This isn’t the first time murky player signings in the IPL have come to light

Tariq Engineer16-May-2012’s sting alleging corruption in the IPL has again focused the spotlight on the issue of under-the-table payments to domestic Indian players. The television channel recorded at least three players allegedly seeking more lucrative IPL deals – including extra money that would have violated league regulations – with other franchises through an undercover reporter posing as a sports agent. In all, five players were named either asking for more money or offering to spot-fix for a certain sum of money.While the BCCI moved swiftly to suspend all five players, the issue of under-hand payments and deals is one that has plagued the IPL since its inception.Ironically, it was the BCCI’s own rules – designed to prevent escalating salaries – that lie at the heart of the problem. The board created three categories for uncapped players and set limits on what the players in each category could be paid. Those players who made their first-class debut in the previous two years would be paid Rs 10 lakhs ($22,000) per season; those who did so between two and five years ago would get Rs 20 lakhs ($44,000) and those with more than five years’ experience Rs 30 lakhs ($66,000).Theoretically, that left players free to pick the franchise of their choice because they would be paid the same no matter whom they played for, but that ignored the law of demand and supply. Nine teams need 63 Indian players to take the field. If each player has one back-up, that means teams need 126 Indian players at the minimum. And good Indian domestic players are in short supply. Therefore, far from protecting the players from inducements, the system left them open to bidding wars that could violate the salary cap, especially since some of the more talented players could, in an open auction, command several times the maximum they can under the BCCI’s rules.The first warning sign appeared in 2010, when Ravindra Jadeja was banned for the season because he violated league rules on two counts. First, he did not renew his contract with Rajasthan Royals for IPL 2010, as the rules required him to do, because he wanted to free himself from contractual obligations under the player trading rules. Second, Jadeja met with representatives of Mumbai Indians and sent his contract documents to them for inspection – thereby violating the operational rules by being in contact with another franchise.Though Jadeja was punished, Mumbai Indians were not. The president of the Delhi and Districts Cricket Association (DDCA) and a member of the IPL governing council at the time, Arun Jaitley, who chaired Jadeja’s hearing, recommended that Mumbai Indians be warned for “having approached a player who was under an obligation to play for another franchise” and said “a more deterrent line of action should be considered” for future offences of this nature. In his order he warned that, “Leagues such as the IPL will survive only if utmost purity and honesty is maintained. There must be a strict compliance with the rules. Money has value, but in a league like the IPL, loyalty has a greater value.”Following the mega-player auction in January, 2011, Vijay Mallya drew attention to the issue again with what now seems a prescient warning. “I urge all the franchises and the IPL governing council to exercise the utmost vigilance while signing uncapped players,” Mallya said minutes after the auction ended. He did so because he was concerned about the BCCI’s ability to protect the uncapped players from being the subjects of a bidding war or under-the-table inducements.
Mallya was right to worry because, despite the severity of Jadeja’s punishment, the problem reappeared a few months later. This time it involved Manish Pandey, one of the most exciting young domestic players and a member of Mallya’s Royal Challengers Bangalore. When his contract ran out, Royal Challengers complained to the IPL that the player’s agent was involved in discussions with rival teams and demanding more money than the rules allowed. However, the league’s governing council could not conclusively ascertain whether Pandey or his agent had committed any violations and he was allowed to sign with Pune Warriors, but was banned for the first four games in 2011.The issue is not restricted to domestic players either. Earlier this year Royal Challengers managed to retain the services of Chris Gayle, the West Indies opener, for $550,000 ($100,000 less than they paid him the previous season). Given his multiple match-winning innings in 2011 and his availability through IPL 2012, Gayle’s auction value probably would have commanded the maximum $2 million contract. His deal with Royal Challengers allowed the franchise to have $1.45 million left over to spend in the auction.Gayle was also reported, in various media, to have signed a deal to be brand ambassador for Whyte & Mackay whiskey, part of the UB Group which owns the Royal Challengers, which brings to light another factor potentially undermining the IPL’s level playing field. The ability to hand out endorsements through cross-branding is one of the advantages some of the big corporate owners, with their multiple commercial interests and entities, have over the other franchises. A Royal Challengers or a Mumbai Indians, owned by the UB Group and Reliance Industries respectively, can supplement a player’s playing contract in ways that some of the smaller franchises, such as Kings XI Punjab, cannot. Thus a player, should he be coveted by them, would have an added incentive to sign on the dotted line.While the board has cracked down on players, it has so far not acted against the franchises. N Srinivasan, the BCCI president, came out in defence of the owners after Monday’s sting. “All the franchisees have people of stature behind it,” he told a television channel. “It will be wrong to presume they are doing something wrong and then make enquiries. If something comes to light it is different. All the franchisees are reputable people and I have respect for them.”

Petersen has dealt with pressure before and come out on top; the challenge this time was of a slightly different order

Firdose Moonda at Basin Reserve25-Mar-2012Before the start of the Hamilton Test, Alviro Petersen was asked what it was like to bat between the superstars. With names and reputations like Graeme Smith, Jacques Kallis, Hashim Amla and AB de Villiers in the same line-up as him, Petersen was essentially being asked if he sometimes got lost in a galaxy of greats. He was asked the question again after his 156 in Wellington, the highest score by a South African batsman on this tour. His answer was the same again.”I don’t know,” Petersen said, with a knowing look on his face, one that suggested he knew exactly how it felt to bat as well as any of those big names. “I am just focussed on my cricket. But, I don’t want to be Jacques Kallis, I don’t want to be Graeme Smith. I am Alviro Petersen.”Who exactly that is, we aren’t sure. We probably won’t know for many more Tests as Petersen establishes himself in the side. What we can say with confidence, is that Petersen is promising enough to be more than a speck of moondust in the atmosphere.Petersen is playing in his 13th Test match and has already scored three hundreds. All of them came at a time when he has had to make a point. The first one was on debut, the second on his comeback after being dropped more because of the prolific form of Jacques Rudolph than any over-riding concern about his own ability and the third here, amid calls for whether he should open the batting despite his last big knock having come just three Tests ago.Why Petersen faced pressure for his place from some quarters in this match remains a mystery. Although his century in the New Year’s Test was overshadowed by Kallis’ all-round efforts which included a double-hundred, it has not been completely erased from memory, especially not the memory of the selectors. He only managed 66 runs from his previous four innings in New Zealand but did not look inept by any means. At worst, he was uncomfortable in previous innings, was guilty of trying to play across the line too often, was lbw twice and adopted an approach that was perhaps too attacking.He was certainly due a knock but it was not a do-or-die situation. The main source of anxiety for Petersen came from Petersen himself, who admitted that he was concerned about how he had played in the previous two matches. “I was under pressure coming into this game because of the standards I set for myself,” he said. “I hadn’t really scored a lot of runs in this series so it was important that I once I got in that I try and score big.”The crucial part was getting in. He looked a little shaky against the away movement but had the luxury of giving himself time to settle in because Amla was playing the role of the aggressor at the other end. He did have one edge go third slip’s way in the early stages of his innings but was lucky to find no-one manning the area. When Amla got out, he had JP Duminy to push on. In that period, he offered another chance that went to Martin Guptill’s right at second slip. Petersen was on 68 then and got away with it again. Then, he capitalised.A hallmark of his play on the second afternoon was his execution of the pull, which came off perfectly almost every time. He said the bounce off the surface was something he enjoyed because it reminded him a little of home. “I grew up playing at the Wanderers so I think I am just used to a bouncier wicket,” he said. “Facing the likes of Marchant [de Lange] in the nets, especially when he tries to take all our heads off, does make things easier as well.”He went to bed on Saturday night on 96 and returned to turn that into 100 by the second over on Sunday morning. With the sun out, the pitch flattened, the pulls from day two became the drives of day three as Petersen rolled them out in conditions which suited. “Today, the wicket played really nicely,” he said. He looked well set to turn his hundred into a double but a lapse in concentration allowed New Zealand to break through and dismiss him the way they have twice before, trapping him lbw.Petersen’s annoyance at having made the same mistake was obvious. He accepted the umpire’s verdict without asking for a review but went back to tap the pitch in a frustration that he lapsed back into a technical flaw he had tried to eliminate. Prior to this match, Petersen studied some footage of himself from previous games to see whether the mistake had crept in recently. “I had a look at some videos, especially of Newlands Test and just worked on a few things,” he said. “I think in this game it came through quite nicely.”This innings has given Petersen a healthy dose of confidence ahead of South Africa’s next tour – to England in July. His challenge will be to avoid waiting for a situation where he to score runs to convince people he is worthy of star status but to keep piling them on regularly. “Every cricketer wants to be consistent and I am no different. It’s just that, I enjoy pressure,” he said. “I have to find a way of trying to put that pressure on every innings and almost play like it’s my last game every time.”

Sri Lanka produced a wonderfully slick performance against England, as Lasith Malinga and the middle order fired, but who was really leading the team? And did it really matter?

Andrew Fernando01-Oct-2012Sri Lanka resembled an engine purring assuredly on the starting grid, as they tuned up all their parts in another dominant victory to finish at the top of their Super Eights group. The openers provided a solid platform and critically, this time, the young middle order also delivered a good finish. Lasith Malinga returned to his penetrative best, Nuwan Kulasekara achieved quietly again, and Akila Dananjaya continued his fairytale, even if he looked a little like he had been in a bar fight in the hours before the match.Sri Lanka’s victory however, was slightly overshadowed by controversy. “Mahela has lost three tosses in a row,” was the line Kumar Sangakkara tried to sell when he, not Mahela Jayawardene, turned out as captain for the toss, but it was quickly apparent a tad more trickery was afoot. Jayawardene and Sri Lanka had been fined for slow over rates during their previous match and, under the ICC code of conduct, he faces a one-match suspension if, under his watch, Sri Lanka fail to complete their overs in the allotted time again in the next 12 months.The debate has been afire on social media since Sri Lanka took the field and it became obvious that Jayawardene was still in the saddle – at one point even approaching the umpires to get a ball changed. Sri Lanka were flouting the rules, which were put in place to try and curb slow over rates. With Sangakkara in place as an empty suit, Jayawardene was clear to marshal the attack at his leisure, where under threat of suspension, he might have paid more heed to the clock. Was this an unfair advantage? Stuart Broad, after all, was also on notice for slow over rates, but had not passed the armband along to Jos Buttler with the excuse that Buttler been practicing the toss at training.On the face of it of course official captain Sangakkara is well within his rights to delegate duties to anyone else in the team, even if that duty is to captain the team. But perhaps that is missing the point. In practice, Jayawardene had never given up leadership and some might find that difficult to make peace with. In the end, Sri Lanka were not fined again and it was all a little like paying out insurance premiums without ever making a claim.The episode belies a more intriguing debate about the very rule itself. In practice, if that is what we are giving precedence to, Sri Lanka’s rate of play did not make the match against West Indies noticeably duller. Why then should their captain and best batsman be at the risk of missing a crucial match in a major tournament? The punishment does not fit the crime, as Pakistan coach Dav Whatmore had noted when Misbah-ul-Haq was forced to miss a Test in June. Those arguing that, in practice, Jayawardene was the captain against England and should be punished for exploiting a loophole, cannot then become sticklers for a rule that itself seems short on practicality.After the match, Jayawardene was open about his mischief and bore the expression of a man who enjoyed having cheated the system. When asked at the press conference why he was not officially captain, he joked “so you want Sanga here? I can go back”.Mahela Jayawardene was worried about over-rate bans so handed the official captaincy to Kumar Sangakkara•AFP”I might as well explain,” he said eventually. “I had a warning for an over rates issue, and if it happens again I miss the match so what we did was have Kumar as the official captain. I don’t think that the intentions were wrong. It’s a tough system and it’s tough to bowl 20 overs in one hour and 20 minutes in a tournament like this. We try our best, but the penalties are harsh. We don’t want to miss the big games, so we did it with the right intentions.”Angelo Mathews was on the same offence for a match against Pakistan in Hambantota, so if he got nailed he misses a game as well. We had to find someone who didn’t have a rap sheet and Kumar fitted the bill.”Jayawardene also revealed the ploy had been thought out by team manager Charith Senanayake and that the team had verified the rules and consulted the ICC code of conduct before proceeding. “I’m sure they’ll change the rules after this, but hopefully not in this tournament,” he said.The captaincy issue, though, should not take the sheen off a near-complete performance. The middle order had not yet proven itself in the tournament, but Angelo Mathews and Jeevan Mendis put on 52 from 31 balls for the fourth wicket, after Jayawardene and Sangakara fell in consecutive balls, before Thisara Perera and Lahiru Thirimanne combined for 36 from 19 after the previous pair had also perished in successive deliveries.”Everyone has put their hand up and performed,” Jayawardene said. “It was really good the middle order had a hit today. They showed the quality that we’ve got. Everyone was saying the top three were scoring runs, today we lost wickets up front against a top quality bowling attack, and those guys came out and did the job. They didn’t go into a shell, they kept going and kept up the run rate. Unfortunately Jeevan and Angie got out to consecutive balls otherwise we probably could have ended up with 15 or 20 more runs, but I’ll take 170 any day.”Malinga took three wickets in an over, and completed his first five-wicket bag in Twenty20s, to derail the England chase alongside Dananjaya, who took 2 for 26. Malinga’s yorkers are yet to find the blockhole as consistently as they once did, but the haul will boost his confidence after a lean patch in which he appeared to have lost some of his venom, even if he retained his economy.”In the last couple of months I didn’t take many wickets, but I’m very happy with what I did today,” Malinga said. “They wanted to come hard and hit boundaries during the Powerplay, but I did my variations and it worked for me.”

ESPNcricinfo presents the plays of the day from the second one-day international between England and South Africa

George Dobell at West End28-Aug-2012Review of the day
England had declined to utilise their one DRS opportunity when Hashim Amla, on 37, was trapped in front by Samit Patel – replays suggested the third umpire would have been obliged to adjudge the batsman out – but did use it when JP Duminy, on 4, was struck outside the line of leg stump by one from James Anderson. It meant that when AB de Villiers, on 22, edged an attempted switch-hit on to his shoulder and into the arms of Craig Kieswetter, England were unable to review the umpire’s decision. Alastair Cook was proved correct five times out of nine when calling for reviews in the ODI series against Australia, but showed in this game that there is room for improvement with his use of the DRS.Moment of the day
Amla was on just 1 when he drove a delivery from Anderson straight to mid-off and set off for the sharpest of singles. Had Samit Patel picked up cleanly and thrown well, Amla might well have been run-out. It was to prove an expensive blunder.Stat of the day 1
During the course of his career-best ODI score, Amla became the fastest man to reach 3,000 ODI runs. To put his achievement in perspective, Amla reached the milestone in just his 57th innings, while the previous fastest batsman, Sir Viv Richards, took 69 innings. To beat Richards by any margin – let alone such a vast one – is testament to Amla’s remarkable quality, consistency and adaptability.Catch of the day
Dean Elgar’s diving catch, running back at fine leg and clinging on to a tough chance with his left hand, dismissed Jonathan Trott and drove a nail into the coffin of England’s hopes. Trott and Ian Bell had added 64 in 69 balls to keep England’s hopes alive, only for Trott to paddle a delivery from Morne Morkel towards fine leg. Initially it appeared as if Elgar, running in too far, has misjudged the catch and allowed the ball to pass well over his head. Instead, however, Elgar kept his eye on the ball, leapt to catch it with his favoured left hand and cushioned his landing with his right. While Elgar failed to show the ability with the bat that led to his selection, he proved his athleticism and skill in the field.Drop of the day
With Matt Prior and Jonny Bairstow both pressing for his place, this was a bad day for Kieswetter to have a bad day. After a series of much-improved performances behind the stumps, though, Kieswetter endured a highly disappointing display with the gloves. Not only did he drop three chances, but he oversaw England’s poor utilisation of the DRS – the wicketkeeper is the one man in ODI cricket in the perfect place to make the call about which decisions to review – and failed to make amends with the bat. His most costly drop came when Amla was on 42 and he offered a routine outside edge off the left-arm spin of Patel only for Kieswetter, rising too early behind the stumps, missed the chance.Move of the day
It summed up the first 10 overs of the match – a period when England’s bowlers looked capable of taking a wicket every few deliveries – when Graeme Smith edged a delivery from Tim Bresnan through the vacant second slip position. It was the second delivery of the ninth over and the first delivery of the match for which England had not had two slips. But is that poor fortune for England or, bearing in mind the run of play, poor captaincy?Stat of the day 2
Since the start of the World Cup in 2011, de Villiers is averaging 107 in ODI cricket. In this game he also passed 5,000 ODI runs in fewer innings (124) than anyone in history except Sir Viv Richards (114), Brian Lara (118) and Gordon Greenidge (121). Which all makes it a bit surprising that he came in behind Dean Elgar, who was playing his first ODI innings.

Memorable lines from the commentary of Tony Greig

ESPNcricinfo staff29-Dec-2012Three decades worth of international cricket commentary can’t be put down in a short list of memorable lines, but these quotes from Tony Greig will let us relive some of his and cricket’s great moments. We have only used the ones for which we could find Youtube videos, which means “The Indians have come alive” and “These little Sri Lankans… they never give up, do they?” aren’t in this list. Send us your favourites (with links, if possible).Tony Greig: brought the fan’s excitement into his commentary•PA Photos”They are dancing in the aisles in Sharjah.”
“The little man has hit the big fella for six! He’s half his size!”

“It’s miles in the air… it’s a wonderful catch! What a catch! The greatest catch! Unbelievable Steven Waugh.”
“Straight up in the air… Waugh won’t drop this… oh he’s dropped it! I can’t believe it! What’s going on here?”
“Oh boy, doesn’t she look gorgeous?”
“Changing behind the bowler’s arm? That’s enough to put any batsman off.”
“These Sri Lankans are giving the Aussies a real hiding.”
“What a biggie! It’s gone into the trees.”
“Viv Richards has obviously decided that tonight is going to be his night.”
“No, we don’t want him to go there, that’s for sure. That would not help at all.”
“That was hit really hard by Rod Marsh… no it wasn’t, Rod Marsh has just walked into the dressing room, and what’s more, he’s retired!”
“He’s blazed that one through the off-side field… go and fetch that!”
“India have won in dramatic style! The whole of Bengal are on their feet!”
“Looks like Inzamam is making a comeback… Sorry Inzy, don’t want you charging into the dressing room here trying to beat me up.”
“They’ll probably need Gillette to work on one of those Gillette G2 double-edged swivel heads to get through those valleys they have got here.”

Australia’s careful handling of Phillip Hughes conveys how desperately they need him to bloom into a batsman of quality, and longevity

Daniel Brettig06-Dec-2012Reborn. Renewed. Rejuvenated. Ready. Really?Phillip Hughes’ recall to Australia’s Test side to face Sri Lanka has been accompanied by plenty of noise to the effect that it will be a new man who takes guard in Hobart next Friday. To borrow Radiohead’s words, Hughes is fitter, happier, and should be more productive.Since the humiliation of last summer’s corresponding Bellerive Oval match, when Hughes completed a quartet of near identical dismissals at the hands of Chris Martin on the way to being dropped, the 24-year-old has gone on something like a journey of self-discovery.He stood back from the inaugural Twenty20 Big Bash League in order to work on his long-form methods, signed up to play for Worcestershire in England, and worked assiduously with his long-time mentor Neil D’Costa. While at Worcester, Hughes forsook New South Wales to move to South Australia, where Adelaide’s cosiness sat more neatly with his Macksville upbringing.All these moves resulted in runs, though spread across three formats, and what appears a more expansive game that features a better range of scoring strokes right around the ground. He even survived a brief but spicy spell from Dale Steyn when playing for Australia A against the South Africans at the SCG. The national selector John Inverarity feels that Hughes is now “cherry ripe” to play, having made a “compelling” case for Worcestershire and South Australia.But a closer glance at how Hughes has fared in first-class matches – the only truly relevant measure when pondering his readiness for the Test team – reveals a record not so much dominant as mildly presentable. Including the 158 he struck for South Australia against Victoria at the MCG during the Adelaide Test, Hughes’ batting digits are as follows: 1,135 runs at 40.54 in 16 matches, three centuries.They are hardly the sorts of numbers to have international bowlers quaking at the sight of the diminutive Hughes, nor the kinds of figures that suggest a quantum leap in the left-hander’s game. Instead they reflect a gradual improvement over the course of a year, after a dire home summer in 2011-12, both for Australia and NSW.At the time of Hughes’ exit from the Test team, numerous sage observers reckoned that he would need a good two seasons of consistent run-making and re-evaluation of his approach to be ready for a return to the international arena. Inverarity himself appeared to be of that view, and has often stated his preference for young players to be given a consistent run of matches for the one team rather than shunting them up to a higher representative level the moment they show evidence of a spike in batting or bowling form.Nonetheless, Hughes is now back into the Australian squad little more than 12 months after he left it, and in circumstances heavy with meaning. By replacing Ricky Ponting in Australia’s top order, Hughes may be seen as the embodiment of the team’s batting future. Of all the young players vying to be elevated to the national team, Hughes’ desire for runs and long innings is the most fervent, as demonstrated by his notching of 20 first-class centuries before his 24th birthday.But Hughes’ readiness for the major tasks to face Australia in 2013, first a tour to India then dual Ashes series away and at home, will remain open to question until he faces both opponents. The selectors’ curious decision to keep Hughes away from the line of fire during the South Africa series has already stirred plenty of debate, raising as it did questions about how ready they think he is to face the world’s best teams.

There can be little doubt that given the lack of standout batting options around the nation, Inverarity and his panel know they have to give Hughes the very best chance to develop into a Test batsman of quality, and longevity

The use (if not abuse) of Rob Quiney in Hughes’ stead was explained by the coach Mickey Arthur before the first Test in Brisbane with the reasoning that Australia needed a team of men, not boys, to face up to Graeme Smith’s team. “I wouldn’t want to disrespect any nation, but against a nation like South Africa right now, and we’d probably do the same against England and India, you want an experienced head to come in,” Arthur said. “You can’t blood a youngster against a team like South Africa. We want a guy who is very confident in his ability, a guy who knows his game backwards, and a guy that has got a little bit of experience. That gave Rob the nod.”How that reflects on Hughes is a matter for plenty of discussion, but there can be little doubt that given the lack of standout batting options around the nation, Inverarity and his panel know they have to give Hughes the very best chance to develop into a Test batsman of quality, and longevity. By holding him back until Sri Lanka’s arrival they are giving Hughes the chance to settle into the team, much as Ponting helped Michael Clarke to bed down as captain by resigning his commission ahead of tours to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, before the more difficult assignments against South Africa and India.Ponting’s sense of timing in relinquishing the captaincy proved to be exemplary, and the selectors will hope that they have done similarly right by their new No. 3 batsman. For his part, Hughes must continue the upward curve of the past year under the public gaze of the same television cameras that chronicled his unhappiest of Hobart Tests last year. Australia’s Ashes hopes may depend on it.

Geoff Boycott on Pakistan’s challenge against pace, why Dhoni is the right man to lead India, and facing Devon Malcolm

ESPNcricinfo staff24-Jan-2013Siddhartha Talya: Welcome to another show of Bowl at Boycs. I’m Siddhartha Talya and speaking to me today from his house in Cape Town in South Africa is Geoffrey Boycott.Geoffrey, England are 1-2 down in this series, and the fourth ODI is happening as we speak. England have scored 250-odd, do you fancy them winning this?Geoffrey Boycott: Not sure []. Listen, I won’t be putting money or my house on either of them because they’re not quite at their best yet. Both of them have quite a bit of work to do, they really do. There are some good things about both teams, they have about two years now, give or take, until the World Cup in New Zealand and Australia in 2015, so in that sense you don’t expect the finished product. I think both sides will be a little bit up and down.ST: Let’s start with our questions for today. The first one comes from Roger Sawh in Canada. He says: Greetings Geoffrey! Seeing that you had such a long career as an England international, you must have played many tour games against local sides as warm-ups for upcoming series. Have any of these games been particularly memorable? Have any players from them that didn’t go on to the international arena remained in your memory?GB: Good question. Two players, really. One of them was in Bermuda’s side. I was a young kid, went with Yorkshire to America, Canada, and Bermuda in 1964. Yorkshire were very good then, with personalities like Brian Close, Freddie Trueman, Ray Illingworth – and we were the best side in England playing championship cricket.A tour was organised. I was a young kid and went on it. We played against a guy called Clarence – I’ve forgotten his surname. Clarence, a tall, gangly left-arm spinner, almost like a faster version of Derek Underwood; he bowled cutters [Boycott may be referring to Clarence Parfitt, who played against Garry Sobers in 1966]. We played some matches on matting – matting over concrete – and he was very, very difficult, he bowled it very quick. We even had [Garry] Sobers guesting and playing for us, and even Garry thought he was a damn good player. Bermuda haven’t gone much further and he [Clarence] didn’t progress. In fact, I was there recently with MCC and people remembered him. I’ve forgotten his surname but he was very good.Actually the most spectacular unknown player I’ve ever played against was Devon Malcolm. Amazing. Yorkshire, in the early eighties, were playing a practice match against the Yorkshire leagues – that’s the best players out of all the best league teams in Yorkshire, in a team that had big cities like Leeds, Doncaster, Sheffield, York, Scarborough. We played at Castleford and this big, black lad ran up and he bowled a most fantastic yorker, spread-eagled my stumps. He did that to Richard Lumb, the other opening batsman. He got snapped up by Derbyshire straight after it and he went on to play for England a number of times.I see him occasionally, even today, and I love him to bits. He is the most gorgeous guy, big smile he has. “Hi Boycs,” he’ll say, and I’ll say, “God, I must have made your career, you spread-eagling my stumps”, and he laughed like hell. I said, “You must have a photograph of bowling me out above your bed head.” He said, “I do Boycs, I do Boycs”, and he laughs all the time.His first [second] series was in 1990 in the West Indies. I always remember it. In the first Test in Jamaica, go look, he knocked over Viv Richards, the best batsman in the world, and Desmond Haynes, very good player, close friend of mine, and England won the Test match.Good company: Lumb and I got bowled out with great yorkers from a fast bowler and he dismissed the best player in the world at the time. Devon went on to have a pretty good career; he played quite a few times for England. Remember, he destroyed South Africa at The Oval, bowling like the wind. There was aggression, pace, and he was almost unplayable on a fast, true, bouncy pitch.ST: A touch of history to our next question. It comes from David Boshier in the UK. Geoffrey, he’s someone who’s watched you bat at Bramall Lane as a boy. He says: If you look at films or books from the 1960s and before, umpires are crouched low over the stumps. Today they stand upright. Any idea about at what stage this change occurred – was it a conscious decision taken by the ICC or did it just happen spontaneously? Did you notice the change as a batsman? And was their ability to decide on lbws influenced positively or negatively?GB: David, I loved Bramall Lane. That’s the home of Yorkshire cricket. Yorkshire cricket started in Sheffield, Bramall Lane, in 1863, and it was the headquarters of Yorkshire cricket for 30 years before it moved to Leeds.Yes, I do remember in the early sixties when I played that the umpires were all ex-players, and they bent down so they could get a better idea of the bounce of the ball. Remember, if it hits the batsman in front, and it’ll be an lbw because it’s knocking the stumps down, you’ve got to look at height as well. We’ve seen now with the review system that quite a number of balls hit batsmen absolutely plumb in front, but when we see the actual trajectory of the ball it’s actually going over the top. By bending down and getting just above the height of the stumps, you get a better idea of the height.I think it has changed because the ex-players knew this, and nearly all the umpires in England in those days were ex-players. Nowadays there are not a lot, not in international cricket. Many of the umpires who’ve been ex-players, they just don’t want to tour the world everywhere – they’ve done enough of travelling, they don’t want to be away from home, family, friends and the wife, so they don’t do it anymore. I think that’s sad.With respect to the umpires who haven’t played first-class cricket, I think an ex-player does have an advantage. I don’t mean that disparagingly to [those who haven’t played first-class cricket] but I think [ex-players] do have an advantage of knowing all the dodges, having been there, done it themselves, and I think it gives them a big plus.Personally, when I am commentating I really don’t like being in these commentary positions which are right up in the gods. People say, “Oh, you must have a fantastic view.” I say, “No, I’m too high.” The best place I’ve ever commentated in my years – I love going to Port Elizabeth. You’re almost just above the umpire’s heads. And Durham. You go to Durham in England, again you’re low down, just above the umpire’s head, and you get a very good, clear view of the bounce of the ball.I thought the old umpires who did bend down, I thought they were right. Their experience, their knowledge, their maturity… it came to pass that they realised they’ve got to get down a bit. Umpires just don’t do it now. I don’t know how it happened or when it happened, but it just changed.

“You want his passion, you want his emotion, you definitely want that from your players, but, I’m sorry, you want a cool head at times. That’s what Dhoni has, and Kohli hasn’t got a cool head.”

ST: Not the best of times to be captain of India right now. Hari Pulakkat has a question about that. He says: What can the selectors do in a situation like now, when the current Indian captain has been losing Test matches for over two years but nobody else is performing well enough to be a certainty in the side? Should the captain be an automatic choice in the team? Or should they bring in someone purely based on leadership qualities?GB: The first thing I’d day about that, I’ll give you your quote back. You say, “The captain has been losing Test matches”, and I would ask you the question, Hari: Has he been losing Test matches? Do you judge captains on their win and loss ratio, or do you take into account or consideration the quality, or lack of quality, in his team? If you’re thinking about India, there’s a lack of quality at the moment, lack of quality seam bowling, lack of quality spin bowling, and in some cases your best players are beginning to retire after getting past their sell-by date. Aren’t they? Dravid and Laxman are gone, Tendulkar hasn’t got any runs recently, so is it his [Dhoni’s] fault?I don’t think so. I don’t judge people on the loss and win ratio of the team. You have to look at the team. You are damn lucky you’ve got MS Dhoni. I think he is a brilliant one-day captain. Like a lot of people, I think he has good leadership skills of the players, but tactically, in Test matches, there’s quite a bit to be desired. But you haven’t got anybody else you can call upon. The fact is, I’ve been in that situation with Yorkshire, when we had a very moderate side.A nice set of lads, but in terms of other quality sides around the world, you are very average and you are not going to win with average teams. And the captains always get blamed. Captains tend to get plaudits when the team wins, which I think is unfair. It’s grossly overrated, is that. But secondly, the captain always gets the blame when you lose. It’s like in the war – losing generals always got the sack. It’s like that with Dhoni; because India have hit a sticky situation, with some of the best players retiring or getting to the end of their careers… Zaheer Khan’s gone, Harbhajan’s gone, Dravid and Laxman have gone, Sachin is towards the end of his career. It’s very difficult to replace players like that with young kids and do well, and Dhoni’s getting the flak for it, he’s getting the blame. I don’t think it’s Dhoni’s fault. So you’ve to be careful about blaming people for the lack of quality in the side.ST: The point he’s also trying to make is that people like Sehwag and Gambhir, who earlier would have been considered captaincy replacements for Dhoni, are themselves not doing too well right now.GB: Sehwag is lucky to be in the team, really. He’s an explosive, fascinating, unpredictable, brilliant batsman, absolutely keeps you on the edge of your seat. But I’m afraid, Father Time comes to everybody, and he’s getting towards the end. And Gambhir, he seems to have played so much one-day cricket that his technique has suffered. He’s getting himself out. I don’t think he’s the force as a player that he once was. As a batsman he is still a good player, but his technique has suffered. I’ve watched his footwork and everything. He’s making mistakes, so it’s not going to help putting himself forward as a captain, as a Test player who can be certain of his place in the side.Devon Malcolm: “A lovely man, smiles a lot, has a nice temperament, and I love him to bits”•Getty ImagesST: And Kohli is still too young, Geoffrey, do you think, to take over?GB: Oh yes, he’s too much of a firebrand and all. You want his passion, you want his emotion, you definitely want that from your players, but I’m sorry, you want a cool head at times. That’s what Dhoni has and Kohli hasn’t got a cool head. He’s got aggression, passion, emotion, they are all pluses. On the negative side, he loses his cool. You can’t have the captain losing his cool. He is the one person. He might be on fire in the heart, but the head has to stay cool, because he’s got to think of the team, not himself; 11 players, not himself. Kohli has got a bit to learn yet.ST: Coming to Geoffrey’s favourite question for this show. It’s from Andrew Rowe in the UK and Rizwan Bashir in Pakistan. Both of them want Geoffrey to take his pick for a big series coming up, between South Africa and Pakistan in South Africa. They also want to know if you think Pakistan’s bowlers, the likes of Junaid Khan and Saeed Ajmal, can hold back South Africa’s run machine of Amla, Kallis, and Smith.GB: Good question, but I would turn it around a different way, Andrew and Rizwan. Can Pakistan’s batsmen hold back the seamers of South Africa? That’s where the crux is. It’s not Pakistan’s bowlers against the South African batsmen. The South African batsmen are good – there’s Kallis, Amla, Smith, there’s AB de Villiers, who is a fabulous player as well. But it is not that that would worry me if I was Pakistan. Can Pakistan’s batsmen bat against the best seam-bowling attack in the world? They are definitely going to come at Pakistan really strong. They have also got reserves. Morne Morkel is bowling well, Dale Steyn is the best bowler in the world, and the guy who is injured at the moment picks up wickets every time he bowls, doesn’t he?ST: Philander.GB: Philander. Where the hell has he been all our lives? He just gets hold of the ball, it just goes a little bit out, a little bit in, it swings a little bit, he nips it around at pace, gives very few balls to hit. Pakistan have got to get runs. That’s the key – the South African seamers against the Pakistan batting. Not the other way around. South Africa’s bowling is the best in the world, by far. [Philander] would be a cracker-jack bowler in any era, any period, any team, let me tell you. The other two aren’t behind – they are very good indeed, so I put my money on South Africa.I like Pakistan. I like the fact that whatever trouble they have, whatever happens, if they are fighting among themselves, or politicking, or what have you, switching captains, there are always some young kids with talent who come along. Unknowns come along and play well. But the fact is, when you are playing with the best seam-bowling side in the world, that’s going to be tough. Especially in their own backyard. The pitches here are a little bit quicker than in Pakistan. Remember, Pakistan pitches are a bit like Indian pitches. They don’t turn much in Pakistan. But in terms of the pace, or lack of pace, or the lower bounce, that’s what they have in Pakistan. It’s easier to play the seamers and the newness goes off the ball quicker.The newness does not go off the ball so easy in South Africa. And if you play in Cape Town or Johannesburg, the ball whistles through. You’ve got a Test at Cape Town, for sure. The ball carries, it carries higher, and it demands better footwork, particularly on the back foot, and this is what will test the Pakistan batsmen more than ever.ST: The first Test gets underway on February 1, so we’ll look forward to that. Thanks for joining us Geoffrey. That’s a wrap on today’s show. Don’t forget to send in your questions using our feedback form and Geoffrey will be back with us in two weeks’ time. Goodbye.

Having been preferred to Imran Tahir for now, Robin Peterson will be hoping to nail down a place in South Africa’s Test side while keeping one eye on Tahir’s return to form

Firdose Moonda08-Jan-2013If Robin Peterson had eyes in the back of his head, they would be fixed on Newlands this weekend. While Peterson and the South African team will be in Port Elizabeth contesting the second Test against New Zealand, the Lions will take on the table-topping Cobras in a first-class fixture in Cape Town, with the resurgent Imran Tahir as part of their pack.Tahir took 12 wickets in his last match to bowl the Lions to victory on a dry pitch in Durban where the bounce aided him. His tally since returning from his embarrassing Adelaide outing sits at 17 wickets in three matches at an average of 18.29. In that time, he has bowled only one no-ball, showing marked improvement from his constant overstepping on tour.More importantly, he has regained his self-esteem which was left shredded after his Australian experience. “When he came back to us after the tour, he was very down,” Lions coach Geoffrey Toyana told ESPNcricinfo. “But he has worked really hard and he is enjoying himself now and his confidence is up again.”Under Toyana, the Lions have had a culture change. Almost all of their squad credits that to the new energy and enthusiasm in the group and it seems to be contagious. Tahir returned to them to play in the domestic one-day cup final which was washed out on both the scheduled day and the reserve day. He took two wickets in two overs when the match was replayed and seemed to have a good time as he started to erase the Australian nightmare from memory.He has come into his own in the longer form again thanks to careful coaxing by Toyana and his bowling coach Gordon Parsons. “We’ve told him not to try too many things at once,” Toyana said. Tahir’s desperation for variety cost him in Australia where he also failed to flight the ball and bowled quicker and flatter with little success. “His googly is working well for him and he has done very well against the left-handers,” Toyana said.The Lions have given Tahir a clear role and have altered their strategy when using him, which has also worked well. Tahir is an out and out strike bowler for them whereas at national level he has to balance between attack and defence. But he has not used his mandate as a wicket-taker to leak runs. In 112.1 overs, Tahir conceded 311 runs across the three matches, at a rate of 2.77 runs an over.Toyana explained that field placings have helped Tahir create pressure and take wickets. “We’ve started off by getting the outfielders around in his first few overs and then once he has found rhythm, we bring in the short leg and the silly point and those kinds of close catchers,” he said. “It’s worked well for now because batsmen always try to attack Imran and with what we are doing, they have not got away with that.”With Tahir “still very much part of our plans,” according to both coach Gary Kirsten and convener of selectors Andrew Hudson, Peterson should be feeling the heat. Although his Test comeback yielded six wickets, and subsequent match 1 for 42, he was guilty of delivering some loose balls and Brendon McCullum labelled him “innocuous”.Petersen is not letting outside influences affect him too much. “I like to stick to one game at a time. If you try and look too far ahead, you can get caught up in things,” he said. At 33-years-old, he may not be thought to have a lengthy career ahead of him but Petersen had previously said he is of the school who believes cricketers really blossom after 30, so he hopes for an extended run.He is also confident that he the right fit for the current South African outfit, because he offers a more all-round package than Tahir. “At the moment, I probably fit into what they want. I’d like to think I can win games for South Africa in the second innings when conditions suit and provide a bit of stability in the first innings,” he said. “My role with the bat lower down the order is also important and there’s the fielding aspect of it. I probably offer a few more dimensions.”While the merits of the mostly-containing versus the mostly-aggressive spinner continue to be debated in South African cricket, Peterson is enjoying his homecoming. Originally from Port Elizabeth, Peterson now plays his domestic cricket in Cape Town but admits it will be “special” to play a Test on his home turf.”It’s nice to see things come full circle for me from where it all started,” he said. “I took my first five-for at St George’s Park so hopefully it will be my first Test five-for as well.” If it is, there may be no need to keep an eye on Tahir at all.

In other words, the Confectionery Stall’s World Cricket Awards, part one

Andy Zaltzman25-Feb-2013Greetings, Confectionery Stallers, and welcome to part one of the Official Confectionery Stall 2012 World Cricket Awards. There will be a full awards ceremony in my garden shed next week, to which all the winners and their families are cordially invited.Most Annoying Phenomenon in Cricket: Workload ManagementThe final splutterings of 2012 have seen England omit Kevin Pietersen from their almost-impending ODI series in New Zealand, and Australia ditch Mitchell Starc from the unquestionably impending Boxing Day Test against Sri Lanka.Both men are having their workloads managed. I have no idea what Mitchell Starc asked Father Christmas for this year, but being left out of a Test match was presumably some way down the list below, for example, a new iPad, a pet iguana and a Spiderman outfit. Pietersen has had a particularly fascinating year in the field of workload management. After attempting to unilaterally manage his own workload, he then found himself having his workload forcibly managed for him, before an agreement was reached that has resulted in his workload being managed largely as he would probably have managed it anyway, and everyone has had a good, cathartic squabble along the way.Both England and Australia are thus entering international matches voluntarily weakened. This is not to suggest that they are wrong to do so. The modern international cricket schedule, however, is a merciless taskmistress, who brandishes a forbidding-looking whip and demands that everyone address her as “Mistress Supreme”. Selectors sometimes have to grit their teeth and take their punishment.International sport is supposed to pit the best performers a nation can muster against each other. Not the best performers a nation can muster, minus a few players they would rather preserve for future engagements, whilst trying to avoid overhearing anyone asking: “What was the point of that? Was that an international cricket match or an exhibition hit-about?”It happens in many sports now. It is not an entirely new phenomenon but it is increasingly widespread as the demands and appetites of professionalism grow ever more insatiable. Two thousand and thirteen will see cricket continue to squeeze its various golden geese, and squeeze them where it hurts, until they honk for mercy. As Aristotle once wrote: “When you have a golden goose, and it is not laying the golden eggs you want it to lay, beware of lopping off bits of its anatomy that look a bit like eggs. It will probably leave you with an angry, unproductive goose.”Worst Cricket Match of the Year: India v England, fourth Test, NagpurI have not seen all cricket matches played at all levels in the world this year. In fact, I have seen relatively few, either live or on television. But it would take a game of epoch-defining dreadfulness to knock the Nagpur Test off its miserably grey perch. On a good pitch, this could have been a thrilling match. It might not have been a thrilling match, as Dhoni’s India had shown few signs of Lazarusing themselves into action and breaking England’s stranglehold, but it might have been. But any possibility of an intriguing climax to the series was clattered round the back of the head with a tedious frying pan, as the cricket world was treated to five days of historically uninteresting nothingness, a competitive oblivion, a sporting vacuum into which all excitement, unpredictability and intrigue was sucked, played on a pitch that could have found a job in a controversial Swiss euthanasia clinic. Even watching it on television, at a safe range of more than 4500 miles, it felt like a cross between a jail sentence and a funeral.Most Annoyingly Short Series of the Year: England v South AfricaIrritatingly curtailed Test series are one of the innovations in modern cricket that have proved curiously popular with administrators, along with torpid over rates, dull pitches, balls that don’t swing, piddling around with the regulations in 50-over cricket before settling on ones that seem designed to make the game less interesting, knackered bowlers, and empty stadiums. England’s main summer series was only three matches long, for various reasons (including the Olympics, the Mayans predicting the end of the world for December 2012 and cricket’s authorities wanting to give the players more time to spend with their families, a pandemic of tetraphobia that swept across Europe at the time the season schedule was being finalised, and the unarguable and sacred duty to conclude the international summer with an anticlimactic and unrememberable two-week ODI series).Fortunately South Africa had the decency to go 2-0 up after the three Tests, so for once a needlessly brief showdown between leading teams was not sawn off in its prime when tantalisingly poised, like a horse race in which, just before the final furlong, a cheese wire has been strung across the track at horse-shin height. But the point, unlike the fictitious horsies, still stands. The rivalry between the new world No. 1s and their immediate predecessors was then, like the fictitious horsies, hidden behind a tarpaulin and humanely destroyed – there will have been a gap of well over three years before their next Test series.

Australia batting coach Michael di Venuto talks about the adjustments the side needs to make

Interview by Brydon Coverdale11-Mar-2013This is your first tour as Australia’s batting coach. Could there be a tougher introduction?
It’s right up there, isn’t it? Our next two tours will be as challenging as they get for Australian teams but they’re exciting ones. Especially for the group that we’ve got – they’re a pretty inexperienced bunch at Test level and even at first-class level as well. There’s not a lot to fall back on as far as their own experiences. It’s exciting times for a coach.Among the batsmen only Michael Clarke and Shane Watson had played Test cricket in India before this tour. How did you prepare the other batsmen?
That’s why the groups came over in stages, so we could get the guys who haven’t been here before over early to play in a couple of games, to get used to conditions and try to adapt. It’s completely different to what we get at home and it was important that we adapted quickly. We’ve seen in the first two Tests that it hasn’t quite happened. There are lessons that the guys are learning that in the next tours they’ll be able to fall back on. But at the moment we’re in the thick of the battle and learning on our feet as a batting group. We haven’t adapted quick enough as yet.What has gone wrong?
It’s a bit of everything. It’s a very hard place to start your innings over here when you first go to the crease. It’s vital that when we do get a partnership it’s a really big one. The Indians have shown the value of big partnerships and getting the first-innings runs on the board. We’ve virtually failed in our first two Tests to get good first-innings scores. Chennai – it was good to get 380 from where we were, at 5 for 150, but realistically you’d want to be getting up around 450-500 in the first innings here.Is learning to bat in India something you can really only do on the job?
Absolutely. I think a lot of batting is done on instinct. The guys have been brought up in Australia and playing in Australian conditions, where, if you see a ball on a certain length, it normally bounces a certain height. Then you come to a foreign country and all of a sudden it doesn’t bounce like it does at home. You’ve got to go against your instincts. You’ve got to play with your mind and train with your mind. That’s something that we haven’t adapted to quick enough here. The nature of cricket is that you learn from your mistakes. But you don’t just make that mistake once and that’s the last time you do it – you make it over and over and over again. Eventually, through experience it sinks in. But the best seem to learn quicker than most. We’ve got a talented young group of batters and hopefully they can learn quickly.Michael Clarke spoke of his disappointment that so many batsmen have been out to cross-bat shots or playing against the spin early in their innings. Is that an instinct thing as well?
Absolutely. Whether it be nerves… everything comes into it, trying to score… It’s where you’ve got to be so patient and play to your strengths. You have to be so disciplined with your game plan, because otherwise you can get yourself in all sorts of trouble over here, like with cross-bat shots. I think the best way to learn sometimes is to watch how the opposition go about it. The Indians were brought up in these conditions and play so well here. So watch how their batsmen go about things and see what things we can take out of their game and put into our own.Can it be quite a fine line between patience and getting bogged down?
It is. That’s where your footwork is so important, to be able to get down the wicket and then get deep into your crease. At the moment with the fields the Indians are setting, there are a lot of men around the bat. When there are a lot of men around the bat it means there are a lot of holes in the outfield. If you’re nice and sharp on your feet, you can get the ball in the holes.

“The nature of cricket is that you learn from your mistakes. But you don’t just make that mistake once and that’s the last time you do it – you make it over and over and over again”

We’ve seen when we’ve had a couple of partnerships, the Clarke-Henriques partnership in Chennai and Clarke and Wade in Hyderabad, batting didn’t look that difficult. It’s about getting two guys in and developing that partnership. What we’ve also seen is that as soon as that partnership is broken, the game can turn on its head pretty quickly. It can be so hard for batters coming in.Is footwork a difficult thing to teach players when it doesn’t come naturally?
It’s a hard thing to teach if you’re not one to use your feet down the wicket, especially when you’re facing high-quality spin. But we all are good enough to get deep into our crease. That’s a matter of picking up the length and making good decisions more often than not. Unfortunately we’ve seen through the first couple of Tests that at times our decision-making hasn’t been great under pressure.Why are so many players reluctant to come down the wicket?
It’s easier to come down the wicket when the ball is coming in to you, where the second form of defence is your pads and body. It’s a lot harder to go down the wicket when the ball is turning away. The good players go down the wicket either way, whichever way it’s spinning. They’ve generally used their feet from a young age.It’s a confidence thing as well. At the moment our batting group is low on confidence. We’re certainly training hard and trying to fix some flaws but until you have success, sometimes it’s pretty hard to get that confidence up.David Warner and Phillip Hughes were bowled around their legs while trying to sweep in Hyderabad. What’s the secret to successful sweeping?
For the two left-handers who got out on the sweep in the last match, the lines were probably right to sweep but the length for Davey was too full and it got up underneath him. Hughesy just managed to drag one on.If the right-arm offie is coming over the wicket you’ve got a pretty good idea of how he’s going to get you out, and that’s bowled around your legs. If you’re going to sweep, make sure you get your pad in line in case you miss it. It’s definitely a scoring option for players if they want to pick it off the right line. If you’re sweeping off the stumps then you’re giving the bowler a chance.I don’t think we’ve got that many natural sweepers. Matthew Hayden turned himself into an unbelievable sweeper through a lot of hard work. The English players are brought up on wickets that don’t bounce, so they’re brought up playing a lot of sweep shots against spinners. In Australia there’s a lot more bounce. We’re taught to use our feet a lot more rather than sweep and lap. The Indians don’t really sweep that much and these are their home conditions. That might be a lesson learnt, just watching them.Hughes has really struggled against the spin. What can he do to improve?
It’s hard work. It’s getting in the nets and working on your weaknesses. We’ve seen it before with a lot of players. Ricky Ponting was an example of that in 2001, when Harbhajan was all over him whenever he came to the wicket. We’re certainly not the first team to come here and struggle. England in the last couple of years have struggled against spin bowling on tours away but as a group they have learnt the lessons and found a way to combat them. Their series win here a couple of months ago was an outstanding success for them. But it also came on the back of their players experiencing some bad losses and spinners being all over them.”If you’re going to sweep, make sure you get your pad in line in case you miss it”•BCCIWatson made 84 and 60 in the tour match but hasn’t pushed on in the Tests. Is there anything he could be doing differently?
He looked unbelievable in the tour game and has looked terrific in his Test innings to date for starts. That’s the disappointing thing. The captain needs a bit of help and people to stand up. He looks in terrific touch but the runs just haven’t happened.His first-innings dismissal [in Hyderabad] was an instinct shot. He pulls so well off length in Australia. The ball stayed down. But if he plays that with a straight bat then he’s still in and you don’t know where his innings could have gone. He’s just got to keep working hard and has got to get better, it’s as simple as that. The talent is there, the skills are there and he looks in good touch.There weren’t many positives from the second innings in Hyderabad, but were you pleased to see Ed Cowan bat for three hours in challenging circumstances? He was batting a long way out of his crease against the fast bowlers.
He gutsed it out. I’ve seen a lot of Ed in Tasmania. When he gets in his little bubble, he puts a high price on his wicket, which was good to see. He’s finding a way to combat the spin. And for the reverse swing coming around the wicket, he was trying to negate the modes of dismissal of lbw and bowled by going at the bowler. With no slips in place you’re not going to get caught behind the wicket. There was some smart batting at that time, which was frustrating the opposition, and he was working really hard. It was a shame he got out when he did.After such a poor performance in Hyderabad, what can be done in the lead-up to the Mohali Test?
At times like this it’s easy to get really withdrawn as individuals and start worrying about your own game and not [think] too much on what’s going on around you, but the most important thing is to stick together and start looking after your mate. Don’t get withdrawn and into yourself. Start helping out the guy next to you. If everyone is helping each other out, that’s what we want to be as a cricket team. We want to stay really tight and work really hard through this.