Zimbabwe Cricket’s CEO talks about why, contrary to popular belief, he isn’t the man who pulls the strings in the country’s cricket administration

Interview by Martin Williamson09-Feb-2009
“Zimbabwe Cricket, like any other organisation, is made up of people who have various political views. I do not enquire of these views as it is not my business” © Wisden
Are you, as has been implied, the real power behind the throne inside Zimbabwe Cricket?
It baffles me how I can be regarded as such. As CEO, I am an employee of the board. As the head of the ZC executive, I am responsible to the board for the day-to-day management of the organisation.I formulate no policy myself and only sit on the board in an ex officio capacity, in keeping with the dictates of corporate governance. To ascribe to me powers that I cannot have in a professional organisation such as ZC is not only erroneous but an insult to the men and women who sit on the board and their constituencies.It should be remembered that the process of enacting the current ZC constitution involved a wide spectrum of consultations and the draft passed through the then ICC CEO and president, who gave their input to bring the document into line with international best practice.How would you respond to accusations that the board is, in fact, not democratic and has been purged of all opposition?
It baffles the mind that the word “purge” is used when no one was excluded from putting their names into the hat during the electoral process by approaching their clubs for nomination into provincial structures and thereafter the national board.It’s a fact that given the population demographics of the country, the majority of players and club officials are black, and so nominations coming from these clubs are predominantly black.It’s very flattering and intoxicating to be told that you wield power over the fortunes of men. Occasionally I wish that was so, but sadly it is not.It has often been said that the board is a political body, taking orders from and implementing the policies of the government, and that your arrival accelerated that process.
Allow me to point out that my entry into cricket did not politicise the ZC board. For me to politicise the board would have meant bringing in political figures to run cricket in furtherance of their political ends.You can look at any board that I have been a part of and on none of them has there been a person holding political office. To the contrary, the boards have comprised lawyers, educators, farmers and businessmen.For you to best understand where cricket in Zimbabwe currently stands, I would like to give you some historical background. Please understand that any reference to black and white is not meant to be racial but is simply factual.The greatest concentration of whites in Rhodesia was in 1975, when there were about 250,000 whites. As the war intensified, that number began to dwindle until settlement in 1979 and independence in 1980. It was reduced further by a massive emigration fuelled by white uncertainty over their future under a black dispensation.Faced with the harsh reality of its sport threatened with extinction through dwindling numbers of its populace, the board of the then Zimbabwe Cricket Union decided, in 2001, to integrate cricket so that it could draw players from the majority [black] population of 13 million and infuse them with those from the remaining white population. This would create a national team whose membership reflected the racial diversity of Zimbabwe. In 2001, despite the racial composition of the country – 200,000 whites against 13 million blacks – only three blacks were in the national team and two on the board.The board set up a task force to deal with the integration. The process was methodical. The Integration Task Force drew up a voluminous and thorough document that was the roadmap to integration. It was the work of countless meetings that were not grounded in emotion but reality. Notwithstanding the history of the country and the deprivation caused by its racist government and institutions, the task force was emphatic that there was to be no malice and no vengeance in this move to change Zimbabwe cricket for the good, indeed the survival, of the game and for the nation.The integration document caused a lot of anxiety among the white players and their parents, and yet it was not supposed to do so. Allegations of quotas were totally unfounded as the task force never dictated numbers but worked on an evolutionary process that aimed at a gradual increase in the numbers of black players making it to the national teams as the board proceeded with its development programme that generated throughout. “I can understand that, given the current state of our supposed playing standard, we are more prone to scrutiny than others, but it would not surprise me if a check of all the boards of the ICC Full Member countries showed ZC’s to be the most apolitical” Why were there disputes between factions then?
Misunderstandings did arise in the implementation of the programme, and a year later some of the white players rebelled against the administration. But this was not the first-ever such act by the players. It was just the first since integration began.Then in 2004, Zimbabwe had its first-ever loss to Bangladesh at Harare Sports Club and the captain and selectors felt that the person responsible was Stuart Matsikenyeri. But the administrators of the then Mashonaland Cricket Association, who were predominantly black, said they would not allow the team to take to the field against Bangladesh without Matsikenyeri and were even prepared to dig up the pitch. Thankfully, sense prevailed.A few days after the series ended, Heath Streak resigned as captain and the board accepted that resignation. The other white players then walked out en masse, saying that the selection process was not fair.But this was not the first rebellion. In England years before, a then predominantly white side walked out en masse saying their salaries were less than that of a bus driver in the United Kingdom. The then board had to bring in Lord Weeden to chair talks with the players.A few years later, this time in the West Indies, there was another stalemate, with the players saying they no longer wanted Dave Houghton as coach. These are just two incidents in a litany of unbridled player power gone awry.Such was their power there were even camps within the players, referred to as “Royal Families”, which included the likes of Andy and Grant Flower and Alistair Campbell.I fail to understand how another player uprising under my watch is now seen as evidence of my being political.At every moment, ZC maintained an open-door policy. After the 2004 incident, we set up a Dispute Resolution Committee chaired by a prominent legal practitioner, Addington Chinake, which made progress such that most of the players returned to play.But that wasn’t the end of it, was it?
Player power was to return when we played New Zealand in Bulawayo and lost a Test match in two days. We then sat down and said that as part of the remedial measures we were going to change contracts to make them performance-based. That set up another fight between the then players association and the board.During that series, the board held its annual general meeting in Bulawayo and unanimously dismissed the coach, Phil Simmons, the manager and the selectors. That set up a new fight with the administrators [of the associations], who felt their grip on power was loosening, using players to fight their cause. They also alleged that we were changing the contract structure because we had misused ZC money.It was the old trick of throwing as much mud as possible in the hope that some of it would stick.
“We have always believed in our players, and continue to believe in them” © AFP
Among these allegations were those of breaching the country’s foreign currency regulations, which brought in the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe [RBZ]. Indeed there were violations, but these stretched to as far back as 1982 and so the courts convicted the body corporate.Their other trick was to try to make the board ungovernable, and so those discontented administrators, who were board members, boycotted duly convened meetings.The country’s supreme sports regulatory authority, the Sports and Recreation Commission [SRC], was then forced to step in. You may want to find out who was keen for the SRC to be involved. It was certainly not me!Having come in, the SRC used simple logic to break the impasse. On the basis that they had shown their goodwill to run the game, the Commission appointed onto an interim committee those members of the old board who had continued to come to meetings during the standoff. It added to that number other stakeholders.If the SRC involvement in cricket was political because the organisation was set up by an Act of Parliament, was it political when the SRC was invited? In which case, those who invited it should accept blame for “politicising” the game, or did the involvement become political only because of the decision the SRC reached? In which case the accusation of politicisation should be dismissed as sour grapes.As one of the terms of reference for the interim committee, a new constitution was drawn up which paved the way for a new democratically elected board inclusive of all the country’s 10 provincial associations.But it is claimed that elected board contained political figures.
Frankly speaking, ZC, like any other organisation, is made up of people who have various political views. I do not enquire of these views as it is not my business. In the same way as it is not your business to enquire about Giles Clarke’s political affiliations. And it is not important. Democracy is founded on choice and whatever that choice is, it remains the prerogative of that individual.In my own case, the truth of the matter is that, like every Zimbabwean, I will comment on issues, whether good or bad, that concern me. But I am not a politician and do not wish to be one. It goes beyond fiction for me to have a conversation with a journalist or player and afterwards tell them which political party I support.Martin, you may as a British citizen be a Conservative or member of New Labour and I as an individual respect that. But for me to go out and, without cross-checking with you, start saying that just by the way you write you belong to this or that party is surely stretching matters.For the record, undoubtedly Zanu-PF has been the dominant player on the Zimbabwe political stage before and after independence. Thus, it is not surprising that, at one time, the suggestion was made that the then prime minister be patron of the then Zimbabwe Cricket Union, and a largely white board unanimously accepted the nomination, sent him the invitation and vigorously campaigned for his acceptance. The letter is on file.I can understand that, given the current state of our supposed playing standard, we are more prone to scrutiny than others, but it would not surprise me if a check of all the boards of the ICC Full Member countries showed ZC’s to be the most apolitical.If you are, as you say, apolitical, why were you and Peter Chingoka recently banned from entering Australia by the government there?
It’s unfair to judge without trial. It is unfair to judge on the basis of innuendo. Your readers may know that until last year Nelson Mandela remained on the United States list of terrorists. A Nobel Peace Prize winner and a worldwide symbol of freedom a terrorist! And his democratically elected South African ruling party, the African National Congress, was classified as a terrorist organisation!The lesson to draw from that is that one does not change one’s principles simply on the basis of some people’s reaction to them. If the principles are right, in time the holder will be vindicated.If on the basis that I have fought for cricket to be a multi-racial sport I should be banned from entering certain countries, then I sleep with a clear conscience. Clearly it is better to be banned when I believe in the justice of my principle than to change that principle in return for entry.What is your vision of the future for Zimbabwe cricket?
I am committed that in the not-so-distant future Zimbabwe takes its hard-earned place on the ICC ODI and Test rankings and that you and I will sit together then and have a drink and wonder about the years of disbelief, distortion and discouragement. “If on the basis that I have fought for cricket to be a multi-racial sport I should be banned from entering certain countries, then I sleep with a clear conscience” Sport is a cycle. Those on top will not always be there. Thus, Zimbabwe will not always be at the bottom. Our assumption of the dizzy heights may not happen in our lifetime but I am happy that we have laid the foundation for Zimbabwe teams to be selected from all over the country, regardless of race, colour or creed.To help take the local game where we want it to go, we need the support, knowledge and assistance of the international cricket community. To promote cricket in Zimbabwe, Cricinfo can help by giving its readers a balanced analysis of what Zimbabwe Cricket is trying to achieve.I am not asking for blinkered praise for our cricket, but there are many people who, on a daily basis, work with me in difficult circumstances to build the game in this country. It is only fair that their achievements be recognised.Just this last season, I have watched with great pleasure the spinning abilities of Prosper Utseya and Ray Price, noted with pride Tatenda Taibu’s selection for the Indian Premier League, noticed the dedication and improvement that Elton [Chigumbura] is showing in both his batting and bowling, the prowess of Hamilton [Masakadza] with the willow and the abundant all-round promise in Sean Williams.But even as I enjoyed all that, I have continued to work with my management and staff to ensure that, next season and the others to come, the game will remain accessible to anyone who wants to play it.This is because, long after the fanfare over Zimbabwe politics is ended, cricket will still be played here.At the ICC meeting recently, the report into the state of the game said that it could be up to two years before Zimbabwe was ready to resume playing Test cricket. Is that reasonable?
We still have some work to do with regards to returning to Test cricket, I think the time frame that all our stakeholders are agreeable on is anything between six months and two years. We will, however, endeavour to ensure that it will be under two years. So the ICC comment is fair and we do not dispute it.Finally, how heartened have you been by recent results?
I am obviously pleased that the boys are starting to show maturity. We have always believed in them and continue to believe in them. We think that if they continue to play competitive cricket more regularly, their standard will be at a level where we will all be happy.

If Matthew Hayden does not decide to end his career after this match,
Australia’s selectors must be brave enough to finish it for him

Brydon Coverdale at the MCG29-Dec-2008

If Matthew Hayden does not decide to end his career after this match,
Australia’s selectors must be brave enough to finish it for him. In
the increasingly likely event that South Africa win the series in
Melbourne and the Sydney Test becomes a dead rubber, it would be the
perfect time to audition a new partner for Simon Katich in a
low-pressure situation.It’s a shame that it has come to this but Hayden’s struggle has become
so difficult to watch and such a concern for his middle-order
colleagues that he can’t go on. They are already trying to carry an
unfit Andrew Symonds and a weak Hayden adds significantly to the
burden. Great players earn credits at the selection table but like a
blackjack player running out of chips, Hayden’s failures in the Boxing
Day Test have been two busts too many.Even if Australia somehow avoid defeat at the MCG – final-day rain
looks like their only chance – there is merit in throwing a fresh face
into the Sydney Test. Look what happened when South Africa gave JP
Duminy a chance. And with a trip to South Africa fast approaching and
the Ashes in England to follow, Australia cannot support an
out-of-form opener any longer.Hayden has made two half-centuries from 15 innings since returning to the Test side for the tour of India after recovering from an ongoing
heel injury. In Australia’s four home Tests this summer he has 79 runs
at 11.28. His lean run pales in comparison with the infamous slump of
another left-hand opener, Mark Taylor, who from 1995 to 1997 went 21
Test innings without passing fifty.Taylor was extremely fortunate to keep his position but he had two things on his side: he was the captain of a winning outfit and at 33 it was felt he had several good years left. At 37 and in a team that is starting to lose more than it wins, Hayden has neither get-out
clause.Nor is there room for sympathy. A farewell Test at the SCG would be a sentimental moment but Australian selectors have not been noted for their compassion in previous seasons. Ian Healy’s last Test was in Zimbabwe and he was denied the chance to say goodbye with one final match at his home ground the Gabba.Mark Waugh ended with a Test in Sharjah, though he didn’t know it was
his finale. He wanted to play on for the 2002-03 Ashes; the selectors
did not pick him and he took the hint and retired. If the MCG Test turns out to be Hayden’s send-off it will already be a more fitting exit than Healy and Waugh received; Melbourne has been Hayden’s favourite venue.But does the new group of selectors under Andrew Hilditch have the same clinical approach as the panel did when Trevor Hohns was in charge? They should remember that when Healy was nudged aside, his replacement Adam Gilchrist won over the Brisbane crowd by the end of his first match. The Australia players had a new match-winner in their side. Fans and team-mates move on.And how will they ever know if there’s another star waiting in
first-class cricket unless they try him? The New South Wales opener
Phillip Hughes, 20, is having a phenomenal season. He’s the same age
that AB de Villiers was when he made his Test debut and Australia need
only think back a week to realise what de Villiers has learnt in four
years on the international scene.

Then there’s Chris Rogers, who played the Perth Test last summer
before losing his Cricket Australia contract. He is 31, but a switch
of states has revitalised him and he is averaging 82.62 this season.
In any case, Phil Jaques should be fit by the time the Ashes comes
around and he and Simon Katich can form a strong partnership. It would
be useful to have a backup who has had a decent taste of the action.When Hayden was caught driving to short cover for 23, he trudged off
the MCG with his head bowed. It was not the exit he envisaged and
injuries to Brett Lee and Symonds might yet save him for Sydney.
Australia will be loath to lose three long-standing players in one
Test.Symonds carried a knee problem into the Boxing Day Test and was
tentative in the field and unable to bowl medium-pace. His scores of
27 and 0 will increase the calls for Shane Watson to replace him. If
both a hobbling Symonds and his great mate Hayden play in Sydney it
will be a poor reflection on the selectors. Opportunities for
risk-free change don’t come often in Australian cricket. This chance
cannot be let to slip.

His South African mentors on his journey from precocious talent to potential Ashes saviour

Alex Brown17-Aug-2009Kenny Jackson – former Boland and Western Province allrounder; Trott’s half-brother
People have been asking me all week whether I’m excited, and the honest answer is no, I’m not. I have seen him speaking about his call-up and all the excitement that you would normally associate with playing your first Test is really a peripheral part of the bigger picture. A lot has happened in his life, and this is the next stage. It’s not especially surprising that this has happened. It wasn’t a lucky selection; he pretty much kicked the door down.He is becoming a very level-headed young man. He has been in and out of the England squad enough times now not to have rookie jitters. I don’t think the situation will overwhelm him. He’s in the form of his life and he is certainly good enough. He can walk on water at the moment. He won’t say it, but what else could the selectors do? They tried to get it wrong in the last Test and they succeeded by getting whipped in two and a half days. Now they have got their selection right.He was dead keen to become a professional cricketer, and nine or so years ago, when he made the decision to move, the county system was very strong. Bob Woolmer had quite a big influence on getting him over to England and to Warwickshire. Jonathan was playing a stint in the Hague at the time, and the goal was to get a few trials in England while he was there. Through Bob and his connections, he ended up at Warwickshire.He played representative age-group hockey, but it was always going to be cricket for him. He did not always have great self-belief, but he has done a lot of growing up in the last few years. He has put a lot of those doubts behind him, and I think Ashley Giles and Warwickshire have got to take a lot of the credit for that. Getting married earlier this year was also a big development for him. He’s turned the corner in all areas of his life. It’s been a culmination of things. All the elements have come together.As the bigger brother, I remember going to the nets and his father, Ian, would occasionally give me some throw-downs. When Jonathan wanted to bat, you would always give yourself a backdoor exit strategy or else you would be there bowling to him all day. I remember one time I told him “a few more” and that “out is out”, and to speed things up a bit I started throwing him balls on a length so he would hit a catch back to me. But he didn’t. He just kept hitting balls on the up. I asked him why he was playing that shot. He didn’t know the terminology for what he was doing, but just said to me, “If I hit back a catch to you the session is over.” And the cheeky little bugger kept hitting on the up.Mickey Arthur – current South Africa coach
I always thought Jonathan Trott was a very good player. He was a young player who came through our system; played Western Province schools, played South Africa Under-19s, played for Boland and Western Province provincially at senior level and always looked a really good player, looked as if he was really going to crack on. I think he was in the same Under-19 side as Graeme Smith, Jacques Rudolph and Johan Botha, so he always had a lot of talent. My assistant coach Vincent Barnes coached him at Western Province and predicted that the boy did have a future. He’s done that pretty well in England.He would have been there or thereabouts (in South Africa). He would have been a really good franchise player. I suspect he would have been a South Africa A player right now, but he would have battled to get into our top six at the minute. With the calibre of player we have in our top six, I think we’re pretty much settled for a while. I suspect he would have been there as reserve strength.I must say it is a bold move and I admire England for making it. If England decided the Ashes were the be-all and end-all, I guess they could have gone with a Ramprakash or Trescothick – but there’s no longevity in that. I suspect Andy Flower has got his vision. He and Andrew Strauss have sat down and put a plan together, much like Graeme and I have done. They’ve looked at players that they thought could fit the bill, players they want to see develop and make England stronger down the line. I suspect bringing in a guy like Jonathan Trott is part of a long-term plan for them and I applaud and admire them for doing it. They’ve stayed true to their plan and they haven’t panicked.Eric Simons – former South Africa allrounder and coach

“I don’t think the situation will overwhelm him. He’s in the form of his life and he is certainly good enough. He can walk on water at the moment. He won’t say it, but what else could the selectors do?”Kenny Jackson, Trott’s half-brother

“Precocious talent” is an overused term, but that’s exactly what he was. For whatever reason, the game of cricket back then felt some kind of need to contain players like him – to clip his wings a little bit – and if he had been born into this era he might have flourished a little faster.He always had the ability to dominate attacks, and to make batting on difficult wickets look easy. There was an underlying self-belief there. Occasionally he looked like he got bored – trying to do too much or trying to score too quickly – but he’s addressed that as he’s got older. He has built on that self-belief – not arrogance – and become a more complete batsman.It’s not for me to say what motivated him to go to England, but there was certainly the idea that county cricket was the place where you could make it big and make a name for yourself in the global game.Steve Palframan – former South Africa batsman and current Cape Cobras selector
He always looked a special kid. When he left school, he was a little on the cocky side, but right the way through his career in South Africa he was always a batsman who seemed to have a lot of time and self-belief. Sometimes he needed (Kenny Jackson) to sit him down and say, “Just listen for a change.” To some he came across as arrogant, but he was always a competitor.In his debut season, some opposition players tried to pick him as someone they could push over. He always gave it back. Not only would he stand his ground and engage in the verbals, he would invariably back it up with the bat. He has what we call , which is presence and attitude. He was always one to puff out his chest.He has obviously been on England’s radar for a while, and the stats don’t lie. The fact that he is next in line over there doesn’t really seem up for debate. He was ready when he took the step from juniors to first-class cricket, and I’m sure he will be ready for this. This is something he has been preparing for and planning for many years. He never really gave himself a chance when he played those Twenty20 innings for England, and I remember thinking at the time, “Come on, Trotty, you’re better than that.”I thought at the time that exploring the Kolpak route was a good move for him. It was around the same time that Boland merged with Western Province, and there could have been a situation where Trotty would not have been an everyday player, with the combining of the two squads. I’m not going to say that he wouldn’t have been chosen for South Africa at some stage, but I do think the move to England was a good one for him. I always thought he would come through.

The defeat in the second Test, completed quarter-hour after lunch yesterday, was as swift, embarrassing and emphatic and brought about by the same factors as those at Headingley in 2000 and 2007

Tony Cozier19-May-2009The defeat in the second Test, completed quarter-hour after lunch yesterday, was as swift, embarrassing and emphatic and brought about by the same factors as those at Headingley in 2000 and 2007.The former was the forgettable capitulation by an innings and 39 runs in two days, capped by the all-out 61 in the second innings. The margin in the latter was as massive as it has ever been, an innings and 283 runs, West Indies routed for 146 and 141 from a combined 79.1 overs.Here the loss was by an innings and 83, its extent heightened by the handing back of the Wisden Trophy just two months after it had been regained through stout resistance and determination.At least, there was another classical hundred from Ramnaresh Sarwan, inevitable fight from Shivnarine Chanderpaul and another half-century from Denesh Ramdin. But these were scraps. The pickings from these couple of matches have been lean indeed.Significantly, Sarwan, then a novice 20-year-old, was the only man left standing in both innings in 2000, unbeaten 53 and 19. Now he is one of the finest batsmen of his time. Alas, there was no new Sarwan in the ranks this time. There were extenuating circumstances in the heavy loss two years ago. Sarwan, in his second match as captain, dislocated his shoulder in the field and couldn’t bat in both innings and Chanderpaul, down with the flu, was absent altogether. As it was, only Dwayne Bravo managed 50.There is a common denominator to all three matches. In all the conditions were typically English. Headingley and Chester-le-Street are Test cricket’s northernmost grounds. Each time the temperatures have varied between chilly and downright arctic and it was either threatening to rain or raining.The upshot was that the ball swung in the air and moved off the pitch. Englishmen who have cut their teeth in such an environment, and those who play here regularly, know what is required. They apply the necessary batting method of playing late and are aware of the length and line to bowl.Modern West Indians, with flawed techniques cultivated in sub-standard regional cricket and with little or no experience of county, even league cricket, find it impossible to cope. The contrast between West Indies’ attack and England’s in this match was as wide as the result itself.As England amassed their 569 for 6 declared, Fidel Edwards, Jerome Taylor and Lionel Baker seldom looked like taking a wicket. James Anderson and Stuart Broad appeared to be propelling hand grenades. If one newcomer, Tim Bresnan, doesn’t look to have what it takes at this level, the other, Graham Onions, did but their real test will be against Australia two months hence when there will be less in the conditions, and the opposition, to encourage them.Edwards bowled faster than anyone on either side but was distracted by some silly sideshow with James Anderson, the night-watchman, who he repeatedly bounced as he might have, but didn’t, those higher in the order such as Ravi Bopara, a compulsive hooker. Had he stuck to his discipline of Lord’s, with the consequent swing at pace, he would surely have had the same success.Anderson, the deserving Man of the Match, made the ball talk. He swung it in, he swung it out, at speeds in the mid-80 mph and above, seldom giving the batsmen respite. Broad, tall with a high action, was fast and hostile. His dismissals of Sarwan and Chanderpaul in the first innings were high-class. More accomplished batsmen than the lesser West Indians would have been hard-pressed to keep them out. Their equivalents in 2000 were Darren Gough and Andy Caddick, in 2007, Ryan Sidebottom and Steve Harmison.This was a series the West Indies players clearly didn’t want and weren’t prepared for. The unprofessionalism of their attitude has been cruelly exposed by opponents out to avenge their preceding indignities in the Caribbean and impose their superiority. The three ODIs that follow offer the immediate chance to restore confidence. It won’t be easy.

Clarke and Bollinger made it an Aussie day, but wood-fired pizzas and a chance to inspect the pitch gave this Kiwi supporter something to cheer about

Sam Grayling21-Mar-2010The game
It doesn’t get better than the Trans-Tasman sporting rivalry. On day two I was optimistic of a quick couple of wickets to bring New Zealand back into the match, but was wary of Michael Clarke taking the game away early.Team supported
New Zealand, always.Key performers
Doug Bollinger, who took 2 for 21. He bowled opener BJ Watling for a duck, which gave New Zealand that horrible sinking feeling.One thing I’d have changed
The weather didn’t quite perform as well as the morning had indicated it would. And a life to Ross Taylor would have been outstanding.Face-off I relished
Bollinger’s short bowling, especially to Daniel Vettori. The bowler gave a couple of Kiwis a cherry or two to remember the day by.Accessories
A hat, sunscreen and sunglasses were a must, when there wasn’t a cloud in the sky this morning. But a jersey for the late-day wind would have really improved things.Filling the gaps
They let us on the field during lunch, so we went and had an inspection of the pitch. There were a few games of backyard cricket on the field too, which was a nice touch.Player watch
Ryan Harris denied some kids autographs, and the crowd gave him plenty for it.Shot of the day
For the first half hour Clarke was putting everything through covers and mid-off. I’d struggle to pick one in particular because they were all outstanding. Crowd meter
The “Get your tie off” chant went round the embankment whenever a “suit” dared walk on that side of the ground. “Sign the bat Harris, sign the bat” went on when Harris was refusing the kids. Most of the crowd clearly supported New Zealand, but a group of Aussies were quite vocal. Clarke got a standing ovation and Bollinger managed to become a bit of a crowd favourite. But I think the crowd was at its loudest when chanting for a kid’s game where some superb skills were displayed.Entertainment
There was a good cricket competition for the kids at lunch. For food there were more options than the games I have been to in the past. There were some good quality wood-fired pizzas – a little pricey, perhaps – Indian food, good chips, carni-dogs etcTests v limited-overs
There is nothing better than arriving for the first ball of the day at a Test match. It doesn’t have the cheap-thrills atmosphere of a Twenty20, and you know the crowd is full of fans who understand the nuances of the game.Marks out of 10
6. Clarke gave a brilliant display of how to bat in a Test and Bollinger bowled superbly. It would have been nice to see a bit more from the New Zealand side. Nonetheless, it was promising to see Martin Guptill’s patience.It’s always good to see the quality that some of the Australians bring to the game but in the end, the day lacked a really good contest.

Plays of the day from the match between Kolkata and Delhi at Eden Gardens

George Binoy07-Apr-2010Dinda v Warner:
The first over of Delhi’s chase. Ashok Dinda sent down four successive dot balls, all of them short of a length and skidding into the left-hander David Warner, hurrying and cramping him. Warner attempted to short-arm jab three of those on the leg side but failed. The fifth was straighter and quicker. It skidded through Warner’s defences before he brought his bat down and demolished off stump. For a batsman reared on the hard and fast surfaces of Australia, Warner was surprisingly beaten by Dinda’s pace.False alarm:
The first ball of the third over. Dinda bowled full outside off and Sehwag threw his bat at it. There was a noise as the ball passed the bat and Wriddhiman Saha flung it in the air in celebration after taking the catch. Dinda was ecstatic and turned to Rudi Koertzen to appeal, Sourav Ganguly ran in from mid off to join in. And then Koertzen’s famously slow left hand began to move, its index finger almost outstretched. But just when Kolkata though they had Sehwag, Koertzen’s hand went into his pocket, and Sehwag smiled.Ganguly!:
You had to see it to believe it: Ganguly throwing himself all over Eden Gardens. His first moment of excellence was the most crucial: he ran in from mid-off to intercept Gautam Gambhir’s drive, picked up, released quickly and threw down the stumps at the bowler’s end with the batsman short. It ended a dangerous 99-run partnership. Ganguly, however, wasn’t done. He was prowling at cover, diving to his left, then to his right, intercepting well-timed shots and working the Kolkata crowd into a frenzy. And then, when Kedar Jadhav drove hard just above head height, Ganguly was there, jumping to take a sharp catch to force the door shut on Delhi.Ganguly v left-arm spin:
In his pomp, Ganguly treated left-arm spinners with disdain. And yet Gambhir gave the ball to one in the second over of the Kolkata innings. This was no ordinary left-armer, though; it was Daniel Vettori, the best in the world. Ganguly won Round one, his deft late cut, cover drive and sweep all finding the boundary. His balance was precise and footwork graceful, and Vettori did not bowl another over immediately. When he returned for the 12th, however, Vettori won round two with a wily change of pace. He sensed Ganguly trying to hit across the line, and slowed one down to 71 kmh. Ganguly swept, missed and was bowled.Absent-minded cricket:
The third ball of the 15th over, bowled by Ajit Agarkar, was a friendly full toss outside off stump. Sehwag wound up and swung, but missed. Perhaps ruing the missed opportunity, Sehwag did not realize he was out of his crease and was loitering dangerously. Saha, however, did not seize his chance and lobbed the ball high over the stumps.

Rather than trimming a format slowly being reduced to un-coveted ashes, Cricket Australia is involved in a dramatic redesign of one-day cricket

Peter English20-Jul-2010The 2009-10 Australian summer was a horrible one for ODI attendances but there were enough television viewers to satisfy the broadcasters. Having West Indies and Pakistan as the struggling drawcards didn’t help, especially since it was only two seasons since the introduction of head-to-head contests to liven things up following the replacement of the 29-year-old tri-series. After 10 games in 29 days, with nine Australian wins and a no-result, there was overwhelming relief when the summer’s ODI component finally died.On January 5 it will be 40 years since one-day cricket was born, growing slowly initially until it exploded in the late 1970s. It changed the sport forever without becoming immortal. Phase three has occurred over the past decade with Twenty20 and it has quickly downgraded the revolutionary 50-over concept into a fight for survival.Despite support from the ICC, which needs the genre for its lucrative World Cups, it seems impossible that the current format will remain recognisable. Former players, including Shane Warne, think it should perish and it would be no surprise if it was pensioned off in the next 10 years. South Africa and England don’t compete in any 50-over one-day games at domestic level, preferring 40 overs to the international standard.In Australia the administrators are currently planning much more than a simple 20% cutback. Rather than trimming a format slowly being reduced to un-coveted ashes, Cricket Australia is involved in a dramatic redesign in which all reasonable ideas – and some wacky ones – are being considered. Over the next month the proposal for split-innings fixtures, played over four 20-over pieces, will be formalised in the hope of partial implementation in next summer’s FR Cup, the inter-state one-day tournament. A swift trial is necessary to start the persuading of the rest of the international world that this is a winning method for the 2015 World Cup, which will be hosted by Australia and New Zealand.It means that many of the concepts that made addicts of a new generation of audiences over the past four decades will be ditched in favour of new flavours. Victor Richardson, grandfather to the Chappell brothers, was fond of saying everything in the game had been done before. It’s not always true, but cricket is a sport that relies on recycling.The starting point for Cricket Australia’s re-inventors is an 80-over match split into quarters. Team A bats for 20 overs in the first and third innings and defends its score in the second and fourth segments. England played a split-innings tour match against a Western Australia XI in 1994-95, so the officials are looking back 16 years to go forward. That fixture was a one-off during a period when all sorts of games were being concocted to revive interest, including Super Eight and Cricket Max.Split innings were trialled in an England 2nd XI competition this year with mixed, and obvious, results. Some games were close and exciting, others were one-sided and boring. Just like in two-innings 50-over affairs, Tests or backyard games.Cricket Australia’s aim is to increase strategy in the contest and make it less predictable. To do this they are discussing sensible ideas, such as two short-balls an over between shoulder and head height, and radical ones, like allowing a star batsman to bat twice. They want more excitement while being conscious of not drowning in gimmickry that will eliminate the project.Sadly, what can’t be changed quickly is the glut of meaningless fixtures because of scheduling commitments and long-term broadcasting deals. Television stations love the duration of one-day cricket and its end-of-over advertising slots; players and administrators are always talking about fewer games and greater context. Cricket Australia’s figures for average ODI television audiences show more than 1 million viewers for eight of the past nine seasons. Last summer the number came down to 846,000.Officials argue people switched off in all formats because Australia were dominating weak opponents. The ODI concerns peaked when West Indies lost their first three wickets within five overs in three of the five matches. A rainy night in Sydney was the main player in preventing a 5-0 result.Making the game more strategic is a worthy pursuit, although no amount of potions and focus-group feedback can prevent a weak team from being outclassed. Three for 11 in the 55th over of a two-innings match still makes the game more interesting for longer than if a side suffers the same fate in the 25th over of a split fixture.Celebrate the change of pace

I like ODIs and don’t want them to be downgraded to 40-over, split-innings affairs. It makes me a Generation X conservative. What I hate about 50-over games is there are so many, usually played so close together. In November Sri Lanka visit for a short tour that includes three ODIs and I think that is ideal, but scheduling and broadcast deals prevent that for major tours. Having shorter series means a lot less money for boards.
One of the main complaints is that the overs between 15 and 40 can be mind-numbing as the batsmen chip the ball around for singles. One thing I really like about cricket is its change of pace and this period provides it in 50-over games. Driving fast on motorways gets boring and makes a detour through a sleepy village an enjoyable diversion. Why is the aim for all limited-overs games to occur at the same break-bat pace?
Inevitably, the split-innings format will make things more like Twenty20. When that happens one of the things I’ll miss is the commentator shouting “SHOT” followed soon after by a much quieter “for one”, when they realise there’s a fielder stationed on the boundary. There is a place for subtlety and singles in ODIs, but it’s hard to believe in that when there are so many matches.
Peter English

However, Cricket Australia says it knows what its fans want. The marketing department has conducted 1200 surveys with supporters, who continue to enjoy the ODI game but believe it needs updating. Test cricket remains the style those fans were most fanatical about, achieving a mark of 54% from respondents, putting it ahead of one-day cricket (52%) and Twenty20s (48%).Crowds at one-day internationals have dropped over the past decade in which the style has been squeezed by the committed interest in Tests and the dramatic rise of Twenty20s. For Australia, the deepest trough came in February when the two ODIs against West Indies at the 90,000-seat MCG were watched by 25,463 and 15,538 people. Despite this the genre remains the version most people follow. “Interest is holding up, but it’s an important opportunity to reinvigorate ODIs and improve them,” Cricket Australia’s marketing manager Julian Dunne says.In the research Dunne has found that a key consideration is most Australian supporters want to see their team make runs. “If Australia bat second at the MCG the crowd is 25% higher,” he says. “In split innings you get to see Australia bat and bowl at night.” If the plan to employ a super striker is approved they will be able to watch David Warner or Ricky Ponting have two lives. That would make the casual supporter happier.During a cross-country exercise – what the politicians would call a listening tour – Dunne and Geoff Allardice, Cricket Australia’s operations manager, have been speaking to supporters, players, sponsors and broadcasters about the possible changes. A minimum of four bowlers to deliver the 40 overs, more generosity on legside wides and fewer fielders outside the inner circle are some of the admirable ideas. Dunne and Allardice acknowledge there are some shortcomings to the package, but are confident a plausible alternative to 50-over games can be ready by October.If successful, it will mean there are five different forms of the game played in Australia this summer: five-day Tests, four-day Sheffield Shield contests, 100-over one-dayers, 80-over split innings affairs, and Twenty20s. Two of the formats will be applied in the same FR Cup competition as the organisers attempt to marry the new idea with the traditional structure so it will not hamper the Australian players’ fine-tuning for the 2011 World Cup.Cricket Australia’s board will vote on the final submission next month and something very unusual – perhaps a committed revolt from the players; Michael Hussey says it doesn’t sit right – would have to occur for the split-innings system not to be implemented. It took almost a century for Test cricket to gain a sibling, but the modern one-day game can now change in an off-season.

India’s bowling was the talking point during the Tests but the focus has turned to their weaknesses with the bat after two capitulations

Siddarth Ravindran in Dambulla22-Aug-2010During the Test series against Sri Lanka, there was plenty of talk about India’s lack of back-up bowlers. In the tri-series, after folding twice without a fight, the focus is on the batting frailties.The Indian team might point to some dodgy decisions – the umpire could have gone either way on Virender Sehwag’s lbw, Dinesh Karthik and Suresh Raina didn’t look to have nicked deliveries to the keeper, and Yuvraj Singh’s vigil ended after being given out when struck well outside off while playing a shot – but there were still plenty of worrying signs.It was by no means a treacherous pitch, certainly not one in which a top side should struggle to reach triple-digits. There was no dramatic swing around after the first few overs, yet all batsmen barring Yuvraj and to an extent Sehwag, struggled to middle the ball.Karthik had a troubling time once his usual ploy of walking down the track was stifled by Kumar Sangakkara standing up to the stumps. He was searching for the ball outside off, beaten several times by Nuwan Kulasekara’s mix of incutters and straighter ones.Rohit Sharma’s forgettable tournament continued after another unconvincing effort. The bulk of his runs came off two mishits – a leading edge for four through cover when he was aiming for midwicket, and a lofted miscue in front of point for a boundary when the intended target was extra cover. In the ninth over, he was looking to leave a delivery from Lasith Malinga outside off but was too late in withdrawing the bat, and the ball rolled off it towards backward point. An Angelo Mathews inswinger ended his stay, hitting him on the pads in front of middle.Suresh Raina had a on-one-knee cover drive all along the ground that made you think a substantial stand was coming up between him and Yuvraj, but he too barely lasted. MS Dhoni usually likes to get going with a bunch of safe singles but there weren’t any on Sunday, just a pair of streaky boundaries before giving Sangakkara his third catch of the innings. The overall effort raises questions about the middle-order’s resilience, and its firefighting skills.Another point to ponder for the management is whether No. 7 is too high a spot for Ravindra Jadeja, who again failed with the bat, and hasn’t shown the ability to consistently either finish matches from that position or assist in rescue missions.The one plus for India was the batting of the fit-again Yuvraj, a crucial component of the Indian middle order. He got going with an array of effortless off-drives, but once the wickets tumbled he switched to graft mode, making only two runs in 30 deliveries during one phase. After eight wickets were down, he started to show the flamboyant hitting with which he made his name including a breathtaking six over long-off, before he was adjudged lbw when attempting an outrageous shot towards square leg.Asked about the umpiring decisions and their impact on the match, Sri Lanka captain Kumar Sangakkara made his oft-repeated demand for the umpire-decision review system. “If everything has to be fair, use technology and make it even,” Sangakkara said. “ICC should make technology compulsory because if some sides are using it and some series we are playing without it, I don’t think that’s right, everyone should use technology.”Dhoni offered no excuses for the defeat, praising the Sri Lankan bowlers for their accuracy. “We didn’t get the kind of start we needed,” he said. “Their bowlers bowled in the right channels, and pushed us into making the mistakes.”About the only thing which went right for Dhoni was that he won the toss for the first time on the tour, something which he has repeatedly said is crucial in Dambulla. It wasn’t of much help on Sunday.

… at the Basin would tempt the best of us even if our team’s batting collapses like a sand castle

Trish Plunket26-Nov-2010Choice of game
Well, when you’ve nothing better to do, you go to the cricket right? It was on, it was free, it was 22 men in white. I assumed Wellington would lose, given their recent form.Team supported
I’d like to pretend that five years studying in Otago made me a neutral supporter, but I was backing Wellington on the inside. And a lot on the outside too.Key performer
Nick Beard, the Otago No. 11 who came in as nightwatchman and scored 62. He came in and stopped the rot, giving the Otago second innings a real kick.One thing I’d have changed

I’d give the Wellington top order the ability to bat. No, seriously. Matthew Bell scored six runs. Cameron Merchant scored a total of 33. Josh Brodie did slightly better, both his innings together made it over fifty.Wow moment
Wow, we managed not to screw it up! As Joe Austin-Smellie smacked the last ball straight out the gate and into the road, it was a serious relief to all that it wasn’t fetched and another over bowled.A special mention
Just a little love for Jayde Herrick, who flew in just for this match and bowled his guts out – until we broke him. Oops. Sorry Jayde. Your tattoos are really cool anyway.Player watch
Well… um… We saw Luke Wright posing for photos, and – woo yay! – Iain O’Brien was back at the Basin, wearing jandals and being harassed for autographs.Shot of the day
A six big enough to thud into the windows of the RA Vance stand, scaring all the execs having a conference in the Long Room. Pity, the shot was by an Otago tailender.Crowd meter
There was a crowd. There was definitely a crowd. They may have been scattered here and there among the bank and on the seats, drawn more by sun than cricket, but hey, there was a crowd! The players were still the loudest group, except for the period where the Wellington College students turned up to hassle Harry Boam.Fancy-dress index
Given the Basin Reserve is actually a public thoroughfare during the games, we were treated to some impressive tattoos, Lycra clad cyclists, ridiculously dressed hipsters and the Blanket Man. I don’t think any of those guys actually watched the cricket.Entertainment
We’re a low-rent outfit here in New Zealand. So low rent that the games are free! The downside is there is no entertainment, besides the cricket, which only counts sometimes. Still, we make our own fun, and a couple of sideline cricket games started up. I think some of the kids batted better than Bell.Accessories
I brought a book, but found the most crucial accessory was one I had forgotten – sunscreen. And so had everyone else. We slowly turned red as the day progressed. But really, who would have thought – sun? In Wellington? In November? Madness.Overall
Oh Wellington. You get yourself into such a good position, and then you blow it, leaving us only grateful to have salvaged a draw and gotten first-innings points. But the sun shone, the whites were bright, it was a distraction from the disaster that had befallen the West Coast. I couldn’t have asked for more. Except maybe an innings without a dire collapse. But I’m a Black Caps fan. I’m used to those.Marks out of 10
8. Sun. In November!

No bowler exemplifies the art of the legbreak as much as Shane Warne does; no bowler ever will

Gideon Haigh19-Dec-2010Shane Warne will probably never play at the Melbourne Cricket Ground again, but a corner has been marked out for him. In October 2008, in the bowels of the ground, the National Sports Museum activated “Shane Warne: Cricket Found Me”, in which a three-dimensional image of Warne speaks for more than 10 minutes, seemingly ex tempore, while appearing to walk around a dressing room.The technology is remarkable; Warne himself, however, is more remarkable still. He was required to speak about his career to a camera, without prop or prompts, in one uninterrupted take. As you observe, he did so effortlessly, without ever breaking eye contact – or, perhaps more accurately, lens contact. Elsewhere in the museum, a simulacrum of the Australian Rules footballer James Hird, an intelligent and well-spoken young man, goes through the same routine in a similar display: his attention falters, his eyes dart away, his body language is tentative. You watch Warne again. You hate to admit it but it’s true: he seems to be talking to you. Now is charisma.Warne was an extraordinary bowler. It can’t really be said often enough. He will personify legbreak bowling for as long as the skill exists. If and when an outstanding new purveyor achieves note, the question will be: how does he compare with Warne? As fascinating to watch as were Anil Kumble and Mushtaq Ahmed, Warne’s was the style to study and emulate – so simple, so unadorned, so apparently artless. So epic were his feats, too, that it is hard to recall legbreak bowling before him. In the 1980s, of course, there were the mysteries and intrigues of Abdul Qadir. But Qadir’s wickets down under cost 61 runs each. Had Cormac McCarthy written a novel of Australian cricket at the time, in fact, it would have been called . That was certainly the attitude, when Warne first played Sheffield Shield, of his captain Simon O’Donnell and coach Les Stillman. Seldom has received wisdom been more promptly and utterly routed.Warne cut a swathe through batsmen in the early 1990s who had seen nothing remotely similar for generations – which was amazing. Then he cut another swathe and another – which was miraculous. After his Test debut in England, with its fabled “Gatting ball”, Warne’s bowling average was 28. It diminished to 22.55, grew to 26.7, and finally settled at 25.4. Until then legspin had been a speculative investment, cricket’s venture capital; Warne made it into bowling bricks and mortar. Everything told you it should be otherwise. Batsman would get used to him. Coaches would work him out. Curators would prepare flat pitches. All these were before the physical dangers Warne posed to himself, for legspin involves colossal efforts at pivotal points in the human anatomy. And, to an extent, all the aforementioned possibilities eventuated. In each case, though, Warne rose to the challenge of counteracting them. He kept getting batsmen bowled. He get kept getting them lbw. He kept getting them WTF. He had almost no right to, but he did.Yet even then, this doesn’t quite do him justice, for Warne was no more to be considered simply a bowler than Marilyn Monroe was to be deemed merely as an actress. He was a presence, on the field, in the game, in the media, in the mind. To each delivery, there was a whole preamble, sometimes theatrical, sometimes languorous, always captivating. As he dawdled before his trademark saunter, he would curl the ball from hand to hand, an action both predatory and dainty, feeling his own powers of torque communicated through the ball, keeping the batsman in his crouch that little longer than perhaps was comfortable – time for thought, time for doubt. That pause: it was almost imperceptible, yet time would seem to stand still. It called to mind Paul Keating’s parliamentary retort when quizzed by his rival John Hewson as to why he did not call an early election: “The answer is, mate, I wanna do you slowly.”

He kept getting batsmen bowled. He get kept getting them lbw. He kept getting them WTF. He had almost no right to, but he did

In the last few years of his career, these performances of Warne’s bordered on burlesque. The Ashes of 2005 and 2006-07 were series divided: there was the cricket featuring Warne, then the rest. There was brilliance, there was bluff; he was the beamish boy one moment, the blowhard the next. He was seldom outbowled, hardly outfoxed, never out-talked. His manner with dissenting umpires was straight from the WG Grace playbook: “They’ve come to watch me bowl, not you umpire.”Nor was it always a pageant of success. A day that sticks in the mind is the fourth in Perth in December 2006. Warne toiled for almost two sessions from the Prindiville Stand End, on a perfect batting wicket, in temperatures well over 40 degrees, taking 1 for 100. Yet every ball was full of willingness and will power. Every time he paused at the top of his run, you felt like the batsman was simply there for his delectation. Every time he whirled into his action, you expected a triumphant appeal to follow. At the time, it transpired, he was contemplating the retirement he announced before the next Test. You’d never have guessed: he seemed to be setting himself to bowl forever. Late that day, Glenn McGrath, spared work for the afternoon, struck crucially with the second new ball, and afterwards commented that the wickets were as much Warne’s as his: how often, by the pressure he exerted, by the yakka he soaked up, that was true.On fame in cricket, meanwhile, Warne rewrote the book. In this, to be sure, he had some help. On television in India, Sachin Tendulkar has exerted perhaps the single greatest influence; on tabloid culture in England, Ian Botham left indelible inky fingerprints. Yet Warne blazed a trail of fame everywhere cricket took him, and everywhere he took cricket. He oozed action. He radiated star quality. An expectation surrounded him, including his own of himself, as it has done few other players, and as it was once summarised by another Australian cricketer: “Every time Warne bowls he expects to take wickets. Every time he bats he expects to make runs. Every time he sees a woman he expects to get laid.”Time seemed to stand still during Warne’s run-up•Getty ImagesHis weakness, particularly in the last of these, was an incapacity for saying no – to others, to himself. But you could sort of understand this apparently infinite suggestibility: after all, most of the time “yes” worked so damn well. And in the end Warne pulled it off: even after all his tribulations he has ended up being a good advertisement for fame. Certainly he always seemed to enjoy it – sometimes to a fault. “He loves to be loved,” said his captain Steve Waugh, and the media has never outgrown its infatuation with him. For all his sometimes tetchy relations with them, too, Warne has returned the media’s embrace. No past master has fitted as seamlessly into commentary as Warne – insightful, irreverent, irrepressible, even in his recent perma-tanned petrifaction.Warne also remained, above all, absolutely true to his gift. Fame had opposite effects on Tendulkar and Botham. Tendulkar preserved his excellence by sequestering himself from a clamouring public; Botham swallowed celebrity whole and spat out self-parody. Warne swaggered down the middle of the road, living large but always bowling big, revelling in the attention while never losing the love of his craft. Even now, at 41, in the IPL, he looks completely engaged in every game, playing because he wants to, not because he has to. There are those who say he obtains wickets because he is Shane Warne; to this, Warne would undoubtedly reply: “Thanks for the compliment.”Warne has inspired books, busts, bottles of wine, hagiographies, hatchet jobs, mountains of memorabilia, even a musical. But in some respects, the MCG’s installation of him is his most faithful reflection. Many, many more people saw Warne as image than reality; he is a man of comparatively few close friends and millions upon millions of acquaintances. Yet somehow, despite all the layers of mediation, all the received opinion, all the manufactured outrage, the naturalness came through, and we felt we knew him.