Dinesh Karthik has missed two important stumpings in two matches, and has lost his wicket at times when he could have helped India towards stronger totals

Karthik Krishnaswamy in Mirpur02-Mar-2014Before bowling the fourth ball of his eighth over against Pakistan, R Ashwin waved to his fielders at deep backward square leg and deep midwicket. With a sweep of his right arm, Ashwin indicated he wanted both of them to move a few steps to their right.Ashwin, bowling around the wicket, had clearly set his field for the sweep. It was obvious to anyone watching that he was going to shift to a leg-stump line. Sohaib Maqsood knew this, and it looked like he wanted to upset Ashwin’s calculations when he tried to squirt the next ball – quick, full, on leg stump – down the ground in a slightly inside-out manner. Ashwin moved alertly to his left and stopped the ball.Next ball, Maqsood jumped down the track. He had started too early, though, and Ashwin sent down a carrom ball wide of leg stump. Maqsood tried to flick, missed, and was stranded yards down the pitch. Behind him, the ball bounced off Dinesh Karthik’s gloves.The field change should have alerted Karthik that he might soon need to collect the ball down the leg side. He should not have been surprised by the carrom ball either. Ashwin had taken his first wicket with that delivery, bowling Sharjeel Khan through the gate.With the match situation thrown in the mix, Karthik’s error looked even more glaring. Chasing 246, Pakistan were 168 for 4 in the 38th over. The partnership between Maqsood and Mohammad Hafeez had just gone past 50. They added another 32 and took Pakistan to 200 before Ashwin dismissed Hafeez. Pakistan won by one wicket, in the last over, and it took two sixes in two balls from Shahid Afridi to get them home.In India’s previous match, Karthik had missed a stumping when Kumar Sangakkara was on 30. He went on to make 103 and win the match for Sri Lanka. It was one of a series of errors the fielders made, and Virat Kohli, India’s captain, spoke after the game of the need to play smarter cricket.A part of his concern had been directed at India’s batting too. Against Sri Lanka, they had slumped from 175 for 3 to 215 for 7, and Karthik had played one of the needless shots that had brought them to that situation.Against Pakistan, Karthik walked in to bat with India on 103 for 4 in the 24th over, having lost Rohit Sharma and Ajinkya Rahane in the span of five overs. This was a big test for India’s new middle order. For a while, it looked as though they were passing it, with Ambati Rayudu busy at one end and Karthik hanging in at the other.Their partnership had just crossed 50 when Karthik moved to sweep Hafeez from outside off stump. The ball landed well short of sweeping length, and Karthik changed his stroke to an uncertain lap. The ball bounced a little extra, took the top-edge, and nestled into the hands of short fine leg.It was a soft dismissal, and it came at a bad time for India. Yes, it was the batting Powerplay, after India had already lost four wickets. Their priority at that stage must have been to reach the 40-over mark without losing another. Karthik was out for a 46-ball 23.India’s squad at the Asia Cup is full of inexperienced players, and a large part of this inexperience is concentrated in the middle order. Karthik isn’t inexperienced. He made his international debut nearly a decade ago. He has played 70 ODIs, and 23 Tests for good measure.Karthik has had the misfortune of being a wicketkeeper-batsman in the MS Dhoni era, and it’s meant he has seldom had a long run in the side. But the selectors have valued his talent enough to pick him as a specialist batsman in 47 ODIs and seven Tests. They have valued it so much that he has batted in the top five in 42 of his one-day innings, and has opened the batting 20 times.Despite this, Karthik has an average of 27.48, a strike-rate of 73.15, seven half-centuries and a highest score of 79. It’s fair to say he has rarely grabbed his chances.From September 2009 to August 2010, he made double-digit scores in 17 straight ODI innings but only made two half-centuries. All but two of those 17 innings came as opener or at No. 3. He was dropped after scoring 9, 0 and 0 in the three innings that followed, and didn’t play an ODI for nearly three years.Karthik returned to the side for the Champions Trophy last year, on the back of some heavy scoring in first-class cricket and in the IPL. He showed ominous form in the warm-up games, scoring two hundreds, but reverted to type when the competitive games began. Replacing Yuvraj Singh, he scored two half-centuries in 12 innings over the course of three ODI tournaments, and was dropped once again.Dhoni’s side strain gave Karthik another opportunity, but he has let it slip in the most literal way possible, in two successive matches. As Afridi’s match-winning six soared into the Mirpur sky, Dhoni’s IPL franchise, Chennai Super Kings, pressed the send button on a tweet.”Do you think we missed Dhoni today as a captain / keeper / finisher? #missuMahi,” it said.

Chris Jordan’s home-town heroics set up a win, but England would be well-served not congratulating themselves too hard on his emergence

George Dobell in Barbados14-Mar-20140:00

Dobell: Jordan made all the difference

Perhaps it was fitting that, 33 years to the day since Roland Butcher became the first black man to represent England in Test cricket, another Barbadian should play such a significant role in an England victory on the same ground.”Our boy, their bat”, the local paper proclaimed when Butcher played. And they could have used the same headline here as Chris Jordan, on the outfield where he played as a boy and on the pitch where, in part, he learned his trade, produced an outrageous demonstration of clean hitting to take England’s total out of the reach of West Indies.Jordan thrashed three sixes from successive Dwayne Bravo deliveries and four in a final over of the England innings that yielded 26 runs. In a match decided by a margin of just five runs, it made all the difference.Chris Jordan starred with bat, ball and in the field•AFPPlaying in front of his parents and sister, Jordan also claimed three wickets with his pace bowling and took an outstanding running catch on the midwicket boundary to account for the dangerous Bravo. Unsurprisingly, he was named Man of the Match and pronounced it a “very special occasion.”It all meant that England won their first T20 in six attempts and depart for Bangladesh with confidence at least a little higher than it might have been.There were other areas of improvement. England at last utilised the Powerplay overs effectively – only twice have they scored more than the 64 for 0 they managed in the first six overs here – and put together an opening stand of 98 in 10.5 overs that should have been the platform for a match-defining total. They fielded significantly better than West Indies and, in James Tredwell and Ravi Bopara, again demonstrated bowlers who could flourish in Bangladesh.But England would be deluding themselves if they concluded that they have settled upon a formula that will succeed in Bangladesh. This was a victory against a West Indies side resting some key players – most notably Chris Gayle and Samuel Badree – and one that owed rather too much to fortune for comfort.England will be fortunate to come up against a bowler as raw as Sheldon Cottrell in the World T20. Cottrell, playing instead of Ravi Ramaul to provide him some exposure to this level of cricket ahead of Bangladesh, provided England with enough loose bowling to provide just the kick-start they required. That Michael Lumb, in particular, was able to sustain his bright start against more demanding bowlers, including Sunil Narine, was encouraging but there was no comparison to opening against Badree.And, that it took Jordan’s last-over heroics to ensure they won this game, underlines how badly England lost their way after the opening partnership. After reaching 96 without loss after 10 overs, England scored just 34 in the next seven and lost five wickets in the process.They experimented with their third No. 3 in the three games and cannot be encouraged by the form of Ben Stokes, who missed a good slower ball by six inches and has now scored just 18 runs from his last seven international innings, or Eoin Morgan, who has not reached 20 in his four international innings on this tour. Had Dwayne Bravo not delivered an uncharacteristically poor final over of their innings, they would surely have squandered their bright start.Even in the final over of the match, they enjoyed some fortune. Jade Dernbach, in a performance that typifies his career, produced a mixture of the wonderful and woeful in his four-over spell. It culminated in a wide from what should have been the last ball of the match to give West Indies a sniff of victory and then what would have been another wide had Darren Sammy not made contact from the last delivery. To suggest Dernbach held his nerve would be to judge from results not the process, though. In truth, he got away with it.Most of all, though, it must be a concern that it took a Bajan playing in Barbados to rescue them from defeat. It must be a concern that, for all the money ploughed into academies, counties, youth development and schools in England that the national team are still as likely to turn to players brought up abroad to mark deficiencies in their own system.To some extent this is to be celebrated. It reflects the mobile, multicultural society that the UK has developed into and it suggests that the days when race or religion were any impediment to progress are long gone, in cricket at least. England would be foolish and wrong not to utilise the benefits of its history and the attractions of county cricket to aspiring young cricketers.But is worth reflecting on the reason why so many of England’s finest players of recent years – from Kevin Pietersen to Jonathan Trott – have spent part of their youth in cultures which seem to produce more natural talent. The reliance upon such players has become disproportionate.Might it be the same reason that England appear to produce fewer quality spin bowlers and fewer fast bowlers who are able to sustain the strains of a career at the top level? That all the coaches and academies in England are part of the problem. That the talent is coached out of many English players. That the desire for uniformity which dominated in England for so long – thankfully there are signs that it is changing – have actually held back young cricketers during those key childhood years when they should be learning the fundamentals.That is not to say that Jordan and co. do not owe a great deal to county cricket. Even in the last year, since he was released by Surrey and moved to Sussex, he has come on in leaps and bounds. But it is telling that his career-best bowling performance – 7 for 43 – came in Bridgetown, admittedly on a different ground; the Three Ws Oval – almost exactly a year ago. He was playing for Barbados at the time. It is telling, too, that this match represented the first occasion most of his family had enjoyed the opportunity to see him play international cricket. Barbados remains the location of the family home.So England may take the victory and they may take some confidence from that victory. But it is Barbados who can take pride in the fact that their tiny island – it is 20 miles long and a smile wide, the locals like to tell you – has produced yet another fine cricketer. England would be well-served not congratulating themselves too hard on his emergence.

ESPNcricinfo picks its flops of the IPL 2014 season, with a limit of only four foreign players in the XI

ESPNcricinfo staff03-Jun-2014Batsmen undergoing a baffling loss in form, captains who forgot their better sense, bowlers who looked a shadow of themselves and a wicketkeeper who triggers frustration just as easily as he invokes confidence. What’s the Indian Premier League without a few people tripping up?Though their numbers were a useful guide, some other factors used to populate the list were the player’s importance to the team, the extent to which he could not meet those demands and the subsequent detrimental impact. The investment they represented and eventual yield was also taken into consideration.Virat Kohli’s skills at leading a team were under the scanner and similar focus was also placed Mohammed Shami and his capacity as a spearhead. Neither was able to deliver near their potential.Shane Watson provided a healthy share of head-scratching moments. For a majority of the tournament, Rajasthan Royals looked downright assured of a playoff spot. Perhaps they thought the same, too , and decided to play pin the tail on the most outlandish tactical decision.Mumbai Indians would have felt assured that their top order was sorted having signed Michael Hussey, but his startling loss of form coincided with the team’s worst start to an IPL. Chris Gayle was Hussey’s closest competition. His dot balls piled up, the big hits waned and he looked in pain while running between the wickets. Pragyan Ojha’s tally of four wickets, while conceding over eight an over, was comfortably outdone by uncapped spinners.The same criteria discounted players like Jaydev Unadkat, Rahul Sharma, Parvinder Awana, CM Gautam. They are yet to present a bankable image to fall short of.The team below conforms to the conditions of seven local and four overseas players. Wonder how they will fare against the team of the tournament?1 Michael Hussey (9 matches, 209 runs, strike rate 114, average 23.22)
2 Chris Gayle (9 matches, 196 runs, strike rate 106.52, average 21.77)
3 Virat Kohli (capt) (14 matches, 359 runs, strike rate 122.10, average 27.61)
4 Kevin Pietersen (11 matches, 294 runs, strike rate 126.18, average 29.40)
5 Shane Watson (13 matches, 240 runs, strike rate 122.44, average 20, 7 wickets)
6 Dinesh Karthik (wk) (14 matches, 325 runs, strike rate 125.96, average 23.21, eight dismissals)
7 M Vijay (11 matches, 207 runs, strike rate 107.81, average 18.81)
8 Amit Mishra (10 matches, 7 wickets, economy rate 9.06)
9 Ishant Sharma (3 matches, 3 wickets, economy rate 9.18)
10 Mohammed Shami (12 matches, 7 wickets, economy rate 8.38)
11 Pragyan Ojha (12 matches, 4 wickets, economy rate 8.26)
12th man – Stuart Binny (13 matches, 123 runs, strike rate 101.65, average 12.30, 3 wickets)

Rangana Herath may lack the turn of a Murali or the guile of an Ajmal, but his immaculate set-up has still left many batsmen scratching their heads

Andrew Fidel Fernando at the SSC15-Aug-20146:25

Arnold: Herath followed the basics well

Now you see me, now you don’t•Associated PressTeams that visited Sri Lanka in the noughties witnessed their fair share of spin-bowling magic. Each series, teams would arrive confident that they had seen enough slow-motion footage of Muttiah Muralitharan’s wrists to unravel his tricks. “We just need to play him off the pitch, on the back foot,” went one theory. “The key is to counter him with the sweep,” claimed another. Nothing really helped.The SSC was witness to one of the most emphatic magic shows in 2008, when an Indian top order featuring Virender Sehwag, Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman were brought to their knees in a bent-arm whirl of big offbreaks, doosras and topspinners. In the end, despite the endless raids for his secrets, Murali retired with most of his magic intact.Few would describe Rangana Herath as a magician. He jogs in, pivots, lands the ball on his intended spot, turn sit a little – where’s the magic in that? It is more like the life of a miner.When South Africa were in the country in July, several batsmen made note of his accuracy, but saw little threat beyond that. In that tour, Herath had been some distance from his best, maybe worn down by the volume of overs he has delivered this year.As Herath claimed five wickets for 98 on Friday, five days after he had delivered an exhilarating victory in Galle, he had reclaimed his old form, but revealed something of his own magic too.He may not have Murali’s rubber wrists or Saeed Ajmal’s subterfuge, but he is instead a purveyor of the long con. Herath’s greatest illusion is that there is nothing illusory to him at all.Many subcontinent spinners have embraced new bags of tricks in the T20 age, but for opponents and spectators all around the world, the most mysterious thing about Herath is that he continues to reel in big hauls.Isn’t he just a line-and-length trundler? A tightwad so the millionaires can spend big at the other end? When he has pulled off a match-turning spell, opponents often admit Herath is good – they really have no other choice – but few can quite explain why or how.Herath gets his lucky breaks like anyone else. Younis Khan’s dismissal on Friday was one of those on Friday. But the secret in the best Herath dismissals are not in the turn, or the prestige, but in the set-up.Khurram Manzoor got seven dot balls from Herath, each tossed up, pulling his front foot a few centimetres further out each time, until in an instant, the bowler whipped the black cloth off his show-stealer.Herath drifted one in with extra revs, pitched it on a patch of darkened soil, and spun it sharply enough to take the edge through to the keeper. The killer blow was nice, but the real beauty lay in the process of getting the batsman to commit to a shot he should never have played.Manzoor left the field smashing bat on pads, as if to say “how could I have been so stupid?” But Herath’s dismissals are so often like this. It is only after his prey is strung up on his web that the entire machination comes into view. You wonder how you had not seen it all along.

Herath’s dismissals are so often like this. It is only after his prey is strung up on his web that the entire machination comes into view. You wonder how you had not seen it all along.

Late in the day, Herath tossed two up outside off stump to Asad Shafiq and beat his outside edge in successive balls. The next one was a slider dressed up as the orthodox spinner, with the same pace and trajectory of the two previous balls, but none of the turn.This one went past the inside edge, as the batsman played for turn, and rattled off stump. All tricks have their time and place. Not every occasion calls for the long con. This was just your run-of-the-mill bait-and-switch.In the past few months, Herath’s cricket nous has been increasingly tapped by a captain who has been in on an all the bowlers’ secrets. Mahela Jayawardene is still the most visible on-field lieutenant, but increasingly, Angelo Mathews is colluding with Herath when other men are bowling.Jayawardene thinks offensive strategy. He knows which fields make batsmen uncomfortable. He has his finger on the pulse of the opposition innings, but Herath is the man with an ear to the ground when the bowlers are running in. He can tell when one quick is ailing, and the other is begging for another over.Most of all, he appreciates their struggle. He understands which fields put the bowlers at ease, so that they bowl at full tilt without fear of leaking runs. He is the leader of this attack by dint of his hauls, but he is the leader in spirit too.Like him, no bowler in Sri Lanka’s ranks has outrageous talent to work with, but in his indomitable ethic, Sri Lanka have a flagbearer for perseverance. “You might have long, loathsome days,” goes the new bowling ethos, “but your effort and your lines have to be impeccable from start to finish.” With two bad knees and light years in his legs, no one takes up that challenge better than Herath.On day two, Herath became the fourth-fastest spinner to 250 Test wickets, in his 57th match. The only quicker slow bowlers were Murali, Shane Warne and Anil Kumble.Even Herath must wonder how he went from the Test-match wilderness to such esteemed company. Herath does not have the big-turning doosra or the rapid flipper, but with a talent for misdirection and a heart that keeps on ticking, he is still working his magic for Sri Lanka.

Plays of the day from the third ODI between Pakistan and Australia

Devashish Fuloria12-Oct-2014Borderline brilliance
A moment of brilliance from Steven Smith was on the margins of legality and left Fawad Alam fuming. Fawad went down on his knee to play a premeditated sweep off Xavier Doherty. Smith had spotted the batsman’s intentions, and started moving from first slip towards the leg side before the batsman had made contact with the ball. The ball went off Fawad’s top edge, and Smith took a comfortable catch around where leg slip would have stood. The umpires consulted each other briefly and decided to give Alam out. However, Alam did not have a reason to complain since as per the new ICC playing conditions, Smith’s action was in response to batsman’s movement, and therefore, fair.The missed appeal
Pakistan had just lost their seventh and eighth wicket within four runs of each other and the remaining 24 runs were seeming like a mountain. Right then, they were about to slip further. Zulfiqar Babar was late to respond to Sohail Tanvir’s call for a single and he was almost dead as Glenn Maxwell fired an accurate throw to the bowler from point. Faulkner, the bowler, collected it cleanly but missed the stumps as he tried to break them. He got it right in the second chance but shook his head in disappointment thinking he had missed his man. However, the replays showed Babar was still short. Seeing the replay on the big scree, Australia celebrated as they thought they had the wicket. The umpire, though, asked the batsman to stay since no one had appealed for it.The substitutes
The Pakistan team management had surprised many by resting their usual captain Misbah-ul-Haq. It was the first time since February 2011 that Misbah had missed a game. However, it did not take long for him to appear. In the ninth over, Sohail Tanvir went off and Misbah jogged in as the substitute fielder. He stayed away from the infield and stood near the ropes, where Tanvir would have been stationed. He was later on hand to carry out drinks duties. Later, Umar Akmal was seen in the field too, filling in for Mohammad Irfan. In the second innings, another substitute fielder was in the limelight. Sean Abbott was in for a brief period during which he dropped Ahmed Shehzad at mid-on.Irfan, the wall
Mohammad Irfan’s 2.16m frame has distinct advantages. As a bowler, he can extract bounce from any pitch; as a fielder, it gives him a fire-engine like range as David Warner found out in the second ODI when his six-worthy hit was intercepted at the boundary. Bending down should be a handicap, theoretically. However, in his last over, Irfan dived low to his left in his follow-through to cut off James Faulkner’s push down the ground, and swivelled quickly while on the floor to strike down the stumps at the non-striker’s end and send back Mitchell Starc. That was one for the myth-busters.

Bowlers who have been around for plenty of time but haven’t played in cricket’s biggest show

19-Dec-2014Irfan Pathan
ODI wickets: 173
Debut: 2004
Irfan Pathan has been Man of the Match in a World T20 final, and has a hat-trick in the first over of a Test, but he has missed out on playing in cricket’s biggest tournament. His debut came a year after the 2003 version, and in 2007 he didn’t get a game, as India preferred Zaheer Khan, Munaf Patel and Ajit Agarkar in an infamously short campaign. By the time the 2011 World Cup came along, Irfan had not been a regular with the one-day side for nearly three years.Ravindra Jadeja missed out in 2011 but is set to play in 2015•BCCIRavindra Jadeja
ODI wickets: 134
Debut: 2009
India gave Ravindra Jadeja plenty of rope in the lead-up to the 2011 World Cup but he didn’t do enough to merit inclusion, losing the allrounder’s spot to Yusuf Pathan. In recent years, he has become a permanent member of the limited-overs sides, and though the rise of Akshar Patel threatens his place, barring injury, he should get games at the coming World Cup.Ishant Sharma’s ODI career hasn’t really taken off•BCCIIshant Sharma
ODI wickets:106
Debut: 2007
Ishant Sharma has played nearly as many Tests as ODIs, making him something of a rarity. His limited-overs career was on the skid since 2009, but a slew of injuries to India’s preferred quick bowlers led to a recall against Pakistan in December 2012. He has played only three of India’s last 22 ODIs, but his experience should get him the nod when the World Cup comes around.59 ODIs, 97 wickets, economy rate 4.78, but Clint McKay is struggling to make the Australia ODI side•Getty ImagesClint McKay
ODI wickets: 97
Debut: 2009
The emergence of a young bunch of quicks has left Australia with the deepest pace-bowling stocks in world cricket, which makes the competition fierce for a place in the 2015 World Cup squad. McKay could go second on the list of fastest to 100 ODI wickets for Australia – behind Brett Lee, and alongside Dennis Lillee, Shane Warne and Nathan Bracken – but even that sort of record isn’t enough to guarantee a starting place. He hasn’t played an ODI since January.Ryan McLaren is the latest in a long line of South African fast-bowling allrounders•Getty ImagesRyan McLaren
ODI wickets: 77
Debut: 2009
South Africa have never been short of pace-bowling allrounders. Ryan McLaren is currently filling that spot in the one-day side, having been more or less a permanent member in the last two and a half years. Capable of hitting big, delivering ten overs every game, and also offering a death-bowling option, McLaren should be in the XI when South Africa seek to end their drought at the World Cup next year.

A profile of an official who remained influential during both the Lalit Modi regime and when N Srinivasan took charge

Nagraj Gollapudi17-Nov-2014Who is Sundar Raman?Raman is the most powerful, and feared, official in world cricket after ICC chairman N Srinivasan. His official designation is chief operating officer of the IPL; his remit goes far beyond that.What is his background?Raman, 43, entered the corporate world as a media planner. An avid cricket enthusiast, Raman in 2004 took part in an India-based reality show on sports network ESPN that was talent-hunting the next commentator to follow in the footsteps of Harsha Bhogle. Raman failed to make the cut.But in professional life, Raman had gained prominence while climbing the ladder swiftly to become the managing director at MindShare India, a global media buying agency. Lalit Modi, the first IPL chairman, swiftly inducted Raman into the IPL operations team during his reign. Even when Modi was banned by the BCCI, Raman did not lose his foothold. If anything, he had strengthened his position, gaining Srinivasan’s trust and steadily becoming the most influential non-administrator within the BCCI.What is his current BCCI role?Officially at BCCI, Raman holds only one position: COO of the IPL. As de facto boss of the most lucrative cricket tournament in the game, franchises report and communicate with Raman, who keeps an eagle eye on the minutiae. But in the last three years Raman has started having a bigger say even in BCCI matters. Every paper has to get his approval. Every new recruit needs to have his nod. Every sacking has his blessing. Even the official broadcaster has to obey Raman’s diktats while appointing commentators for bilateral series since BCCI.tv owns the production rights.Does he have a role at ICC?If he cracks the whip within the BCCI, Raman transforms himself into the role of negotiator at the world cricket table. Officially, Raman is the BCCI’s representative on the ICC’s Integrity Working Party, which is chaired by ICC CEO David Richardson. But Raman is Srinivasan’s shadow, his ear-piece at all ICC meetings.In 2013 Srinivasan got Raman inducted into the ICC’s commercial working group and the domestic Twenty20 sub-committee. Raman was the one of the chief architects of the radical position paper introduced last year by the Big
Three (BCCI, Cricket Australia and ECB), that overhauled the structure of the ICC.Importantly, Raman believed India had the right to earn the major share from the sale of ICC’s commercial rights for the 2015-23 cycle. He worked out the calculations and threatened if there was any opposition, India would go solo. As always Raman’s assertive ways were successful.

All West Indies and New Zealand had to do in their respective matches was simply turn up and wait for their opponents to shoot themselves

Andy Zaltzman21-Feb-2015Two more clobberings in this World Cup of one-sided walkovers, two more teams teetering on the brink of melting down. It is hard to think of anything more Pakistan and England could have done wrong thus far, without taking the field wearing scuba gear and flippers, or batting with cucumbers, or jumping onto the umpire’s back and shouting, “Giddy up, horsey”.There are unconfirmed rumours that the ICC is considering ejecting both sides from the tournament over suspicions they have been ambush marketing for a duck-farming company. Even their mild fight-backs at the end of their opening games only served to make their total subsidence in the second matches all the more galling.Each applied their final coup de disgrace in New Zealand with admissions of total defeat. In Wellington on Friday, Stuart Broad, thoroughly demolished with the bat in a dreadful innings of scrambled feet and beaten mind, a swing-and-hope shadow of the outstanding innings-building lower-order batsman he was in his early years, ended England’s brief but intense suffering in the field with the involuntary bolt gun of five wides ballooned over the batsman’s head.England losing at a sport it invented to a nation formerly under its colonial rule is nothing new. But in Wellington, they lost with so much time to spare that they could have invented a new sport, taught that to the New Zealanders, and lost to them at that as well.At Hagley Oval on Saturday, in front of a sizable crowd of slightly bemused neutrals who had been told by reliable sources that two international teams would be playing against each other, Shahid Afridi, Pakistan’s final theoretical hope of victory and actual hope of avoiding utter humiliation, was the penultimate wicket to fall.The ageing talisman plopped a useless full-toss from Suleiman Benn unerringly and remarkably slowly to mid-wicket with a thwonk of remarkable mistiming. This followed two dropped catches, and a second consecutive wicket-less bowling performance, which, though tidy enough, lacked the devil and belief of his considerable best.The final surrender followed minutes later as Sohail Khan white-flagged a catch straight up in the air, and the two teams which contested the final when the World Cup was last held in this part of the planet, were both left win-less, pointless and hopeless after two games of almost unceasing failure.The excellence of their opposition was more instrumental in England’s defeat than in Pakistan’s. Tim Southee’s seven wickets, all with pitched-up, stump-threatening or stump-clonking swingers, should be compulsory viewing in all schools around the world. England played with the dancing footwork of a lead watermelon and the confidence of that same lead watermelon in a Lightest Fruit competition, but Southee struck perfection.McCullum was almost sadistically superb, under no pressure from either the match situation or England’s bowling. New Zealand have thus far paraded their combination of collective strength and individual game-shaping brilliance. By the end, it was not even clear whether the two teams were playing the same sport.Pakistan won in 1992 playing like “cornered tigers”. They fielded like cornered tigers in Christchurch. In that they appeared not to have hands.Both teams will now have to take a long, hard, icy bath with themselves as they contemplate how to escape from the deep, constricting bogs of confidence in which they currently lurk. Fortunately for them, the format of the tournament is relatively merciful – few equivalent competitions offer realistic prospects of advancement to teams who have been thrashed in their opening two matches.

***

Oops, I did it again: Pakistan’s fielding in Christchurch did resemble cornered tigers. They appeared not to have hands•Getty ImagesWest Indies showed how fortunes can swing in a short interlude – Fifteen overs either side of the innings break uplifted them from a ragged struggle and the possibility of a second defeat, to the near certainty of victory and a surging confidence. For much of their innings in Christchurch, it had been a classic battle of the resistible force against a movable object. The reckless imprecision of West Indies’ batting was matched blooper for blooper by the almost spiritually incompetent Pakistan fielding.Marlon Samuels encapsulated his career in two balls – the most perfect straight drive imaginable, struck on the up with majestic poise, followed by a leaden-footed one-handed flap outside off stump for no discernible purpose. He soon departed for a 38 that was simultaneously lucky, insufficient, important and careless.In the end, Misbah’s men proved the more easily shifted, and, amid decreasingly competent bowling, were hammered out of the game by West Indies’ potent allrounders. This Pakistan is not well structured to chase 250. Chasing 311 was a task akin to asking a dolphin to climb a tree – unlikely, and only achievable in extraordinary circumstances.No team is well structured to chase 311 from a starting point of 1 for 4. Between England’s middle and lower order, and Pakistan’s top order, 11 wickets were lost for 20 runs in 64 balls. On the plus side, Chris Woakes bowled a maiden, and Ahmed Shehzad’s groin did a decent bit of fielding, but there is little else to build on.Both teams may well still make the quarter-finals, but all their remaining opponents will scent their publicly-displayed vulnerabilities. If there is a repeat of the 1992 final, when Imran Khan’s mercurial but intermittently brilliant Pakistan beat Graham Gooch’s excellent England, then the world will have been given an unmistakable sign that the apocalypse is upon us.

• An impressive Hagley Oval crowd of almost 15,000 might not have seen a particularly good game either side of that vigorous late slugging by the West Indian middle order and a scything opening spell by Jerome Taylor, but they did at least witness incontrovertible statistical history with which to regale their friends, loved ones, future grandchildren, personal fitness trainers, accountants and/or priests. Pointless, but incontrovertible. For this was also the first ODI in the history of the universe (or, at least, the known universe) in which both No.6 batsmen have been out for exactly 50. And it was the first ODI in which a team’s No.3 to No.8 all scored at least 30, as West Indies’ did.
• More relevantly, Pakistan became the first team in ODI history to lose their first four wickets for fewer than four runs – their record-smashingly-useless score of 1 for 4 could prove hard to beat in the annals of ODI incompetence. The previous low-water-mark of top-order unproductivity was Canada’s 4 for 4 against Zimbabwe at Port-of-Spain, a collapse aided by both openers being run out in the first three overs. Unsurpisingly, the one run ‘amassed’ by Jamshed, Shehzad, Younis and Haris also set a record for the fewest runs collectively scored by a top four in an ODI.
• The Wellington game was only the fifth time that all four openers had been out bowled in an ODI. The only previous instance in a World Cup also involved New Zealand, in their rain-reduced win over Zimbabwe in Napier. Martin Crowe scored 74 off 43 balls in that game. At the time, in the fifth World Cup played, it was, at a strike-rate of 172, the second fastest 50-plus score by a New Zealander in ODIs, and the second-fastest World Cup innings of at least 50. It is now, respectively, 19th and 18th on those lists, testament both to the accelerated pace of batting, and how brilliant Crowe’s innings must have been in its time. McCullum shot to the top of both lists on Friday – overtaking his own records in both cases.

The creation of the BBL was an investment by Cricket Australia, an investment to expand cricket’s audiences with a view to one day making a profit. It was also in this sense, a risk

Freddie Wilde30-Jan-2015″The future cannot be predicted,” wrote the inventor of holography, Dennis Gabor, in 1963, “but futures can be invented.” Gabor’s words would no doubt resonate with Cricket Australia. When the Australian board invented the Big Bash League in the summer or 2010-11, they invented the future of cricket in Australia.It is apposite of the age that the origins of the future of Australian cricket lie in the meeting of 180 stakeholders who convened in August 2010 at the inaugural Australian Cricket Conference. The summit, held over five days in Aitken Hill Conference Centre in Melbourne, saw extensive market research presented to those in attendance and has since been referred to by those at CA as a “wake-up call.”The research found that cricket’s popularity amongst teenage demographics was plummeting. BBL general manager, Anthony Everard recalls that “cricket faced losing a generation of fans unless something was done,” and it was within the T20 format that CA felt the answer lay. “It’s become pretty clear to us,” said CA’s operations manager Mike McKenna at the time, “that T20 is the vehicle by which we were going to get females and kids interested in the game … it’s the product they prefer and it’s the one that’s going to get us into a new space.” Not only were there concerns surrounding the game’s popularity amongst young people, but also more generally with a 24% decrease in television audiences over the preceding decade and a huge over-reliance on broadcasting revenue from the sub-continent and particularly India.In 2010 Australian cricket already had its own domestic T20 tournament, the KFC Big Bash, which was played by the six existing state teams. The Big Bash produced a high standard of cricket and was typically competitive but it had broken down very few barriers into new demographics of fans. To compound problems, as Graham Dixon, then Queensland’s chief executive, recalled, “despite a lot of people going to the Big Bash in 2009-10, the bottom-line is that it still ran at a loss for the state associations.” Australia’s domestic T20 tournament wasn’t growing the sport and it was losing the sport money at a time when it needed to do the opposite.”It’s pretty obvious to us that people aren’t as passionate about state cricket, and state competitions generally as they are about club competitions,” said McKenna in 2010. This was a seminal realisation, one perhaps informed by the AFL backgrounds of CA’s most influential men, CEO James Sutherland (former finance manager at Carlton Football Club) and McKenna (former general manager of Essendon Football Club), but a seminal one all the same. The six state associations represented over 100 years of history and were part of the fabric of the sport in the country, but they were institutions seen to be out of touch with modern inclinations and were anti-brands as much as they were brands.”In order to to be able to provide a product to appeal to different audience than we currently have, we need to have something different,” said McKenna. “Having different teams, new brands, the ability to basically start again and target a different audience, is really important.””To reach kids,” McKenna said, “we need cricket that doesn’t look the the cricket they know.”There is little doubt that CA were heavily influenced by the success of the Indian Premier League. Indeed, McKenna acknowledges that the IPL was “one of the references for planning the BBL,” while Sutherland admitted that there was “a lot to be learnt from the IPL.” However, CA were in one regard ahead of the BCCI and the IPL. As early as 2005, prior to the IPL even existing as a concept, CA struck up talks with New Zealand Cricket and Cricket South Africa about forming a “Southern Premier League,” involving teams from all three nations based loosely on Super Rugby. These plans even progressed far enough for the sports management company IMG, who were later heavily involved in the IPL, to have a temporary desk set up at Cricket Australia’s offices in Jolimont. The idea for the SPL was widely reported as news in 2008 following the enormous success of the IPL, but in the end, the concept was put on hold “indefinitely.”One aspect of the IPL that did find its way into the origins of the BBL was that of private ownership of teams. In October 2010 it was planned that 33% stakes in the new BBL teams would be sold, and following a report by the research firm LEK that predicted teams could command private investment of between A$25 million and $40 million, by March 2011 CA planned to sell 49% stakes. Queensland Cricket reportedly received requests from overseas investors in the United States, China and India before the Brisbane team even had a name. This was all happening during the boom years of T20. Lalit Modi had been and gone at the IPL, but despite his scandalous exit the league surged on and two new teams, Kochi Tuskers Kerela and Pune Warriors India had just been sold for nine-figure sums. The Kochi franchise was worth more on paper than many established European football clubs.Yet despite the stimulating climate and luridly tempting projections, Cricket Australia recognised the fragility of private ownership and Everard recalls that it was “decided that given the strategic importance of the BBL to acquire new fans it was best that the managements and governance of clubs remained under the domain of state cricket associations, who had the broader responsibility for all other elements of the game (game development, community/club cricket etc).” It’s also highly likely that third-party interest levels were not as high as had been imagined.In February 2011 CA announced that the inaugural BBL would run from December 2011 to January 2012. By April 2011, eight new teams, superficially if not foundationally detached from the state associations were unveiled. There was a team for the capital city of four of Australia’s six states and two per state in New South Wales (Sydney) and Victoria (Melbourne). The teams were centrally assigned home grounds, kit colours and nicknames, purposefully unfamiliar to the existing ideals embodied by the state system.As appears to increasingly be the case in the ever-more opaque world of cricket administration there were those unknown to those on the outside pulling the strings and controlling the message of Australia’s new league from the very beginning. In the IPL it was IMG, and for the BBL, it was Chicago-based sports marketing company PCG. Having recognised the restrictive connotations of the state system CA therefore realised the importance of the BBL’s image being distanced and isolated from such vestiges and outsourced the job to an expert third-party. PCG had worked with the NBA, NFL and MLB.Their man on the ground in Australia was Dan Migala, a US sports marketing expert who has had a desk in CA’s offices since day one of the project. Migala recalls how he was asked to question “every detail about [cricket’s] sporting code and literally write the marketing, brand and fan-engagement vision from scratch.” PCG, Migala said, were involved in the very earliest meetings surrounding the formation of the BBL and “had a direct role in planning the marketing vision; including team colours and names.” It’s interesting to consider that in an age in which popular culture is increasingly Americanised the BBL, in Migala’s words, drew on lessons from “North American sporting codes.”Sutherland was keen to create a window free of international cricket in the Australian season to give the BBL the star quality that was seen as so integral to the success of the IPL. However, he soon accepted that the rigours of the international schedule made a window impossible. The BBL was going to rely on domestic talent and foreign imports.The progress towards the BBL was not without opposition, however. In detaching T20 contracts from the existing all-encompassing state contracts, the financial rewards on offer for non-T20 players was diluted. Furthermore, the new BBL would be at least ten matches longer than the old Big Bash, eating into more of the existing domestic calendar denying fringe Australia players opportunities against the red ball during the summer’s Test series. In a time when Australia’s national side, particularly their Test team were struggling there were those who saw CA’s priorities as betraying the national team for financial gain. CA would’ve argued that the performances of the Test team are of little relevance if in 15 years’ time there were half the number of players to choose from.In the absence of private ownership the eight teams were to be centrally funded by CA. “Seed funding,” Everard explained, was tagged to specific purposes “such as marketing, event presentation etc” while clubs were also granted “foundation funding” to “assist them in their formative years and take the pressure off them living hand to mouth, enabling them to focus on the key objective of acquiring new fans.” CA planned that the level of central funding would decrease over time as the teams became more self-sufficient.Prior to the first BBL season, the broadcasting rights for the original Big Bash still had two seasons to run with the pay-per-view channel Fox Sports. Having signed that deal way back in 2005 the price of the rights were well below the market value by 2011.Without private ownership of teams and without a recent or sizeable broadcasting deal CA were investing big money, big dreams and big goals in a league that existed only on paper and had at least two years to run until sizeable revenue could be generated from a new broadcasting deal. Queensland’s CEO was candid in his admission that “the game simply cannot afford another elite competition that is a drain on income.” CA were looking to solve a problem evident in its existence with a solution conspicuous in its infancy.The creation of the BBL was an investment by Cricket Australia. It was an investment to expand cricket’s audiences with a view to one day making a profit. It was also in this sense, a risk. The BBL would shift the target audience of cricket and redesign the sport’s popular image. Detached and separate from existing conceptions of cricket, CA had created the BBL with the hope that it would bring a new generation of fans to the sport. If it failed CA would be poorer, potentially have a smaller audience than before and have the wreckage of 100 years of state cricket on its hands.As the first season approached McKenna boldly proclaimed that “virtually the entire cricket industry is behind us because we can all see it is going to work.” It was going to have to; CA were rewriting cricket’s history to invent its future.

On Saturday Pakistan face South Africa in Auckland knowing that they have solved none of their long-standing issues – particularly a fragility within their top order – and that they will benefit from none of the good fortune they received here

George Dobell in Napier04-Mar-2015Just as a hungry man is unlikely to decline a cold samosa, no Pakistan win can be taken for granted these days. So Pakistan should welcome this victory. They should welcome that they are lifted back into the top four in the Group B table. They should welcome the runs scored by Ahmed Shehzad, the continued potency of their bowling attack and the fact that they passed 300 for only the second time in 18 ODIs.But, with respect to UAE, this match was like preparing to wrestle a lion by petting a mouse. On Saturday Pakistan face South Africa in Auckland knowing that they have solved none of their long-standing issues – particularly a fragility within their top order – and that they will benefit from none of the good fortune they received here.It is, for example, unthinkable that Shehzad will be dropped twice by South Africa before he reaches 12. It is unthinkable that South Africa will allow the Pakistan middle order to settle in against gentle bowling and it is unthinkable that the Pakistan fielding -they are, by some distance, the worst fielding unit among the Full Member nations – will not be run ragged by a South Africa line-up that has scored 400 in the last two ODIs.Certainly nobody should be sucked into thinking that this result might spark a great revival. Even coach Waqar Younis admitted afterwards that Pakistan “still need a win against a bigger opponent” to gain confidence.Waqar asserts for cricket in Pakistan

Waqar Younis has pleaded on the global cricket community to renew tours to Pakistan as he seeks to improve the fortunes of his struggling team.
While the Pakistan coach saw his side defeat UAE in Napier on Wednesday, it was not an entirely convincing performance and did nothing to arrest the suspicion that Pakistan cricket is in decline.
Pakistan has not hosted international cricket since 2009 due to security concerns and Waqar is worried that the popularity of the sport in the country and the development of future players could be jeopardised.
“Pakistan needs teams to come to Pakistan,” Waqar said. “That’s where I think the ICC or the world of cricket can help us. We need to restart cricket in Pakistan.
“It has been a big, huge loss for us. Of course you can see the symptoms. And that is the help I think I can ask the cricketing world.”

“The South Africa game is crucial,” he said. “Not so much for qualifying, but also for a morale booster. We need to beat a top team to get our confidence back.”We are definitely capable. It is not so long since we beat South Africa in South Africa and we have beaten Australia, too. You might not see it at the moment, but we are capable.”Other teams have picked up. You can see India picking up and South Africa lost badly and then picked up. So that’s what we’re hoping. We’re hoping the boys that got runs today will carry on.”I still feel Pakistan need an extra batsman in the line-up,” Waqar admitted. “But our batsmen are out of form. But we still need seven batsmen.”The most pressing form issue concerns Nasir Jamshed. The Pakistan opener has now scored five runs in his last four ODI innings and might well be the worst fielder in the entire tournament. He makes Inzamam-ul-Haq appear like a leopard. The decision to persevere with Jamshed here had some logic. By giving him this opportunity to bat against a relatively weak bowling attack on a good batting surface, Pakistan were providing him with every opportunity to rediscover his form.But it was logic that only worked if he took the opportunity. By the same logic, Pakistan could have recalled Sarfraz Ahmed – which would also have improved the wicketkeeping, Umar Akmal keeps like a man who is allergic to cricket balls – and given him an opportunity to find form against a relatively weak attack. It is asking a great deal of him to come into the side – particularly as an opener – and find form against South Africa. All of which could lead to a conclusion that they are better to stick with Jamshed for the next game.There is disagreement here, too, between the selectors. While Moin Khan said before the tournament that Sarfraz could be utilised as an opening batsman – he performed the role admirably against Australia in October, averaging 43.66 in three ODIs – Waqar suggested after the win against UAE that “Sarfraz’s career would be at risk if he opens.”If there is one thing that can possibly be agreed upon in Pakistan cricket, it is that nobody agrees with anyone. And some would disagree with that.Pakistan also ended the match with a concern over the fitness of Mohammad Irfan. While Waqar said the fitness of his tall fast bowler – one of the most frugal seamers in the tournament – was “not a major concern,” Irfan spent much of this match icing his sore buttocks. Three matches in seven days in different cities is not easy for a man not built to fit on to planes or in hotel beds.While Irfan is the one man who might compete with Jamshed for the title of “worst fielder in the World Cup” – he looks like Jaws from the Bond film when he bowls and Jaws from the fish films when he fields – his loss would be significant. The sight of Sohail Khan, the other opening bowler, being thrashed for 20 in five deliveries by a baggage handler who bats at No. 8 for an Associate side – fine talent though Amjad Javed clearly is – underlined Irfan’s worth.Comparisons between this Pakistan side and the team of 1992 – prompted by two wins on the trot – are, at best wishful thinking and at worst simply delusional. While the team of ’92 contained at least five players who might reasonably be described as “great” – and six more who were very good – the team of ’15 contains perhaps two players who may be remembered as “great,” several others who are good and a couple that Pakistan supporters will be trying to forget for years.