whether I managed to get a touch on it, managed to field, catch or miss it was inconsequential. Perhaps that’s why I managed to hold on to a few good catches.Also, you need to sharpen your reflexes because they are your only allies when it comes to taking a catch or defending yourself.Placing yourself
The angle at which you field is based on the way a particular batsman bats and how much the ball is turning off the surface. Even the distance from the bat is dictated by the speed of the ball, bounce in the pitch, the kind of shots a batsman plays, and nowadays the quality of the pads.

The moment I decide to allow the ball to hit me, the brain processes that information and prepares the body. It might sound weird, but once you know it’s going to hit you, it doesn’t hurt all that much

The fielder needs to be a lot closer to the bat for people like Dravid, who offer a dead bat, compared to those who jab at the ball, like Marcus North did in the second Ashes Test at Lord’s. Fielders need to be further away from the bat if the batsman is using leg-guards with more give, like Sachin Tendulkar and some New Zealand batsmen do. You also stand a bit further away when a quick bowler is bowling. Protection
I can’t dream of going close to the bat without protection, so it’s tough to even imagine how the late Eknath Solkar did it, and with distinction at that. Life has become a lot better with helmets, shin-pads and other protective gear. It helps to know that you won’t die if the ball hits you on the head – though not enough to make you completely carefree.While one can wear chest-pads, shin-pads, helmet and so on, there are still enough areas left exposed where a strike could prove fatal. I can never forget the untimely demise of Raman Lamba, who was my senior and a mentor of sorts to me. Of course, he wasn’t wearing even a helmet, but we’ve all stood many a time for a ball or two without wearing any protection.I remember borrowing a chest-guard from Dravid and using it to protect my ribs in Sydney. After a few sweep shots missed me by a whisker, Sachin asked me which side I was wearing the chest pad on. I wore it on the right, but without realising it, I kept moving towards my right, thereby exposing my unprotected left side. Sachin pointed this out and I corrected it immediately.

Alex Brown in Cardiff09-Jul-2009This is what comes naturally to Ricky Ponting. The feet, the eyes, the hands working in tandem, the head conning the nerves into believing that the weight of a nation – two of them, actually – isn’t upon him. Crisp pivot-pulls, elegant drives, and, just as crucially, judicious shouldering of arms and redoubtable defence. This is the timeless wonder that is Ponting at the crease; the phenomenon who, on Thursday, became just the fourth man to surpass 11,000 career runs in Test cricket.It was this instinctive side that allowed Ponting to compensate for that which does not come so naturally. As a leader, Ponting has encountered his share of critics over the past six years, and the horde was in full voice at Sophia Gardens after a first session in which England’s tail milked 99 runs to advance their first innings total to an authoritative 435.Questionable bowling plans, defensive fields and a general lack of aggression all played into the free-swinging hands of Graeme Swann and James Anderson on the second morning, prompting a reloading of slings and a sharpening of arrows in Ponting’s direction. True, the captain could not be held responsible for the errant line of Peter Siddle nor the short length of Mitchell Johnson, but neither was he effective in containing a situation that spiralled out of control faster than a bad day at Lehman Brothers.Some leaders are born. Ponting was manufactured. That is not to say that over time he has not become a capable captain – Test series victories in South Africa are never to be sneezed at, and particularly so with an inexperienced squad – but seldom has Ponting convinced his public that he is cut from the same intuitive cloth as the Borders, Taylors and Waughs.No such questions have been asked of his batting, however. Ordained from a young age by Rod Marsh, the coach at Australia’s cricket academy at the time, Ponting has fulfilled every prophecy, exceeded every expectation placed upon him as a batsman. By the end of this series, he will almost certainly have usurped Allan Border as Australia’s all-time leading run-scorer, and given further credence to the “best since Bradman” tag bestowed on him by his countrymen. His is a greateness that transcends eras.So it was on Thursday that Ponting, the batsman, came to the rescue of Ponting, the captain. Following a forgettable morning at the helm of an indisciplined fielding side, Ponting arrived at the crease in the midst of furious, intimidating spells from Andrew Flintoff and Stuart Broad. Those negotiated, he then set about the task of hauling in the runs conceded in the morning session, and laying the foundations for Australia’s Ashes defence.It has been an innings of tremendous class, and one which cannot be overstated in terms of its importance to the man, the team and the series. On a slow, holding pitch, Ponting adapted his game perfectly: waiting, watching, playing the ball under his eyes, never reaching. Suggestions his 34-year-old reflexes were failing him were dismissed with each swivel-pull stroke, and his shot selection on-and-around off-stump was beyond reproach. He may have played better innings but, against the backdrop of 2005, few will have been as satisfying.Nerves were only evident when Ponting reached the 90s and the clock approached 6pm. Eager to avoid a night of insomnia, Ponting flayed and prodded in the shadows of Sophia Gardens, before eventually reaching his century – his 38th overall and eighth in Ashes contests – from Flintoff’s penultimate ball of the day. The stroke was greeted with a triumphant sprint and a wave of the bat to all four corners of Sophia Gardens. The mission to atone for 2005 had commenced.

Cricket has acted as a vehicle for good in a country not used to
celebrating

Will Luke18-Apr-2009Shortly after 6pm yesterday, through sheer will power and single-minded
belief in their ability, a new country was inducted into the ICC’s six teams who hold one-day international status. It is a country more familiar with terror and war than celebration, acclaim and cricket. Afghanistan have truly arrived.The romance of their story will become diluted and clichéd in a few
months’ time, if it hasn’t already, but now is a fitting time to be
reminded of the journey of refugees who have sprung quite literally
from nowhere. Many were born in Peshawar, in north Pakistan. Those
born in Afghanistan sought refuge from the seemingly endless war
against Russia in the 1980s, or from the Taliban, which banned all forms
of entertainment. Or from the Americans’ attempt to oust the Taliban in recent years, the
consequences of which still impact Kabul and the country as a whole.
In one way or another, through loss of family or the barbed-wire
claustrophobia of refugee camps, all the team have suffered.Like for most children, cricket and sport were an escape, a delicious
distraction from the humdrum and rigidity of education or parental
control, but moreover from war and the subsequent suffering. Hamid
Hassan, a gifted and intelligent fast bowler, learned the game under
his elder brother’s wing, having seen barefoot and dusty strangers
thwack balls on the streets of Tehkal. He only started wearing spikes
18 months ago. Raees Ahmadzai, slightly older, grew up in one of
Peshawar’s biggest refugee camps, Kacha Gari, which is now closed, and
became “the Sachin Tendulkar” of tennis-ball cricket, so renowned was
his hitting. He never imagined there was a world outside Kacha Gari,
because Kacha Gari was his world. Cricket was his dream, and now acts
as a passport to a better life.And like most people, particularly Afghans who have endured decades of
mortars and suffering, hope has been one of the few constants in their
lives; hope and the aspiration to achieve something out of nothing, to
quash the prejudiced view that all Afghans are fighters. In racing
through the divisions of the World Cricket League – the ICC’s venerable
competition to wheedle the wheat from the chaff – they have proved to
themselves that they can achieve something significant. Moreover,
their prominence now on the world stage might inspire their countrymen
either into playing cricket, or simply believing they too can succeed.”I think this will give them back their self-belief,” Sarah Fane,
chairman of the Afghan Connection, told Cricinfo. “If you really work
at something, you can make it happen and you can succeed. You don’t
necessarily need to have the wonderful infrastructure and equipment
that [Britain and the West] have got.” Fane and her charity have been
donating cricket equipment to rural locations, building schools and
cricket pitches in Afghanistan. Without her or MCC’s interest and
funding, cricket might have passed a generation of schoolchildren by.
Now, they have role models too.

Too often lately cricket has cosied up to controversy and made a rod
for its own back. Not a series goes by when we don’t argue over the
use of technology, call for the resignation of an umpire or official,
or complain at the quantity or gripe at the quality. This level of cricket is not immune to corruption or farce – it’s a veritable hotbed of ridiculousness in some cases – but the game is somehow simpler and cleaner. Bat versus ball. Twenty-two people playing cricket. And Afghanistan have epitomised this carefree exuberance of playing a game with no distractions other than their single-minded belief that they can, and will, win.Their attitude, while refreshing and mildly amusing in its simplicity,
has not won over everyone. In Jersey last year, their excitable
demeanour and expectation that they were going to play in the World
Cup found them few friends on opposing teams. Their attitude, one
journalist told me, was to win and not accept second place. They did
win, and they have kept on winning through that same formula: a potent
and occasionally tangy recipe of talent and belief.Their victories in this tournament have been notable for their
comprehensiveness. Bermuda, whose methods and desire are the complete
antithesis of Afghanistan’s, were rolled aside dismissively. Ireland,
the favourites, and now finalists, underestimated them woefully –
albeit on a corrugated pitch – and were bowled out, with Hassan picking
up five. Scotland, too, were simply outplayed.”Good on ’em. They’ve come a long way and have played in a lot of tournaments just to get this far, so any team that comes from Division 3 or 4 and works their
way up to reach the top six, they deserve it,” Pete Steindl, Scotland’s coach, told Cricinfo. “You don’t get there by luck, or without hard work and good performances, so good on ’em.” The surprise factor is now diminishing. Afghanistan are a team to be reckoned with,
for the time being at least.With ODI status comes pride, prominence and money, and here is where the caveat lies. Afghanistan remains a nation riddled by decades of war and the Afghan Cricket Foundation has only ever relied on small funding from the ICC, donations from charities, and a sponsor
to fund the players’ clothes and equipment. The board’s make-up will need to be reviewed or expanded, a financial officer employed, a media liaison found, a website built and a development programme put in place. The ICC will help – they have to protect their interests – but the inevitable corruption that exists in the politics of a war-torn nation could easily seep into the pores of baby Afghan cricket. As Bermuda have shown so glaringly, money is not the cure but often the problem. The investment Afghanistan will receive is doubtless exciting, but equally worrisome.Everything smells of roses tonight, however, and the future seems
impossibly bright. For the time being, cricket and its many quirks and
irritations has acted as a vehicle for good in a country not used to
celebrating. And that in itself is reason enough to cheer for the game
and for the refugees who relied on self-belief to get them to the top.

Chris Gayle is not enthralled by Test cricket, but for Ravi Bopara it holds a special place – and that’s coming from a player who can also be assured of making a fortune in the Twenty20 game

Andrew McGlashan at Chester-le-Street14-May-2009Chris Gayle is not enthralled by Test cricket, but for Ravi Bopara it holds a special place – and that’s coming from a player who can be assured of making a fortune in the Twenty20 game. After listening to the depressing overtures from the West Indies captain, Bopara’s youthful exuberance and excitement at his continued success was a timely reminder of the pride the five-day game can bring.Sadly the crowd was as meagre as expected – the official figure of 5000 seemed very generous – and there are clearly issues the Test game needs to address to secure its future. That is a job for the administrators, but the players must play their part by performing with passion. The attitude of a young cricketer like Bopara can show the way.”Playing in the IPL was amazing, it was a great experience and I’d love to do it again,” Bopara said. “Then again, Test cricket is still the pinnacle of the game. The feeling I got at Lord’s reaching a hundred and the feeling I got here, there’s no better feeling. I don’t know if that’s because I had a bad run in Sri Lanka but as a young boy I’ve always wanted to play Test cricket. My heroes have done extraordinary stuff and you want to do what your heroes have done. All forms of the game are very important to me.”That poor run Bopara alluded to has made his re-emergence as a Test player even more impressive. When he was left sprawling in the Galle dirt in late December 2007, having been embarrassingly run out from slip by Mahela Jaywardene, it completed a pair for the match and three consecutive ducks. Bopara looked anything but a Test cricketer.As he returned to the dressing room in Galle, he vowed to become better for the experience. “Sri Lanka was possibly the toughest part of my career. Not at one point did I feel uncomfortable, it just seemed to happen so quickly,” he said. “I just kept getting out and kept finding ways to get out as well. But not for one moment did I think I wasn’t going to play Test cricket again or it’s the end for me. I knew I was going to come back and knew I was going to be a better player. From the moment I got run out in that last Test I went back into the changing rooms and said I knew what I had to do and I’m going to come back stronger.”It took a little while – he only returned to the Test squad at the end of last summer, and didn’t make the team again until Barbados in February – but he’s now back for the foreseeable future. His third hundred in three consecutive innings (having been dropped despite his Bridgetown success) makes him the fifth in a select group of England batsman to achieve the feat. Herbert Sutcliffe, Denis Compton, Geoff Boycott and, most significantly for Bopara, his hero and mentor Graham Gooch – who made 333, 123 and 116 against India in 1990 – were the previous four.Bopara finds it difficult to talk about the huge influence Gooch has had on his career and didn’t want his name to be so closely associated with someone who he admires so greatly.”I wouldn’t put my name in the same sentence as Graham,” he said. “It’s hard for me to talk about cricket when it comes to Graham Gooch because I’ve got a lot of respect for the way he did things and what he did with me. He was a fantastic player, and he’s done a lot for me and a lot for England.”

“He got on the phone and said ‘It’s okay, ‘I got a pair in my first Test it will make you a better player. You will come out stronger because you’ve got this gift and make the most of it.’ It’s nice coming from Graham, someone who’s done so much, a legendary batsman. It gives you confidence and belief.”Ravi Bopara on the advice he got from Graham Gooch

Bopara said Gooch, who bagged a pair on his Test debut against Australia in 1975, rang him after his Sri Lanka experience to say he would come good. “He got on the phone and said ‘It’s okay, I got a pair in my first Test. It will make you a better player. You will come out stronger because you’ve got this gift and make the most of it.’ It’s nice coming from Graham, someone who’s done so much, a legendary batsman. It gives you confidence and belief.”His batting advice to Bopara has always remained the same and very simple: play straight. “I know it sounds basic but it’s nice to have a reminder, especially coming from Graham. It’s quite reassuring,” he added. Gooch would have been proud of the three straight hits off Sulieman Benn that took him close to three figures.They are sentiments echoed by his Essex team-mate, and fellow century-maker, Alastair Cook. “I quite like a whip from off stump to the leg side as well,” he said with a wry smile. “Goochie has been amazing for me and Ravi. The amount of hard work he’s put in. He would be throwing to me at 8.30 in the morning when I was 18 and to do that is something special.”Their joint success rekindled a partnership that began in the Essex Under-14 side and first caught the headlines in 2005 when they added 270 against the touring Australians. It was a stand that marked them out as future England stars and in less than two months they will have the chance to face up to Australia again.Although Cook’s innings will be overshadowed by the extra flair, and the come-of-age story, from Bopara, his was equally vital from a team and personal point of view. Although he managed to break his 14-month century drought with a second-innings ton in Barbados he hadn’t made a first-innings hundred since facing West Indies, at Lord’s, in May 2007. It’s first-innings runs that shape Test matches and it’s a habit England need to get into ahead of the greater challenges down the road.It was also fascinating to watch two contrasting batsman build long innings, which is one of the many charms that isn’t available in Twenty20. Cook built steadily, whereas Bopara went through phases from a swift start, to a stall in the thirties, then a dash to his hundred. Only one of these batsmen would flourish in Twenty20, but both can prosper in Tests and it would be a great shame if that variety was ever lost.

At tea on the opening day at Durban, England were looking short of options and short of ideas, but six overs into the evening session, there was a very different complexion to proceedings

Andrew McGlashan in Durban26-Dec-2009Rarely has creating something out of nothing seemed quite such an appropriate phrase. At tea on the opening day at Durban, England were looking short of options and short of ideas, but six overs into the evening session, there was a very different complexion to proceedings. All of a sudden it was the tourists who ended in the happier position.That’s how quickly Test matches can change. The value of adding two wickets to any scoreline was highlighted as a pair of batsmen who looked set to reach hundreds, Jacques Kallis and Graeme Smith, fell within 17 balls of each for 75 apiece. But it was the manner of their dismissals – Kallis caught at slip pushing forward against Graeme Swann and Smith run out in a horrendous mix-up – that made the turnaround so much more unlikely. All throughout the day, it was England’s quicks who had looked like causing the problems.The feeling persists that England have picked a team to hang in during this series, rather than take it by the scruff of the neck – once again, they opted to play the extra batsman in Ian Bell rather than strengthen the bowling with Luke Wright or Ryan Sidebottom. But if that is the plan, so far it is paying dividends. They managed to escape Centurion with a draw and have now clawed back their position at Kingsmead to such an extent that it was South Africa who were relieved when bad light closed in.”When they were 160 for 2 and then all of a sudden you take three big wickets it puts it right back in our favour, and we feel as if we’ve finished the day quite strongly,” said the pick of England’s bowlers, Graham Onions. “But the way we bowled and fielded I thought we deserved that little bit of luck that came our way. We hung in there during a tough period when the ball wasn’t doing a great deal.”Batting had been hard work against England’s three frontline pacemen, especially during the first hour when Onions, James Anderson and Stuart Broad were outstanding. But in energy-sapping humidity they couldn’t carry on forever and had to be rotated in short spells. Andrew Strauss had to turn to his other options with Swann coming on inside the second hour. Even Jonathan Trott was handed an over before lunch, and had another exploratory spell ahead of Onions in the afternoon session.Still, it’s dangerous to jump to early conclusions and crucially for Strauss the scoring never ran away from England. In the first innings at Centurion, England showed an ability to dry up the run-rate when not taking wickets, which is a priceless commodity for a captain who doesn’t possess the strongest strike options. Helped by the early stranglehold offered by two new-ball blows, the first 14 overs brought a measly 18 runs and South Africa’s run-rate didn’t push above three-an-over all day. Which meant that, as and when England could somehow fashion a breakthrough, they would be right back in the match.After tea it came from that man, Swann, who has never been far from the action in the early stages of this series. In conditions similar to Centurion, which suited pace far more than spin, he cleverly came round the wicket and pushed one across Kallis that was edged to Paul Collingwood at slip. Yet, the next scalp was the one that really changed the balance of power when Smith and AB de Villiers were involved in a Pietersen-Trott style piece of running, which resulted in the South Africa captain departing, although only by a matter of inches.”We weren’t 100% sure,” Onions said, after Alastair Cook had sprinted for the stumps and broken the wicket with ball in hand. “Then when it goes up to the changing rooms, you’re looking up there hoping. We were just thinking, this is a key part of the game. If he was not out, how would it have finished?”But it was very good thinking by Alastair. He was going to throw it at AB’s end – but eventually he thought: ‘No, I’m going to try to get Smith out’. He could quite easily have thrown at the stumps, missed them and he could have been a foot out.”Onions then capped an impressive personal day, in which he had been handed the new-ball duties ahead of Stuart Broad, and built on Cook’s swift work by trapping JP Duminy lbw, moments before the players left the field. At Centurion, Broad’s first spell had wasted the hardness of the new ball, despite removing Graeme Smith for a duck, but here Onions set the tone with an opening burst of four overs for two runs.”Throughout my short career I have generally taken the new ball, but obviously coming into a squad with Jimmy and Stuart, they are the opening bowlers and I have no problem with that, ” he said. “I was very pleased to open today and it’s a little bit of pressure which I thrive on.”If Onions can set the right tone again on the second day, England have a chance of restricting South Africa to a first-innings total of less than 300. Any such achievement would set up this Test match beautifully.