The CT does not sleep anymore

Jerome Taylor, the most promising young fast bowler outside of the 2 Ashes playing nations, goes back a few steps from the crease to bowl his last delivery. Australia need 12 runs to win off one delivery against West Indies, and the young-man-with-a-glacier-inside realised he just needed to ensure this one to be the last for the evening.

He achieves that goal by bowling Trevor Chappellesque slow medium off a few steps. [I ask Greg about it and he confessed that Taylor's delivery has bounced infinitely higher than Trevor's.] In leading his team to an improbable win Taylor makes a statement as poignant as that last delivery is unexpected of any genuine quick bowler, least of all a Caribbean one. Essentially that he would rather be part of a painstakingly improving team of proud contributors than get sucked into the familiar "image trap" that lies ever so near his newly achieved place in a game that still worships its fast bowlers and reserves instant stardom for them. [No prizes for guessing who I am referring to..]

Announcement:

The ICC Champions' Trophy race is suddenly getting very hot as an expected consequence of the first 4 group league matches producing 3 upsets (2 mini and one major). There can be only one better way to get those disgruntled cricket lovers around the globe glued back to their TV sets than a cricket tournament that throws up upsets: a cricket tournament yielding closely fought medium scoring upsets. Precisely the description
befitting yesternight's Pak chase and today's Windian heroics..

I have made 2 posts on CT matches in the past couple of days: The Eng-v-Ind and SL-v-Pak matches. Instead of delaying the inevitable I hereby declare this current post on the Aus-WI thriller as a kick-off post on Pavilion View to launch the "CT Awakes" series that will cover ICC Champions' Trophy 2006 events.

Did I mention the Aus-v-WI result to be an upset? To be honest I felt sort of odd saying that. I checked up on a few statistics and they all supported that odd feeling. Inspite of their continued batting fragility this West Indian lot is arguably the most competitive side we have seen from those islands since the turn of the millenium. That was not good enough, I reckon. Okay then: They are amongst the most competitive teams today, period.

The Australians are having their own one day batting woes of late as are the CT hosts, India. They were the two best batting sides in ODI's even a few months back but their batting form has dipped significantly since they began running into the West Indians every now and then.

It would be both unfair and foolish to ascribe that likeness in batting decline of the two higher-ranked, smoothly chugging teams after facing Lara's men to coincidence and / or slow pitches. If you so wish, you are allowed to dismiss India's (remaining) claims to formidability on grounds of inconsistency. But the all-conquering cricketers from Australia give you no such leeway and a good show against them must be a reflection of cricketing ability. Ask Vangipurappu Venkata Sai Laxman. We can take another example.

Dwayne Bravo was an unknown threat when Yuvraj Singh and his teammates struggled against the Trinidadian's slower yorkers in the Caribbean a few months back. But after Kuala Lumpur and Brabourne you realise that for all the support staff at their disposal a middle order like Australia's is yet to find an answer to Bravo and his mates on slow-low pitches. With a World-Cup-ful of slow and low tracks around the corner, that translates to a longer duration of 'slower' rule by Caribbean medium pacers than most reckoned.

Let us assess the West Indians in light of their recent performances against the Killer Kangaroos.

Since they crashed to 0-4 in the midst of a 7-match ODI series back home immediately after the 2003 World Cup, the West Indians have been regrouping themselves and proving to be a constant thorn in the flesh of the world's most awe-inspiring ODI team.

The Calypso boyz won the last three matches of that 2003 series on the trot, and since then they have returned a respectable won-2-lost-4-noresult-1 scoreline playing against the Aussies over 3 separate tournaments in 3 countries. That summarises to 5-4-1 (Win-Loss-NoResult) in their last 10 ODI's versus Ponting's men since 25th May 2003 till date.

Corresponding figures (Win-Loss-NoResult) for other major teams in their last 10 games against the Australians:

South Africa: 5-5-0
England: 2-7-1
India: 1-7-2
New Zealand: 2-8-0
Pakistan: 1-8-1
Sri Lanka: 3-7-0

Surprise, surprise! So the 'struggling' West Indians have won as many games against Australia in their last 10 encounters as the 3 sub-continent majors put together and compare rather favourably with the famously Aussie-baiting South Africans.

It is high time that credit goes where it is long overdue. That Jerome Taylor last delivery was an outcome of a process of rebuilding techniques, attitudes and minds. The next post of 'CT Awakes' series shall be dealing with a man integral to that rebuilding process.

And then it strikes him

Let us go 20 years down the line. It is year 2026. You just got introduced to FutureFan, an average new age cricket lover of the time in a cricket playing country outside the subcontinent. You are pushed by this young fella that jabbers incessantly on cricket. You want to have some fun and test the cricket acumen of this cocky youngster.

You take leave for a minute and come back with a printout of the scorecard of a Pak-v-SL ICCCT match played on the 17th of October 2006. You have erased a lot of information from it, including team names, player names, championship and year of contest. Then you hand it over to FutureFan and ask him to identify the international team that won this contest. He needs to get it right at one go, without any external help. In all likelihood he will think hard on the tampered scorecard from a not-so-famous oldie and reply in the negative.

You share your first cryptic clue at this point: Key bowlers of the winning team were sent back 2 days ahead of this match due to some reasons while their formidable opponents came into this match in prime form, with a 10 match winning streak under the belt. There's a steep chance that your examinee will start thinking of a few teams by this time. He would not take a name at this point though.

You supply the 2nd clue: The captain of this team, who was also their best batsman, was prevented from taking part of the tournament due to some other reasons and there was a major controversy just ahead of this tournament even regarding the new captain. FutureFan will start thinking on those lines but drama outside the cricket pitch was never this guy's cup of tea. He is still blank.

It's time for the 3rd and last clue: This particular match happened at a time when the team was in the midst of a seemingly endless lookout for decent openers and decent catchers.

Furrow-browed FutureFan now stares at you with indignation. 'I can't get you old man. You say that coming into this match the team was plagued with off-field problems, had no openers or catchers worth their salt, were hamstrung in bowling and impaired in batting.....are we bloody talking about the winning team or what? And how the hell do you expect me to identify the team from that set of crap?'

You just smile in reply. And then, then it strikes him. FutureFan enquires sheepishly: 'It must be Pakistan, wasn't it?'

CK

We love Sunny Gavaskar. If only he could weed out a few yawning draws from his resume....


We love everything about Sachin and Kapil. Wait wait, but 'everything' includes captaincy....


Everyone misses Vishy's class and beauty. No one misses his fielding though.


We love Dada's aggression in driving spinners and rival skippers to madness but we may not reach out for our wallets if asked to bet for his work ethic.


We love Dravid's work ethic and determination but is he calling the shots when it matters?


Through a brief but informative piece I recently came to learn more about the only - I repeat ONLY - international cricketer in the subcontinent's cricketing history who combined typical cricketing abilities of an Asian cricketer with the no-quarters-given-or-taken work ethic of an European, an elusive combination many foreign coaches in these parts are breaking their heads to achieve. Read on.


He's our first and foremost one. Colonel Cottari Kanakaiya Nayudu, CK in short.


And if this was not enough, his captaincy - in the colonial days when English folk were 'mai baap' - could make even Sourav Ganguly's stuff look like mother care. No wonder India placed a strong claim for Test status mainly through his efforts.


How I miss everything about him.

Update (31-Aug-10): This must be the most long delayed update I have ever written to a blogpost. Could not help it. I was reading a special Amit Varma post @ India Uncut on Indian chess and its cult figure Vishwanathan Anand, 'The man with the Maruti 800'. The last paragraph of that piece took me back to CK Nayudu.

Who knows, one of them* may even win the World Championship someday. But it won’t be as big a deal as this. Anand is special.

* modern Indian chess players whose chess upbringing, as per Amit, has a much narrower gap with westerners compared to the hopeless scenario at the time when Anand learnt his chess

Earlier in this post I had brought up some chinks in the legends of some other great Indian cricketers in order to elevate CK's standing. But somehow I still could not precisely bring out what CK actually meant to Indian cricket in my eyes.

Amit gives me a chance to make up for that failing nearly 4 years after writing the post. I can now refer to his post and state with clarity what I set out to say in that post:

Sachin, Sunny, Kapil and the other cricketing greats named earlier in this post were world champs worth their weight in gold. But then all of them learnt their 'chess' availing facilities similar to the modern Indian chess players. CK was 'Anand'.

Tail piece: The last analogy may be debated. "CK was Dibyendu Baruah at most - Lala was Anand" and so on!! I close my argument here, others are free to continue.

Dirty Harry can't find his sixth bullet

This article made for nice reading. Ian Chappell finds interesting similarities of the top six men that matter in each of the major Champions' Trophy sides with the six bullets loaded in chambers of a 'six shooter' revolver. I thought the old fella's pretty much on the bull's eye or thereabouts. Except for the part on Indian bowling and batting, that is.

Chappelli has this to say about Indian bowling:

"...the West Indies, South Africa, England and India all fall a bit short in bowling class but the hosts can raise themselves into the first group if Pathan is firing on all cylinders."

The Indian bowling department is shaping up coolly and admirably for the battle on hand and the war coming up. Over the last three or four series we have seen two of Agarkar, Harbhajan and Munaf taking turns at the 'the miser and the mauler' duties in all matches irrespective of Pathan's bowling form which still remains important to Indian fortunes as Chappell senior underlines repeatedly in that piece.

However the following part of his observations reads more like high hope than any immediate possibility with every passing day:

"India with Virender Sehwag in form and opening would be formidable."

Barely six months after making the world sit up to a booming cresendo of consecutive batting explosions last season India are suddenly in desperate want of another century maker to support Tendulkar in the batting department. All three potential candidates - Dravid, Yuvraj, and Sehwag - are inexplicably looking quite a distance from that vacant role at present. For confirmation of this willow worry we only need to look at Indian batting scorecards for the last 10 ODI's.

Sehwag, in particular, is a major cause of shivers. Never an owner of a brilliant defence or deft footwork on the crease, today he appears to have lost a chunk of even the modest lot of the basics that he started off with. He looks determined that he does not want anything in the name of a basic batting technique to come in his way. He would be well advised by his supporters inside the camp to look where that 'way' ends.

They can perhaps persuade Sehwag to re-assess all the aspects of his game that got him here - at this apex level - in the first place. Too much of his present batting performances depends upon the bowling errors he is allowed and he looks a fidgety batsman whenever top bowlers bowl to a plan against him. As far as my memory goes, an attacking game was never EVERYTHING that Virender Sehwag had in 2001 when he scored his debut Test century in South Africa.

India have a trigger-happy wicketkeeper, a serviceable all rounder (Pathan), the two war-painted bowlers and one bazooka of a batsman. That fills up five chambers. Rival gunmen are already firing shots in our backyard. The English ones nearly broke into the building today. India's missing bullet rolled under the cot quite a long while back. Someone please retrieve it NOW....

The smaller but deeper worries

There was a time when 600 plus runs in an innings were a norm in Indian domestic first class matches. As much as a reflection on the pitches, it was also an indication of a cultural imbalance: India produced far more quality batsmen than quality bowlers. The just concluded 2006 Irani trophy match missed the services of many top cricketers in the country, all of whom are busy preparing for upcoming Champions' trophy.

Consequently the UP vs. ROI clash literally ended up as a contest of the reserves. The outcome, specifically the 2½ day finish, hints at a specific area of concern regarding the future of domestic long duration games: that old imbalance is showing signs of getting reversed, and an equilibrium is not necessarily the likely destination of that reversal.

The ideal state to achieve would be a balance between bat and ball. At present though while the bowling stock is improving since the bygone years, the batting reserves are getting pitifully thin on quality. Pratyush Khaitan highlights this area in his Irani trophy review here. The trend is supported by the dwindling fortunes of our senior squad in Test matches over last couple of years. If the improvement in bowling means we can think of going into a Test match armed with the confidence of taking the 20 opposition wickets, we will still need runs on the board to compete.

Well, we always knew this vacuum as a distinct possibility for the international side once those 3 greats born within a year of each other and another barely 2 years younger than them sealed all the available middle order slots for better part of a decade with the BCCI going to sleep on the back of brilliant performances from the famous four with no proper plan of succession in place. [I know what you are thinking: Had Sourav Ganguly received better treatment and a decent exit route, I would have believed that Ganguly's ouster was indeed part of a succession plan.] Players like them are difficult to replace, and it is understandable that the process will take some time.

But a similar void at the first class level is a far bigger worry. Who do we replace Sachin or Dravid with when it is time to move on? For that matter, are we developing enough ready substitutes for even the fledgling Yuvis, Kaifs or Rainas in the event of their non-success at the Test level? Hope we are headed the Australian way (who bounced back from a temporary mid-80's trough by identifying the need to plan, develop and select with a vision) rather than the West Indian one (still smarting from loss of great players thru the 80's and 90's, with no plan on the horizon as yet).

It must be said that Greg Chappell the national coach can take some credit for the BCCI waking up to a need to have good bowlers for producing consistent results. It remains to be seen if Greg takes the same pains for the willow wielders of the future.

P.S. I just heard Greg's closest ex-competitor for the post Mohinder Amarnath howling in laughter after reading that last line and calling me a joker. Fair enough; try staying sober after reading this scorecard from a Ranji final he played in nearly 25 years back - lack of runs was hardly the problem there. Those were the days folks...

A thought on Mufambisi

There's a saying in some language: every person has a replica in this world. You may have heard of that. There's another saying that you never heard of: even though you love a game, some matches can be so bad that you fail to live through them. I do not know the speaker of the first quote but you know who said the second.

The first time I saw Zimbabwe opener Tafadzwa Mufambisi was in the 6th over of today's non-match. He played a ball from Ian Bradshaw in a familiar fashion.

I was already expecting the match to be one-sided (just like you, and those fellows chattering behind your back, and the person who got a verbal pasting from you last week, and your grandma). The words 'precious' and 'few' often go hand in hand and today as a cricket viewer I was feeling like a shining million year old piece of carbon by the time 6th over started. I know you understand how rare a feeling that must be in this cricket mad country...

With the best interests of cricket at heart I tried a novel way to internally generate interest in the contest; an important ICC event like this should not lose valuable audience this early in the tournament. "I'll try handing out a quick rating on the form and quality of this guy taking strike from the first shot I see," I thought. After the shot: "....I think he will be good attacking player with decisive footwork, while his defensive technique needs work."

While West Indian bowler Ian Bradshaw returned back to his mark, this Zim opener's game (that is, whatever I boast to have seen of it in all of one ball) continued to half-remind me of another young player. However I could not pinpoint who that was. Both showed decisive and fluent forward footwork and natural stroking ability with the bat while the defence needed a few more layers. So which player was young Mufambisi a replica of?

Fortunately I did not have to rack my brains for too long - the answer came in the next (or was it next-to-next) ball when Mufambisi cut Bradshaw to point and an alert fielder swooped down on it in a flash. Dwayne Bravo it was indeed.

Unfortunately that was the end of my new one-ball game of replica hunting; I was forced to switch channels soon with a heavy heart as proceedings became increasingly insufferable.

"It won't leave much for the highlights film"

Love the way John Stern sums up a growing need to recreate fast bowling magic.

Going through this list of interesting cricket facts on 123India cricket, the one I loved the most was:

Kapil Dev`s only break of one Test in his 131 Test career came after 65 Tests.

So the poor old all-rounder was only trying to bring about a little symmetry in a long career during his unproductive twilight years. Tch, tch....on hindsight it was unjust on my part (and by a few likewise dirty minded folks I know) to misread that act as a hankering for Richard Hadlee's world record 431 wicket tally. No fire in hell will be too bad for us unduly heartbroken admirers of the man....

But thanks to Warne and Murali, these days we find it hard to digest that such a miniscule record actually existed as recently as 1994!

Sanjay Bangar

Some cricketers have all the luck.

They get extra chances, extra facilities, extra media attention, extra fan following and the utterly forgettable resultant - extra sponsorship deals.

You can bet that dour and gritty ex-India player and Railways all-rounder Sanjay Bangar never got to play those extraaa shots. He is your regular no-nonsense bits-and-pieces guy, born to do everyday jobs of far less national importance than making people flock to stadia just to watch him play.

So what kind of jobs do the Bangars do? Leading an unfancied Railways side to Ranji trophy triumph, for example. Or setting little big examples of solidarity that help alleviate perennial woes of his railway mates making do with a non-existent support system. And helping bind his bunch of men-on-wheels together to make this team perform wondrously better than the sum of its parts.

Unfortunately the options of extra chances, extra facilities and extra attention fly extra quick out through of the window when a blue collar guy enters the scene. That brings us to another question: what does a Bangar get back for his contributions? Let us explore.

A Test batting average of 47.85 at home. Hmm, that is a steady start. That figure is 18 points more than his overall Test average, something he can mention to his grandchildren with a 'been there done that' nod. Pity Bangar the bowler could never back it up and remained wicketless in his six home Tests, or he could be a rather handy all-round horse for the Indian course. Let’s see what more we have in the Bangar baggage of collections.

OMG, he is the guy with the most unforgettable ‘only fifty-plus Test score on foreign soil’ on earth! Wow, wonder how this most temporary of openers had the audacity to partner Dravid in exorcising the resident evil ‘genie of away losses’ out of its permanent abode, the Team India bottle, on that crucial first day of the 2002 Headingley Test.

It seems he did have some luck in making himself a name.

“Aw c’mon, look at the stinking ODI stats of this all-rounder…”

Truth hits you hard and snaps you back to reality with a batting avg of 13.84 and bowling avg of 54.85. That batting average is a full two points less than Agarkar’s! I’m afraid the fairytale has ended and we have no more knots to unravel inside Bangar's backpack…he will now have to walk away into the horizon clasping his pedestrian record close to heart. Sadly the bag is all empty now. But at least Bangar has been guaranteed of some applause along his exit route after showing off those extraa bits of his.

Hold on a second, what of that only ODI fifty of his in 15 matches? Scoring 57 off 41 balls at five down with 96-to-win in a fifty-over–match enroute an overhaul of West Indies ‘ 325 in India was surely no joke. There there, even his only 50-plus knock in ODI’s threw a punch worth remembering. Dravid was again the partner watching from the other end.

Given that Sanjay Bangar played so few matches for India and did not exactly set the stage on fire in those, it is unusual that we remember almost every notable performance he put up in India colours. Some people have all the luck indeed. Perhaps they deserve no less.

A few extraa claps for Sanjay Bangar please.

The Psychos

"Who writes your scripts?" asked Graham Gooch to Ian Botham once. Well, who writes theirs?

Update: I bet you thought you would not see greater drama than that. Ha ha - now watch the sequel!

These are moments when you feel Pakistan cricket administration is indeed a virtual world inside the 'Matrix' as against the real world where all the cricket is being played, watched and loved. From the same perspective this latest episode was its 'Reloaded' (Younis) and 'Revolutions' (Youhana) sequels rolled in one.

Apologies for that misnomer of a post title.

How do we keep THEM?

Amidst stars old and new, shining and falling, promising and delivering, the performance of wicketkeepers of each of the three “India”s participating in this year’s Challengers’ trophy provoked a thought . How do we keep them?

Parthiv Patel first. We have seen his gloved journey from youthful brilliance to loss of lustre to losing the entire plot as a specialist keeper. All through that though he has showed impressive improvement in every outing with the bat. Aged 16, he saved a crucial away Test match on debut. Then on he kept building on his nudges and pushes to emerge as a dependable lower middle order bat who could score fluently either side of the wicket and, importantly, would not cower in adverse situations. He shone with the bat in his two Challenger matches this year (just as he did last year). His latest performances could have helped him pose serious threat for almost any keeper playing in the national side. But unfortunately it isn’t ‘any keeper’ that he is up against.

Parthiv’s continued rotten form with the gloves in 2004 brought us to Dinesh Karthik. In his 1st ODI he effected a fantastic airborne stumping [while falling away from the stumps] to tilt a low scoring close match in favour of India and thereafter most things that he and the other keepers in India (Dhoni included) have done could only cement the belief that Dinesh is arguably the best amongst Indian glovemen who can bat decently. Like Parthiv he does not cower in pressure situations either and demonstrated his qualities in front of the stumps in the 2005 Test series against Pakistan. And like Parthiv he’s only 21. Dinesh shone with the bat too in this Challenger trophy. But just like his predecessor (again) his efforts are also certain to go unrewarded.

When Dinesh Karthik got relieved from national duties he did not need to lose form with either bat or glove to get replaced by Mahendra Singh Dhoni in a one day squad. That would be true for any wicketkeeper in the history of one day internationals barring Adam Gilchrist. Dhoni proved just that point during the just-concluded 2006 Challenger series. Essentially Indian selectors are left with no choice but to refute the claims of a good keeper-batsman, Dinesh, and a decent batsman-keeper, Parthiv, for both ODI and Test selections because of the irresistible package that is MSD. And that may be a bit of a tragedy in the making.

There is little doubt in my mind that sooner or later Dhoni is going to become a full fledged middle order batsman in Tests and maybe even in the ODI’s at a more advanced age. In other words Dhoni will do a Dravid when he reaches thirty. [He should, if you ask me.] The role change may come due to a change in his batting temperament, or due to declining glovework in the face of added batting responsibity with increasing seniority, or both. That will open up a possibility of Karthik or Patel - even both - getting national call-up(s) for the specialist keeper’s role in Tests and / or one dayers half a decade hence. But can they keep themselves in the hunt for that long a period? Are they single minded enough to survive the guaranteed snub of the intervening years?

Indian cricket is notorious for letting young and promising cricketers lose heart and focus after their first brushes with failure. Out of a batch of 5 or 6 promising young cricketers inducted into the national cricket team in the mid 80’s only Azharuddin made it into the 90’s. It was the same with another batch of rookies in early 90’s of which only one Sourav Ganguly had the heart and the luck to make a grand comeback half a decade later.

This is one of those areas where the national selectors need to step in with a vision and decisive action plan for the future, a future that does not end with their respective tenures. They need to share that vision with the zonal cricket bodies and selection committees. They need to talk to the young aspirants and explain to them the vital role planned for them in the future provided they stay focussed. A Colonel has been posted on the warfront and he knows that his job is far beyond everyday paperwork.

Keep the keepers focussed, Colonel. We will need them.

The men with a knockout punch

When the going gets tough the tough get going, they say. What can be tougher in one day cricket than a knockout match? The next knockout match perhaps.....and so on till we have the final. George Binoy of cricinfo lists some stats here that can help separate men from boys in ODI's.

It's a pity that the Test matches do not have knockouts; spanning over five days, those would have been the sternest tests of sporting character one can think of.

I C C-rious connotations

There was a sense of rejoice in learning that Inzamam-ul-Haq got a light rap on the knuckles by ICC for ‘bringing the game to disrepute’ but was cleared of the big bad charge of ball tamperin. I reckoned both decisions to be….proper. [‘correct’ is not an option, is it?]

My happiness had more reasons than just an agreement with the verdict. The incident has evoked unanimous support from the bowlers’ community for their fellow swingers, a phenomenon I always love to see. The ‘rejoice’ was complete when I imagined the impact of this ‘not out’ decision on high-handed umpiring. Never saw footage of the actual incident at The Oval but the outcome of that affair added to a growing feeling that of late some umpires are getting a few free rides too many in a game that is so strict on its players.

But even in celebration of such rare moments of triumph you can trust the ICC to dish out half cooked broth. The withdrawal of Hair from ICC trophy is one such faux pas; not so much the actual decision to withdraw the controversial umpire but the ridiculously roundabout way of announcing it. However ICC Chief Match Referee Ranjan Madugalle’s adjudication on the ball tampering charge announced during his press conference is perhaps a far more resonant botch. In the conclusive paragraph he says:

“Given that the physical state of the ball did not justify a conclusion that a fielder had altered its condition, and neither of the umpires had seen a fielder tampering with the ball, there was no breach of Law 42.3. The course of action which I would have expected from umpires concerned that there may be ball-tampering would have been for the Umpires to draw Mr ul-Haq's attention to the marks and to tell him that they intended to keep a close eye on the ball after each over.”

While the second line of that all-important paragraph was designed as a brief guideline for umpires to act upon future incidents, I have serious objections with the first line and the distorting effect it has on the second line. That last bit of “there was no breach of law 42.3” could have been worded otherwise. It could go like “there is no conclusive proof that law 42.3 was breached.” As you read the paragraph in totality you’ll find a marked alteration come about in the sense with that little change of words.

In the brouhaha of coming out with the right verdict ICC have missed spelling out a little but crucial message for players and umpires alike: that the Pakistan team are being let off for want of evidence in support of the charge – nothing more, nothing less. At present that first line makes the second line look less of a guideline and more of a cold instruction from ICC for the umpires alone. ‘Do this and do no further,’ seems to be the underlying message.

The statement from Madugalle can only serve to unduly undermine the authority and inclination of an umpire to interfere with suspected ball tampering. Irrespective of the validity of the present charge, the verdict unwittingly discourages umpires from looking for ‘rape’ of the ball unless the ‘rape’ is extensive enough to be proven. If that means allowing the requisite ‘rape’ to happen in front of their eyes then so be it.

Is that the intended essence of ICC’s seminal “note of caution” for its umpires? Then they better be prepared that lesser mortals than Hair (you can’t help having that one regard for him) will pretend looking the other way when a ball tampering incident actually happens on the field. I’m sure none of us would love that.

Maybe I’m reading too much into Madugalle’s choice of words. Let’s hope the umpires do not.

Update: It seems some other people are also harbouring similar thoughts about the outcome of ball tampering controversy. Cricinfo Pakistan's Osman Samiuddin ponders:

Should the law perhaps make it necessary for an umpire to spot at least one individual or one act of tampering before taking action, as Dickie Bird said immediately after the hearing?

Update 2: Jagadish expresses his apprehensions about the verdict.

King Cricket talks about Prince of Cricket

Get a feel of Brian's 501 n.o. here.

Born to make history

This one's for the ages.

When Sachin Tendulkar retires he is going to be associated with zillions of cricketing records. As with so many special things destined for him, here is one more curious association between history of the colonial game in his land and its greatest product here:

If you join the two digits of Sachin Tendulkar's age (in years) at the time of his 1st Test century to the two digits of Sachin Tendulkar's age at the time of his 1st ODI century (in that order) we get a significant year in the history of Indian cricket.

The year is 1721. It corresponds to the 'earliest known reference to cricket being played in India.'

[Check out on the concluding section of this wiki link.]

When losing the plot comes with a clot

There can be n number of ways a captain can lose his head while playing a crunch game. Pic 10 of this series records one of them.

Greg Chappell the great ODI all rounder

Did you know that besides being an all time great batsman the Indian cricket coach is quite Viv Richards-like in qualifying as one of the top all rounders to have played in ODI's?? I never even bothered to check until I came across this Friday column by S Rajesh on cricinfo.

Chappell Jr. has taken 72 wkts in the 74 ODI's he played!! Now I know what makes him bowl so much at the top order men in the nets.

The article gives a reasonable method to judge all rounders in ODI's. Problem is, while the bowling economy rates of players is available on the players' stats pages the batting strike rate is yet to become a permanent feature in those columns...Wisden and Cricinfo, are you listening??

Strike rates and economy rates of individual players are functions of average strike rates / economy rates for that era and need to be viewed as such. You need to make a few adjustments while judging specialist bowlers and batsmen from different generations with those figures. But for the all rounders the relevant figures, as indicated in Rajesh's article, are differentials of batting and bowling figures - and that should essentially cancel out such 'generation gaps'.

Clarification: Players' career batting strike rates are already available on the individual player pages of cricinfo. In the post above I was suggesting their incorporation on statsguru so that we get filtered values of strike rates.

[cross posted on Different Strokes]

D L F?

In other words, Did Lara Falter as a captain by batting himself, the best batsman, at number nine in yesterday's nail-biter of a run chase against India? Was it overconfidence on his part? Was it poor experimentation? And that's not all - there's another nasty angle: "Was it a got up match?" asked my colleague today. Typical Lara.

The intuitive captain that Lara is, it is likely to be none of those. 'A gamble' is perhaps a more correct call. West Indies have already qualified for the finals and it is quite possible that Lara saw dual benefits in trying out his perennially failing lower order bats at the top in last evening's modest chase. Those batsmen could have gained much needed confidence if West Indies could win without the services of Gayle and Lara. The West Indian spoke about that angle in the post match conference.

Lara kept silent about the other perceived benefit of his experiment though. It would have been 'improper' to make a public expression of it. He reckoned that even the unlikely outcome of an Indian win would significantly bolster India's chances of making it to the finals - which is all very well for West Indian chances of winning a long awaited trophy. Lara's assumption: India can hope for a win against Australia but winning with a bonus point in a knockout match against the full-strength world champs is akin to asking for the moon.

Understandably Lara could not put words on this aspect of his decision making and utter those in a press conference. There's no way a skipper would want Australia to know of the esteem that his team reserves for them nor would he like a wounded Indian team to treat the final as a prestige fight if they reach that far.

It was never going to be an all-win experiment though. The shocking result of that strange batting order jumble means Lara and his top order mates will be saddled with deep worries about middle order fragility in the final match. Come Sunday and we will know if Lara had called correctly during yesterday's lunch break or he was indeed foolish and took too much upon himself as captain and player by making a facile win difficult for a team that was only just getting used to winning.

While we continue to get confounded by skipper Lara's mind and its strange functioning, Tim de Lisle gets bamboozled by some other minds.

It's how you field and bowl, dears

You score over 300 runs and lose comfortably. Next time you set 163 and win against the same team playing with 9 batsmen, a keeper and a specialist bowler . I'll have to end this here - I am frantically making a list of all those who ever accused one-day cricket of being a batsman's game, to be handed over to a cricket loving bhai I know. "It's a long time since I broke some bones," lamented the poor guy when I last met him.

He is back

...and across, and forward. He's everywhere on the bowlers' minds. And he's magnificent as usual.

Pssssst.......he's back too, and so is he. All in the same tournament! No wonder it makes someone up there break down so often.

[Pic: cricinfo]

It doesn't get bigger than this...except the hype

Every new cricket series brings with it the next level in marketing of the game. I do not expect to be charged with overstatement for stating that this image provides a comprehensive picture of a world centred around promotion. Not even 24 hours have passed since the English Ashes squad was announced and we have this image splashed across the web. Do not recall seeing anything as dramatic as that during the build up of any recent big series. Not even the last Ashes that is barely a year behind us.

But then, no one expected the 2005 version to be much more than a formality. This illustration, then, is a tribute to the elevation of English cricket team in the domain of public awareness and it is commendable that they have raised such hopes of a repeat dogfight even in the face of losing so many of their 2005 heroes to injury.

There is another team though where half the team does not matter anyway because those players simply do not crave to be the one that made a difference (except maybe against India). They seem hell-bent on clinically removing every remaining reason for the team's numerous ardent supporters across the globe to keep on rooting for them. I must say that they do a pretty good job of it.

Update: Here's an expanded modification of this post.

Those moments of motion frozen in time...

....are what sports photography is all about.

You look at the celebrities and their supporters here.....

....A few young men enfolded by a mystic haze in their own divine world here ....

......Or at this delightful, wonderful collection of magic moments from a cross section of over 100 crore people by Will Luke.....

Each of those gems is a small yet fathomless chapter in the game of cricket told thru a single moment of visual inspiration that was also a magnificent feat of hand-eye (or should it be finger-eye) coordination, a chapter that could not be described quite as well by all the words coined in history.

Seeing is believing, and there hardly was ever a point of time in my existence when I believed in that more than I do now after coming across those pictures. I am glad that I blog about cricket - as that alone allowed me the fortune of getting to them.

Many of those pics transend the sport they depict. It could have been any sport in those pics and I would be as blessed to get a share of them as I am now. But I am just glad that it is cricket in its resplendent 24 carat glow that those snaps reflect rather than another game.

About his passion for cricket pics from the sub continent Will has this to say in one of his posts:

"I still haven't discovered what it is that appeals to me about cricket photos from the subcontinent. I love all cricket photography, partly because I'm an amateur snapper myself but mainly because there's something mystical about "freezing" action into one moment. Perhaps it's that cricket is to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh what football is to Britain. But moreover cricket on the subcontinent appears born from the dust and soil. With the exception of the privileged, children aren't given shiny white pads and a slazenger bat for their 7th birthday; they play with sticks, on dusty tracks, on railways, platforms, mountains and> wherever they choose. It's much more a way of living, of passing time, than it is of playing the game.

That's my blinkered view of it anyway....."

Meanwhile I am still searching for Sunil Gavaskar's email ID. Do Send him these links if you have his contact, as he badly needs this medicine. Things can get from bad to worse if he manages to expose himself to some of the footage from his own playing days while in this frame of mind.

Moin-ud-dowla: a road map to Test cricket for ICC associates?

The Moin-ud-dowla Gold Cup tournament is played over 3 days in a 2-limited-overs-innings-a-side format. The first innings is of 90 overs and the 2nd innings has 40. Excepting a final addition of totals the two innings are treated independently i.e. remaining wickets, overs or time from one innings do not carry over to the next. The one day wide rule is firmly in place.

I read a report where Bengal captain Deep Dasgupta explained some of the rules at the press conference and I must say I like the present format as it facilitates evaluation of talented one day specialists and young club cricketers that may become future first class and Test prospects.


Most of the young talents unearthed at club level are only exposed to the limited overs format by the time big opportunities start knocking at their doors.This is true even for some established Test nations like India and Pakistan. The Moin-ud-dowla format (I do not know if we have a proper name for it), while ensuring a result, can allow budding cricketers to build their stamina, improve concentration and maintain intensity over long periods.


There are a few associate countries of ICC that have a future in cricket but are yet to institute a first class format in their domestic infrastructure. They can implement this present format adopted at the Moin-ud-doula tourney for their apex domestic cricket tournament and maybe chart a path of progress to five day cricket.


Perhaps they will need to expand that limited-overs rule of one bouncer per batsman per over and increase the margin of error for an off-side wide. Wait, wait - some more much required alterations are already rushing to my mind.....

[Cross posted on Caught Behind]

Aerodynamics of a cricket ball..

The subject often becomes a raging topic following marvellous spells of swing bowling or allegations of ball tampering in international cricket. The cutomary response by e-readers: maybe a few browses across the net after reading a thought provoking article or report on the subject and a blog post with a lot of questions, and that's it for most of us. Imagine a person pursuing the subject for 25 years! Meet Rabindra Mehta, Sports Aerodynamics Consultant and NASA Scientist who makes the effort to share on cricinfo his learnings about the subject.

Thumbs Up mate, we are blessed to have people like you.

Shoaib's 5 years younger than Asif....

The cricinfo bulletin of the 2nd ODI between Pakistan and England (I could follow a part of the English innings and that was it) had a link of player pages. Cricinfo has this nice feature of listing the significant personalities discussed in a report and linking these names to respective personality pages. I casually pressed the link to my blue-eyed boy 'Mohammad Asif' and was horrified to learn that he was a 1971-born! Goodness gracious - age is the last similarity I have in mind when I keep saying that Asif reminds us of Glenn Mcgrath.

But then the reality strikes: our grandpa Asif is yet to play an international match. It was after all a minor linking error that allowed an Asif namesake his unexpected turn under the spotlight. And no wonder it happened - I counted 12 Mohammad Asif's in all on the Pakistan players' list. All was well thereafter and I slipped into my own Asif's player page.

Update: I cannot resist myself from sharing with you a potentially fatal thought that (fortunately) never occured to me during the precise period of shock described above. I may not have survived the damage if an image of former Pakistan fast bowler Aqib Javed had surfaced in my mindscape while I was still trying to digest the extreme advanced age of Asif.

Allegedly born in 1972 (and having started the rather easy job of fast bowling at first class level in the 1984-85 season aged 12 - right, t-w-e-l-v-e), Aqib happens to be younger than the 1971-born Asif.

Was Aqib Javed born aged five? I can't say - and that's a pity as that could have explained his rather 'early' start and likewise departure (he was spent by the time he was '26'). But he sure could have knocked me off for a round hundred; I take this opportunity to announce that the previous post was the 100th one on Pavilion View. Cake's on the way...and with it we will celebrate this new lease of life for your blogger friend. you'll agree that the landmark's far too innocuous when weighed against a narrow escape.

[The Aqib Javed info was pointed out in an earlier blog comment at a different forum as an 'intergalactic incredulity' by Jay, a cricinfo reader friend and supporter of Pakistan cricket team.]

Mindless, bordering on heartless

Cricketers of this era are turning out to be an an ill-advised lot - and we say this leaving aside controversies, politicking and on-field issues of cricket. If not for the game that gets increasingly beyond their control, the players can surely do better for the environment - and for themselves.

Bad time to be a fast bowler

.."in the 2000s, fast bowlers average more than 32 per wicket, while in the last five decades they touched the 30-mark just once. In fact, to find out the last instance when they gave away so many per wicket, you'd have to go back to the 1930s, when they averaged 32.89."

S Rajesh laments the dwindling stock of fast bowlers in the new millennium, with 2004 being the worst year for them in post war history!

"Since then (2000), the runs per wicket for pace bowlers has always been on the wrong side of 30, with 2004 being an especially poor year - their average of 35.15 is the worst for fast bowlers in any single year since the war."

Not surprising at all, not surprising at all. Morning showed the day ahead during the new Year Test of 2004 when Brett Lee registered a double century of conceded runs in the Indian 1st innings at Sydney.

Swinging in confusion

Here’s a much-awaited treatise on that great mystery of cricket – swing. While Saad Shafqat mentions a few interesting facts there about the past of swing bowling and touches upon the scientific simplicity of it all, he yorks me with the lines:

It is often said that reverse (super) swing is poorly understood, but in fact it is a simple and straightforward technique that you can try in your own backyard. All you need is a tennis ball, a roll of electrical insulation tape, and a set of stumps to aim at. Cover one half of the ball with strips of tape and hold it down the center, with the taped side entirely to one side. For a toe-bruising yorker, keep the taped side towards leg and deliver the ball aiming for second slip. About two-thirds of the way the ball will curve like a banana and crash into the base of middle and leg. The faster you are the better, but you don't have to be very quick to create the effect. To bowl a menacing outswinger, keep the taped side facing off and aim for fine leg. The physics is elementary. The smooth, taped side creates less turbulence than the uncovered, rough side of the tennis ball. Less turbulence means lesser resistance, and the ball moves in that direction.

A scientific confusion is created here. For all the elementary science lessons at your memory’s disposal and without treading into ‘turbulence’ territory you would have thought that the smoother or shiny half of the ball would face lesser air resistance and try to travel FASTER through the air than the other (rough) half and thus force the ball to move away from it, which would be the opposite of Shafqat’s take in the last two lines. The resultant trajectory, when viewed from above should resemble a heated bimetallic strip. I believe most of us laymen generally regard the normal (or conventional) swing to function that way rather than ‘reverse’ (or ‘super’ or whatever) swing.

Is the turbulence effect, that obviously functions inversely as the ‘expected’ effect explained above (let’s call it that), so strong that it overcomes this expected effect and reverses it to a degree that it becomes too negligible to even deserve a mention from Shafqat? And does the cricket ball behave in exactly the same fashion as the tape ball? In case you think of dismissing the above words of Shafqat as a typo there’s further confirmation of what he intends to say:

Super swing is simpler to understand, easier to learn, more accurate, and perfectly reproducible. Delivered at speeds over 90 mph, it can be a lethal weapon, some would even say a weapon of mass destruction. It doesn't matter what your action is or how you cock your wrist. All that matters is which way the smoother surface is facing. Provided there is enough difference between the rough and shiny sides, the ball will always move towards the smoother surface. It isn't the 'reverse' of anything. That's just the way it is.

‘Towards the smoother surface’ again? Now my confusion is peaking and needs serious sorting out. Having surfed on this topic a few times earlier I repeat the exercise. All of the more simplistic explanations (links provided below) that I pick up on the net point towards my original beliefs (to use a suitable term) about swing. However I’m far from convinced that I understand the truth.

Not for nothing is aerodynamics excluded from science syllabi for fifth standard students and there should be a lot more to the mechanism of swing than simplistic explanations. Simply put, the ball behaves as it does and it is up to us to find out how it moves. There’s no use expecting it to do this or that just because our expectations soar only as far as our knowledge allow them to.

Maybe ‘turbulence’ does weird and big things to the quickly hurled cricket ball and Shafqat’s statement may be based on that. How I wish this scientific misery of cricket lovers to end once for all through extensive studies on this front by a handful of crazy cricket lovers pretending as brilliant scientists.

Oh – I must kick myself hard for forgetting to thank Shafqat profusely. Controversies have deluged cricket over the last month and it is a long time since we all discussed ball, bat and such things that are easier to relate to. At least Shafqat has started a debate that we would love to shout ourselves hoarse about. Would love to read a more detailed account by him about those words of his.

Do add your views here and help enlighten me if you have understood Saad Shafqat's point. In case you wondered, I regard myself to be an on-the-verge-of-retirement non-pro medium pacer who generally swings the ball right up. And as Shafqat mentions in his post, I agree with Imran Khan that it would swing the same (almost) all the time irrespective of the way the ball is held.

More stuff on swing bowling mechanism has been discussed here, here and here.

[cross posted on Caught Behind and Different Strokes]

Update [7-Sep-2006]:

Rabindra Mehta has come up with an illustrative piece on cricinfo to explain the science of swing bowling in simple terms. My DS friend Krishna Kumar has this to say about the issue:

"
I know you can get conventional swing with a taped ball, if you strip away a bit of the tape on one side, after covering the whole ball first with tape, i.e. away from the shiny, smooth side and toward the damaged tape side. We used to do that for fun in Ottawa, until very quickly the batting team asked for a re-tape :)

Ball does travel faster over the turbulent air stream side. The smooth side allows air to stick to it better, roughly speaking, and hence air flow is slower. It's the same reason a dimpled golf ball travels quicker through air.

There's a ball available on order, from the Greg Chappell cricket centre online, called King Swinger or something like that (I have it with me:), it's half regular tennis ball, half smooth rubber, it swings conventionally, but swings a LOT. Very difficult to control unless you bowl as quick you can, otherwise it starts bending half way down the pitch. :)

A taped ball I'd have thought would behave much the same way, i.e. generate conventional swing, but Saad seems to suggest otherwise.

The only real difference in reverse swing and the conventional variety, is that when one side becomes really rough, air flow becomes very turbulent, and when it is really turbulent (as opposed to mildly turbulent for conventional swing), air flow slows down, resulting in a reversal of swing direction. Or so people claim :)

The real reason (I think) wrist position becomes very crucial in conventional swing, is that, the difference in air flow speeds is because of the seam position as opposed to the difference in roughness between sides of the ball. After all, the first few overs of a game, there is no rough side :) Hence, the angle at which the protruding seam cuts through the air determines the speed of air flow over and around it. That's not a very good explanation, but that's about as well as I understand it anyway :) A bit of wobble (not too much, but just a bit) of the seam I think helps (although TV comms and coaches say, you need a pefectly positioned seam), because if you notice, Zaheer Khan has about the best positioned non-wobbly seam ever, but gets almost no swing with a red ball. Or perhaps, it is the non-slinginess of his action.

But, overall, it's the vaguest science known to mankind (superstring theory being a distant second:)
"

God bless both.

Gibbs decides to take it on

Gibbs has finally decided to face his long pending police interrogation session in India with the Delhi police that will hopefully close the Indian chapter of his involvement in the match-fixing episode. Since 2000 he has avoided visiting India citing grounds of possible arrest and harassment. here's a cricinfo report on his views of the forthcoming India tour:

Gibbs said that the delays were all at the Indian end. "They haven't really played their part," he shrugged. "You know, we've asked them many a time to come question me on neutral territory, and they refuse. So it's not like I haven't made the effort. It's them being hard-arses. That's it."

It is laughable how he expects to be interrogated on a neutral land for a crime committed on Indian terrotory. Easy to blast him for that, as Gibbs had confessed to involvement in the controversy. Long dragging worries though can be thoroughly irksome - we all have a few (generally of smaller gravity) - and manage to bring out the prickly side of men. Poor guy, this Herschelle Gibbs. Brilliant batsman he might be inside of the 22 yards but he still is an ordinary man in an extraordinary situation and fighting to come out of it with no UCBSA in sight this time to approve a 'withdrawal'.

As I recently commented here, everything in cricket today is not just cricket and it is futile in the long run to skirt issues that test the mettle. At least Gibbs has decided to face the consequences and we need to appreciate that thought. He need not be worried; here in this country we all respect him for his timely withdrawal and throngs of people will surely come out in his support if he is harassed without a reason while some other tainted ones belonging to this land strut around signing autographs and participating in weekly sports debates at prestigious television channels.

The maiden maiden of Twenty20

Here's a nice piece of info: Mohammad Asif is now a strong contender for "Casanova of the year" award after winning over the most reluctant maiden of all time. It, or she, took 8 matches coming....(okay we will go this far and no further)

Holding the truth aloft

Thaat maan Michael Holding may be well into his 50's but he can still send down some serious singing stuff. Whichever side of the fence you are on, his take on a divided cricket world on the Hair controversy will take some digesting. he does not mention the much-discussed racism issue, or even the regal air that some older nations surround themselves in while dealing with the newer entrants to international cricket.

Holding says:

There is a double standard at work in cricket and this episode has only highlighted it.

Mikey's statement opens up a different perspective when he points to a first-world-third-world factor in the equation of power. In other words, he says that the unwritten rule of traditional Indian marriages also dictates polarisation in the realms of ICC: spouses bond well when their families have similar economic backgrounds.

You start thinking, "Is there a chance in a hundred that South Africa might have reacted any differently than Australia did (by staying on) if they had been playing a series in England last year when the London blasts happened?" Back in 1996 the cricket administrators of Australia thought nothing of even forfeiting their World Cup match in Sri Lanka but when the 'action' shifted to England everyone in Cricket Australia showed a big heart.

Till the recent South Africa incident I found nothing partisan about that bravado. The 1996 reaction of Australia and Mikey's own West Indies always looked more of a panicky reaction, independent of the 'status' of Sri Lanka in the world of firsts and thirds. After the brilliant Ashes last year I could only thank heavens that the intervening nine years of terrrorism around the world had so drastically changed perspectives of even the 'safer' nations. [Not that I am a great supporter of terrorism, in case I selected a few wrong words there...] Had Australia pulled out after the London blasts we would have been denied cricket of quality rarely seen in the past decade.

The South African reaction to the Sri Lanka blasts and a telling silence from the 'first world' in response to that backout said things that no cricket lover in these parts wants to hear: we are considered below par in protecting our guests from local distractions. Sadder still, that message may just be the header text of a rather long paragraph. After these incidents from the recent past even the most neutral of Asian cricket supporters will hope to be forgiven for nodding in agreement when Holding says "That is first-world hypocrisy and we have to live with it."

I am yet to come across recordings of the exact events that took place on "Hair Day" but even so I am pretty sure that Hair would have gone about the matter just as Mikey says if the fielding team at Oval had been Australia, England, West Indies or even New Zealand (who are about as old, or new, in Test cricket as Pakistan).

"All in a day’s work", the new Macbeth

For a few moments let us forget the rights and wrongs of Pakistan in the ball tampering controversy and concentrate on the parody of that Shakespearean tragedy Macbeth that the Hair drama is throwing up. Trying to reword the latest developments with some creative license:

Scene One:

"I’ll be putting a lot to my side when this is all over. I have been vilified by virtually everybody here and when the truth comes out a lot of people will pay. So, that’s all I can say."

Darrell Hair mouths these dramatic words and achieves his original aim of making people chew off nails in anticipation of his autobiography. Good PR job that, we must say. But then……

Scene Two:

……with his present and future workload the story can only come out a few years later - as stale as John Wright talking about his Indian tenure in 2006. Enter the three witches who whisper business sense into Hair's ears and arouse his greed. [Analogies yet to be established for all three witches but Steve Waugh with his indirect role in fanning the controversy qualifies as one…]

Hair realises that he simply has to write a book on this controversy right NOW. "Hit the market while the principal topic is still raging." He may strike gold with the publication and never have to stand again in the sun with stressed lumbars for days on end.

But how does Hair write a book while ICC (King Duncan) makes him conquer new frontiers [officiate in Test matches] around the globe all year? Darrell (okay, we will call him Macbeth henceforth) feels the prick to chuck this umpiring job for a greater gain. Time for a few drastic measures.

Scene Three:

Meanwhile, Macbeth consults Lady Macbeth (umpire Ross Emerson, of the Murali connection). The Lady comes out in support of Macbeth’s plan to get rid of Duncan from his scheme of things. The Lady incites him further: why not try and wring out his expected earnings over next few years from the King’s coffers before eliminating him? Enter $500,000, Hair’s claim for vacating an umpiring slot of the ICC panel. [I bet that was the most expensive way to lose Hair.]

Our Macbeth is a man of deeds. [Please note the absence of the term ‘honourable man’ – I hate mixing up plays.] He assures us about making 'a lot of people pay when the truth is out' and actually attempts it. Indeed what is ICC, Darrell's paymaster and the Duncan of this Macbeth, but representation of 'a lot of people'?

Scene Four:

"If people want to force me out of the game it has to be done in some shape or form that I am unaware of, because I am contracted to do a job and I know I am doing it quite well at the moment so far as the ins and outs are concerned."

Is it the same Macbeth speaking to news agencies while firing off that half-a-million letter to ICC? Here the Shakespearean script threatens to morph into a Ram aur Shyam like Hindi movie ("Maqbool" be damned) where lookalikes keep exchanging positions. But wait! Darrell Hair’s Macbeth has to be taken to task and who else can you have but the slain King’s son Malcolm speeding up to the podium, joining hands with Macduff (Inzamam), another Macbeth victim to elaborate on the clandestine deeds of Macbeth.

Scene Five:

Fierce battle ensues.

Scene Six:

Still under scripting – keep watching.


And almost all of this has happened in a single day! Irrespective of the fate of Darrell Hair this Macbeth is anything but a tragedy.

Disclaimer: I happen to be a complete outsider in this Hair-v-Pak war as I admit to the shame of not having watched live cricket in the past fortnight or so.

[FOR THE EXACT SEQUENCE OF EVENTS THAT TRIGGERED THIS CONTROVERSY READ THIS POST BY MATT THORNTON.]

An ICC-free cricket match...

Billy Bowden hands out a dodgy lbw to Brian Lara playing in his final Test. The batsman crinkles his eyes an ambles back with head falling back. While passing the umpire Lara stops on his way and asks:

Are you sure the eyesight's any straighter than that finger of yours?

Vishnu Pawan imagines a dream world and has a few breezy suggestions for those 'ideal' conditions when no rules are there to stop you from having your way..or, say.

If it's 'Ashes to Ashes' for the English then for the Pakistanis it's...

...hair to Hair!