New Zealand’s performances against South Africa suggest they are back to the starting blocks in Test cricket

Firdose Moonda in Port Elizabeth14-Jan-2013The development of a butterfly has four stages. It starts as an egg, grows into a caterpillar, enters a metamorphosing pupa phase and, finally, becomes a grown adult. If Brendon McCullum’s theory is to be believed, New Zealand are still eggs.”This team and its life cycle is different to the South African team,” he said, before glumly admitting that he could not think of a time when they had been fully formed. “It would have been a fair few years ago, I guess. There have been constant changes, be it for injuries or other reasons. This team is pretty young, as a group we haven’t been exposed to such hostile cricket before.”To ask McCullum to remember the home triumphs over India and West Indies in 2002, or the win over Australia in Hobart last summer, or the recent win over Sri Lanka in Colombo, may be inappropriate in the aftermath of two crushing defeats. But his inability to recall a time when New Zealand had a solid grip over Test cricket seems to point to a harsher reality about their status.McCullum is correct in his explanation of his team now because they exit this series as a unit searching for a beginning. With a batting line-up unable to hold their own, and bowlers who are constantly under strain because of that, the wide lens would say New Zealand have to start from scratch. The zoom will reveal more specific points for restructure.The opening partnership has already been discussed, and in defeat McCullum conceded that is in area that will be reviewed. “We have to confront the new ball with some steel and some resolve,” he said. But it is not the only area that could face overhaul.New Zealand do not have a top six any bowling attack in the world would be nervous of. Occasionally, as BJ Watling and Dean Brownlie showed, they are able to put together a partnership or two. But those stands do not threaten; they merely irritate.Once they are broken, the roadblock clears itself en masse, as Graeme Smith explained: “They were able to put small partnerships together but once we had broken through, we were able to run through them.” New Zealand did not have a single century stand in the series, with their highest being 98 between Brownlie and Watling in this match. They had three half-century partnerships across the two matches.Popular opinion is that the return of Ross Taylor will go a long way to changing that. Taylor is regarded among New Zealand’s best batsmen and even if he does not come back to lead them (which seems to be the case), his contributions to the run chart will be needed. Taylor is due to play first-class cricket in the lead-up to the England series, which has been earmarked as his comeback.McCullum is looking forward to it but spoke about it in the same way the England camp described Kevin Pietersen’s return. “Reintegration must be smooth. I am sure he wants to come back and do well for New Zealand,” he said. His choice of the R-word was interesting because, unlike Pietersen, Taylor was not the main protagonist in his own demise.

“We trained hard but the ability to transfer that on to game day is what we need to work on. We’ve also got a pretty good blueprint of how the best team in the world goes about their business”Brendon McCullum

Poor communication and the coach, Mike Hesson’s lack of faith in his ability to captain led to him being left out, not shenanigans like text messages and being a cause of dressing-room disharmony. Many of New Zealand’s players support Taylor – Martin Guptill, whose Twitter profile picture is of the two of them together, most obviously. Even Hesson, who has had differences with Taylor, admits that the team would be stronger with him in it.If Taylor’s return is a given, New Zealand’s line-up will have a more solid look to it. McCullum will ponder moving down the order and there may be a move to bring Luke Ronchi in to keep wicket so BJ Watling can be promoted up the line-up. A certain amount of toying with combinations will be needed to get the best six in order, but it does not seem an impossible ask.The bowling department is a simple puzzle for New Zealand to solve. Tim Southee will return to fitness soon, giving them back the leader of the attack, and Trent Boult was impressive in South Africa. Their veteran seamer Chris Martin said he believes Southee, Boult and Bracewell will form the pack that will take New Zealand into the future. If they all click, they could form a formidable trio.Questions will still be asked of the spinner. Jeetan Patel may end up fighting Bruce Martin for a place. Todd Astle is also in the mix as is Tarun Nethula, but given New Zealand’s other talking points, this one may fall slightly under the radar.The tactics will definitely change but McCullum is warning against sweeping personnel changes because it will affect team culture. “There needs to be a little bit of change, but at the same time have to protect the core of the group,” he said. “Players have come over here and learnt from the best. We are trying to find the right balance.”In experimentation, New Zealand have ended up falling to some of their heftiest defeats, but McCullum said there were things they could take out of the South Africa trip, like commitment to the cause. “I can’t fault the preparation. It’s hard to replicate facing guys like Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel in the nets but I can’t fault the efforts. We trained hard but the ability to transfer that on to game day is what we need to work on. We’ve also got a pretty good blueprint of how the best team in the world goes about their business.”Something McCullum will want to take note of is that the current No. 1 side also started as eggs. They spent years in the interim phases, building for what they have achieved now. Some of that time was spent in frustration, some of it was in losing, but through consistency, South Africa learnt to turn that around. From being defeated, they turned into being defensive and eventually were able to transform that to winning. That is the kind of cycle New Zealand will want to replicate.

Andy Zaltzman admits Mohammad Aamer is a better bowler than he was at his age, and turns his stern eye to all matters statistical concerning debutants

Andy Zaltzman25-Feb-2013

Ricky Ponting and Mohammad Aamer attempt to break into a Scottish dance routine
© AFP
After a painstaking 98-year reassessment study following the botched triangular series experiment of 1912, neutral Test match cricket returned to England yesterday. It was, according to those who were lucky enough to see both Syd Gregory’s Australia play South Africa almost a century ago, and their modern-day baggy-green descendants take on Pakistan, much improved from its previous incarnation.It was a compelling opening to the series, with everything you could want from a Test match – some good batting, some bad batting, some outstanding swing bowling, a bit of decent legspin, a bit of less decent legspin, a couple of influential umpiring bloopers, a couple of rampantly irritating bouts of going off for bad light, and perhaps the most minor piece of argy bargy in the history of all sport, as Ricky Ponting and Mohammad Aamer lightly brushed elbows.To the untrained eye, this could easily have signified the beginning of an outbreak of Scottish dancing, but fortunately the umpires were on hand to ensure a full-blown ceilidh did not break out – there is simply no place for it in Test match cricket. Ponting, an inveterate dancer, was understandably irritated, and left the field visibly chuntering his displeasure to the umpire that his trademark Strip The Willow had been cut off in its prime.Aamer’s opening spell was prodigious. He could have had all of the top three Australian batsmen out lbw, but ended up with none. Katich should have been given out, Ponting could have been given out, and Watson was being given out but escaped because he had the good sense to deflect the ball into his stumps and be out bowled instead (thus depriving Umpire Gould, the first English umpire to stand in a Lord’s Test since umpires were deemed to have become so universally and flagrantly patriotic as to be utterly untrustworthy, of his moment of finger-raising glory).Katich escaped for no discernible reason – Gould claimed to have heard and/or seen an inside edge, in which case Katich’s bat must have invisible wings stretching a good eight inches beyond the visible wood. The only other conceivable explanation why the umpire did not despatch the self-proclaimed Elvis Presley Of Stepping Across To Cover Off Stump And Deflecting The Ball Into The Leg Side, after his extremely Australian leg interrupted a delivery that was heading towards the middle of the middle of the middle bit of middle stump, was that Gould had been playing with a ouija board before the start of play, and had been told that the ghost of Gubby Allen would pop out from under the Lord’s turf and headbutt the ball away before it hit the wicket. Thus the benefit of the doubt was given to the batsman.I can, without jealousy or hyperbole, state definitively that Aamer is a better bowler than I was at his age (notwithstanding my then career-best spell of 2 for 35 off four overs of occasionally reachable legspin). His mesmeric opening spell was later supported by a hypnotic burst of platinum-quality trundle by Asif, a masterfully skilful and crafty onslaught of 80mph dobblers that broke both ends of the Katich-Clarke partnership, almost dismissed North three times in three balls, and thus exposed Australia’s untested middle order.Paine and Smith, in their first Tests, were doomed to failure – not by the excellent bowling nor the helpful conditions nor the pressure of their own expectations, but by the sheer weight of statistical history. This was the first time Australia had picked debutants at both 7 and 8 since their first Test against Sri Lanka in 1982-83, when Roger Woolley and Tom Hogan proudly donned their baggy greens for the first time, and then collectively failed to trouble the scorers. Largely, in fairness, because Australia declared on 514 for 4. This however, merely spared them from inevitable actual failure.Fourteen times since their first Test in 1876-77, Australia have sent out a brand new 7 and a previously unseen 8 in the same Test, and between them, in their debut innings, they have now scored a not especially grand total of 318 runs in 26 innings at a piddling average of 13.25. The top score of these was Clarence “Nip” Pellew’s immortal, unforgettable, era-defining 36 in the first post-Great-War Ashes Test of 1920-21. (Feel free to use this fact in your next attempted seduction. I cannot guarantee it will lead to success, but it will certainly elicit a reaction of some kind.)Australia’s coaching staff has clearly not been checking their statistics. If they had, they would surely have split the two debutants, sandwiching them around a more experienced player to divert the unstoppable hand of cricketing inevitability from slapping them both back to the pavilion.Assuming they bat according to the listed scorecard, Pakistan will also launch two players into their debut Tests back to back in the batting order. Umar Amin and Azhar Ali are listed to bat 3 and 4, making this already historic match even more historic – it is the first time Pakistan have had their numbers 3 and 4 making their debuts together since the entire Pakistan team made their Pakistan debuts in Pakistan’s debut Test against India, in Delhi in 1952-53. So this is the first time they have chosen to play a Test with an uncapped 3 and 4.In that game in 1952-53, Israr Ali and Imtiaz Ahmed scored 1 and 0 respectively in the first innings, so Umar and Azhar will be desperately hoping to set a new national record for most productive joint debuts by a 3 and 4.It is a risky, and almost unique, selection. They may develop into one of the all-time great 3-4 combinations, but, currently, their joint total of 0 career Test runs and 0 lifetime Test centuries, cannot match up to Younis Khan and Mohammad Yousuf’s Test total 12,600 runs and 40 centuries. But the unusualness of Pakistan’s selection is revealed by the fact that this will be only the 27th time in the entire history of the human race that a Test team has had debutants at 3 and 4. Here is proof, courtesy of the all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful Statsguru.Bear in mind that, of the previous 26 such occasions:Ten were in a team’s first ever Test match, when debuts are largely unavoidable; seven more were whilst Queen Victoria was still alive;
one was in 1907, the year Picasso painted , and ace Russian science whizz Ivan Pavlov was messing around teasing dogs with bells, so the world was understandably a little confused; four more occurred whilst Hitler was still largely viewed by the world as a jaunty curiosity; and two only happened due to the use of a night-watchman.That leaves only two other Tests since the Second World War in which numbers 3 and 4 have debuted together. The first was when England sent a shadow team to India in 1951-52, and the second when Sri Lanka, in just their sixth Test match, against New Zealand in 1982-83, decided to start all over again and throw seven debutants into the Test arena at once.(Incidentally, a brand new opening partnership is almost as rare – 28 occurrences, the most recent being last year, when a commercial dispute led to West Indies having to ask if anyone in the crowd fancied a game against Bangladesh.)This shows how reluctant teams have traditionally been to throw two completely unproven players into the top order together. But in mitigation, not many Test countries have been piecing a team together after speculatively banning then unbanning a large wodge of key players, and not many Test teams have had Shahid Afridi as captain. It sounds crazy, but it might just work. Unless the ball keeps swinging, in which case, it probably won’t. It all adds to the ceaseless fascination that is Pakistan cricket, and it is a delight to see them play just their tenth Test on these shores in the last 18 years.

Or why Hamish Rutherford has blown his chance at immortality: a piercing statistical analysis

Andy Zaltzman12-Mar-2013England made their now traditional and always captivating useless start to an away series, followed by a characteristic dogged second-innings rearguard on a pitch that could have been scientifically created by The International Society for the Proliferation of Dogged Second-Innings Rearguards. For the second Test in a row, England played out an ultimately tedious draw on a travesty of a cricket pitch. Dunedin was not in the class of Nagpur in terms of inflicting misery on (a) spectators, (b) bowlers, and (c) cricket, but it was dismal nonetheless.It took a first innings of relentless, almost heroic, incompetence by England to make a game of it. With hindsight, it was a gesture that now looks like a selflessly public-spirited attempt to breathe some life into a match that could otherwise have been about as interesting as writing a 30,000 word dissertation on how to spell the word “dreary”, particularly after a first-day sog-out. England’s batsmen, aware that they are custodians of the game first and international sportsmen second, generously hurled their wickets away for the good of Test cricket. Their dismissals should be discounted from their career averages.Another Mogadon-infused surface should not detract from the quality of Hamish Rutherford’s spectacular debut innings, a performance that mixed flair, judgement, and an ominous range of strokes into a potent cocktail that England found utterly undrinkable.Not since day two of the History of Test Cricket has an England team looked up at a scoreboard to see a batsman in his first Test innings with 165 or more runs to his name. In that inaugural Test, in 1877, Charles Bannerman, the first of many Australian batsmen to inflict pain on England, scored 165 before retiring hurt. Few in the commentary box or TV studios at the time would have predicted that the “Highest Debut Innings Against England” graphic they whizzed up that day would last for 136 years.Rutherford departed the stage with an impressive haul of Test debut silver medals – the second-highest score by a New Zealander, the second-highest by a left-hander, and the second-highest by an opener (behind, respectively: Mathew Sinclair [214 v West Indies, 1999-2000]; Jacques Rudolph [222* v Bangladesh, 2002-03]; and Brendon Kuruppu [201* v New Zealand, 1986-87]). His 171 was, in fact, the second-highest by a debutant against England – George Headley hit 176 in the second innings of his first Test, in 1929-30.Eagle-eyed cricketologists will notice that, with one exception, this is not exactly a list of legendary all-time batting megastars. Headley would go on to prove himself one of the greatest batsmen ever to lay hands on a plank of willow, but even a man with a tattoo of Sinclair, Rudolph and Kuruppu riding in a motorcycle pyramid emblazoned all across his back would admit that those three have not established themselves in quite such elite company. Headley scored a further nine hundreds (all of them in his next 16 Tests). Sinclair scored two more tons in 32 matches, Rudolph five in 47, and Kuruppu did not even pass 50 in the three subsequent Tests in which the Sri Lankan selectors generously invited him to participate.In fact, from a career point of view, Rutherford would have been well advised to smash his stumps to pieces on 163. Javed Miandad scored 163 on his debut. He proved to be a tidy batsman – 22 more hundreds and a Test average of 52. But of the other 11 players who have scored more than that on debut, seven have never scored another hundred after their first match. And four of those seven never again even waggled their bat in celebration of a half-century.Of the seven, Bannerman, RE Foster (whose 287 has been the highest debut innings for 109 years now) and Archie Jackson are looking long shots to add a second hundred to their tallies, having been regrettably dead for a combined total of 261 years. Billy Ibadulla, aged 77, looks too old even for the craziest of Pakistan selection panels to recall him after 45 years out of the Test game. Probably. The 51-year-old Kuruppu might harbour secret ambitions to become the oldest Test player in history, but Sri Lanka appear to be trusting in youth now, whilst Pakistan’s Yasir Hameed – who scored centuries in both innings of his 2003 debut against Bangladesh – has gone 24 Tests and almost ten years without troubling the honours-board engravers again. Even if the tattooed man had added some Yasir Hameed ink to his shoulder blade, he would concede that the Pakistani resides in the Has Had Enough Chances folder of the selectorial filing cabinet.

You may have carved your name into the record books against a bowling attack of proven class. But you will also need the strength of body to vanquish Statisticor, the Implacable Deity Of Cricketing Destiny

The only one of the seven with a realistic hope of adding to a mighty debut megaton is Fawad Alam, who scored 168 in the second innings of his 2009 debut Test, a match in which only one other Pakistan player passed 40. A little mystifyingly, even by Pakistan’s heroically mystifying standards, Alam played in his country’s next two Tests, and has not been selected since.Only two of the highest-innings-blasting debutants have ever improved on their highest career score after their initial plunge into the Test jacuzzi – Headley, and his fellow West Indian Lawrence Rowe. Rowe scored 214 and 100 not out in one of cricket’s more striking entrances, went on to stroke a triple-hundred against England, part of a sequence in his first 13 Tests in which he averaged 70 and scored six centuries. However, then he realised that the career trajectory of spectacular debutants is supposed to mirror that of a seagull after a disappointing rendezvous with an aircraft engine, and averaged 27 in his final 17 Tests, with only one more century.The top 11 pre-Rutherford debut centurions have gone on to average 33.8 in the remainder of their Test careers combined, scoring a hundred every 14.7 innings. Remove the genius Headley, the exception who has proved the rule (and who, in his pre-war peak, averaged 66, whilst the rest of the West Indian top six collectively averaged 24), and the remaining ten players have averaged 30.4 after their stellar debuts, with a hundred every 22.6 innings. By comparison, all top five batsmen not on debut have collectively averaged 38.1. So scoring over 164 on debut is a surefire, guaranteed, immutable means of ensuring you proceed to have a disappointingly below-average Test career. Unless you are George Headley. Or Lawrence Rowe, for a bit.So beware, Hamish Rutherford. You may look as if you have the technique, temperament, skill, class and strokeplay to flourish in Test cricket for the foreseeable future. You may have carved your name into the record books against a bowling attack of proven class. But you will also need the strength of body to vanquish Statisticor, the Implacable Deity Of Cricketing Destiny. Or the strength of mind not to believe in Statisticor. Whose powers are, at best, erratic. Your choice.● On current form there are not too many Australian batsmen queuing up to follow in Bannerman’s footsteps and inflict 21st-century pain on England. Some of them might be waylaid queuing up in a stationer’s shop for a new homework book instead. I have not followed this extraordinary story closely, but Australia’s strategy in India seems to have been: (a) to ensure they do not peak too early in this Ashes hyperyear; and (b) inculcate a feeling a smug over-confidence in the English cricketing media and public (which was not entirely necessary, and akin to painting a banana yellow). Both prongs of that masterplan are running eerily smoothly.After a useless all-round performance in Hyderabad, coach Mickey Arthur had apparently asked his squad to write down three suggestions for how the Baggy Greens could recover from their 2-0 deficit. Four of the players missed the deadline. In mitigation, after the first two Tests, they could have claimed that they were still wrestling with the Herculean task of trying to narrow it down to just three suggestions. (I told you Prong B was working.)Do not be taken in by these cunning Australian ruses. I am an English cricket fan who has followed the game since the 1980s. I fear the Australians, even where they are bearing gifts. Even when those gifts are as entertaining as dropping four players over a paperwork issue.

The TV cameras focused on him a few times, his fan report made it to ESPNcricinfo, and his team won. Franklin Joseph is a lucky man

Franklin Joseph20-May-2013Choice of game
Having watched in disbelief as RCB surprised CSK on Saturday, I realised I was right in picking up tickets for this match. Now the Sunrisers needed to win to get through and I had to be there to take them through.Team supported
I have always backed the Hyderabad franchise. Last year, the Deccan Chargers knocked Bangalore out of the tournament in the final league game, but the victory was only half sweet since Deccan finished in the bottom half. But this time there was a lot more riding in the result for the Sunrisers. I was in the same Sunrisers jersey I wore to the victory against Rajasthan, and the good-luck charm worked wonders again.Expectations sky-high
We could sense the intensity in the air. Normally, when Hyderabad plays the popular teams the support would be 50-50. But today, the stands were a sea of orange. The tension was evident when the crowd watched in silence as the Kolkata openers got through the Powerplay without much trouble. There was applause whenever Dale Steyn ripped in his short balls or when Anand Rajan kept it tight. The crowd was cheering, but cautiously. Things changed gradually, though, and as the match proceeded, the carnival set in.Key performers
The Sunrisers openers Parthiv Patel and Shikhar Dhawan. Having watched KKR make only 130 I feared the SRH openers would struggle. But they took off instantly and grabbed the match out of KKR’s grip with a fluent 89-run stand.One thing I’d have changed about the match
The sudden twist in the climax made it too nervy – especially the maiden over from Sunil Narine. I’d have preferred to have a smoother finish. But then, to make it up, Darren Sammy’s sixes made it a grandstand finish instead of a heart-stopping one.Face-off I relished
After Steyn delivered sweet chin music to Yusuf Pathan, the next ball was duly dispatched over the fence. Yusuf instantly dropped his bat and put his hands up in mock-applause. After seeing the celebration on the big screen, Steyn returned the compliment at the top of his run-up with applause of his own. The two were inseparable till the end of the over.Close encounter
Steyn kept playing to the gallery as he’s done all season. He began with the ‘I can’t hear you’ gesture towards the crowd on the Eastern stands and applauded every time the crowd responded. But he did curtail his antics after a misfield miffed him.We were in the front row in our stand, which afforded us a close-up view of the action at third man, or long-on. Amit Mishra put in a dive in front of us, and Yusuf’s sixes fell into our gallery. After returning home, I watched highlights and got to see myself on TV every time the ball made it to the boundary at our end.Shot of the day
Shikar Dhawan’s jump-and-cut off Jacques Kallis for six was the shot of the day for me. That shot had the words ‘This is T20 my friend’ written all over it.The careful banner banter
I had wanted to bring a ‘Bye-bye RCB’ banner to the ground, but I was aware that it could backfire. So I decided against it. I looked around the ground and on the big screen for at least one such banner. But clearly, everyone was apprehensive. But finally with the target under 40, I got the first glimpse of a banner that had exactly those words.Crowd meter
It took the crowd some time to get pumped up and the Manvinder Bisla dismissal triggered off delirium. When the SRH innings started, no amount of coaxing from the DJ or the big screen could get them going. But a few minutes into the chase, all that changed when Parthiv Patel crashed one over the top.Hardship factor
Having a cricket stadium in the middle of a hugely populated residential area does not help at all. Parking is a big mess with cars parked all around the ground, and along the roads abutting the stadium. Drinking water is not available for sale at the ground – soft drinks are the only thirst-quenchers on sale. Mobile phones and cameras are not allowed inside the ground, but some people managed to sneak them in. One person in the crowd was even caught on the big screen taking a picture of the roving cameraman.The farewell
As has been the case at other stadiums, the fans got a view of the home team players on a victory lap. A lucky few also got to take home jerseys that the players flung into the crowd during the lap of honor. The franchise representatives were there too, with a ‘Shukriya Hyderabad for the support’ banner.Marks out of 10
I’d have to give a 10/10, if only for the favourable result.

Zimbabwe will soon have to move away from the safety of bits and pieces players and towards specialists. That can only happen if their top-order strengthens and they are can unearth some depth

Firdose Moonda30-Apr-2013Brendan Taylor said a worrying thing after Zimbabwe lost a Test against Bangladesh for the first time at home to share the series. He deemed it “not the end of the world,” which was fair enough, but he also said he felt the team had progressed overall.Their sizeable win in the first Test may have partly explained his assessment but their heavy defeat in the second should have prevented him from settling on praise instead of self-examination. From the position they were in, after dominating the first Test, against an opposition that had been spooked into thinking conditions would not suit them, Zimbabwe should not have shared the series.They should not have lost the second Test either and it seemed a lack of confidence rather than inadequate skills accounted for their defeat. Inexperienced teams are capable of pulling off surprises when they are on top but they struggle to recover when they are against the tide because they often do not believe in themselves enough.Zimbabwe are a prime example. In the first Test, Taylor’s century and solidifying partnerships with Malcolm Waller and Graeme Cremer gave them the advantage. When Kyle Jarvis began tearing through Bangladesh, they did not look back. In the second Test, when Bangladesh put on 300 on day one, Zimbabwe were at a disadvantage. From there, they could not look up.Sometimes only conviction can change that. Zimbabwe play too infrequently and are too used to being beaten to have built up any of that. They suffer from the small-country syndrome and that may only change when they have the players who can force that turnaround.For that reason, it may be worth them rethinking their policy of allrounders versus specialists. In a bid to lengthen their batting line-up in this series, Zimbabwe opted for lower-order allrounders like Shingi Masakadza, Keegan Meth and Cremer instead of out and out bowlers like Tendai Chatara, Brian Vitori and Prosper Utseya or Ray Price.In Masakadza’s and Meth’s case, it turned out to be the right decisions because they contributed with the bat and had success in their primary role with the ball. In Cremer’s case it may not have. Although he was also responsible for lengthening the batting order, his bowling in the second Test was expensive and lacked penetration. A holding spinner may have worked better.Zimbabwe will soon have to move away from the safety of players who can do a little bit of everything and towards those who do their main task very well. That can only happen if their top-order strengthens and they are can unearth some depth to create competition for places.

At the moment, Zimbabwe centrally contract 10 players and the franchises take care of the rest. The non-centrally contracted players only have deals for a seven-month season and are left without security over how they will earn money in the winter

Before the series started, Stephen Mangongo, the interim coach, proudly declared that Zimbabwe had 75 professional cricketers (15 from each of the five franchises) to choose a national squad from. He didn’t mention that only included one opening batsman. Vusi Sibanda had to make do with makeshift partners in both Tests because Tino Mawoyo was injured and Zimbabwe did not seem to have anyone else who could do the job.Timycen Maruma and Regis Chakabva were used in that position and while both showed some promise, it was not enough. Mawoyo will likely return to the role when fit but the lack of other options should worry Zimbabwe. The only solution will be to go on a scouting mission to each franchise, examine the prospects there and monitor their progress.Their middle order and bowling stocks seem better supplied but holding on to players has proved difficult because of Zimbabwe’s precarious financial situation which may improve with a healthy dose of transparency all-round.At the moment, Zimbabwe centrally contract 10 players and the franchises take care of the rest. The non-centrally contracted players only have deals for a seven-month season and are left without security over how they will earn money in the winter. This year, ZC introduced winter contracts but the amounts being paid were too little for every player they wanted to retain to accept and they lost some of their men to club cricket gigs overseas.It was Craig Ervine this time, but it could be anyone else next year. Ensuring there is enough money to run the game is proving tough for Zimbabwe Cricket (ZC) but they do themselves few favours through some of their smoke and mirror policies that create and exacerbate uncertainty.A glaring example was available during this series. ZC refused to comment on the situation with their new coach, Andy Waller, who was present at the ground for most of both matches. He has quit his job in England and he would not have done that to take a holiday so it was obvious why he was there.ESPNcricinfo understands that Waller has a signed contract to take over as head coach from May 1. ZC could not confirm this, nor explain the reason for him being in the country and in the stadium.Instead, they continued to play a charade that the board will announce the new coach in due course because they did not want to detract from the ongoing series. What they are waiting for, no-one knows.After the first Test, Mangongo was asked by one of the members of the local media if he thought the victory would increase his chances of getting the job full time. He swerved past the question and went on to discuss his experience as a coach and his commitment to ensuring the players develop and give of their best.That will be difficult for them to do when they are not being told the truth about things like who is taking over as their coach and why. It also makes one wonder what else don’t they know. Two years ago, Tatenda Taibu revealed they were always unsure of when they could expect payment. Before this tour, a player who did not want to be named, said nothing had changed in that regard, salaries often came late or not at all and questions around them go unanswered.With that on their minds, it’s hardly surprising the players lack faith in the structures they are working in. That has reflected on the playing field. Zimbabwe are a talented crop who have made some strides since their Test comeback in 2011.They have held on to the core group and players like Kyle Jarvis, Taylor and Hamilton Masakadza have become better. They have found some youngsters with potential and seem to have nurtured them somewhat, like Shingi Masakadza. They have not found the binding ingredient that can marry those individuals into a team that regards itself as one that can win. Real progress will be achieved the day that is not an ideal or a dream but something Zimbabwe can turn into reality, more often than they do now.

Plays of the Day from the second Test between Zimbabwe and Bangladesh

Firdose Moonda in Harare26-Apr-2013Shot of the day
Sohag Gazi made the first ripple on a quiet morning when he decided to take on Zimbabwe’s best bowler, Keegan Meth. Mid-way through the morning session and almost out of nowhere, Gazi gave Meth the charge. He lofted a length ball over midwicket and stood back to admire his own hit. It was cleanly struck and well-placed and took Meth by complete surprise. He was moving the ball both ways and challenging the batsmen and did not expect to be taken on in that fashion. Meth followed up, as any hot-headed fast bowler does, with a bouncer.Over of the day
When Bangladesh’s innings ended with 12 minutes to go before lunch, most assumed the break would be taken. Not so in this game. Since the changeover is limited to 10 minutes and time is the most sacred commodity in a Test match, the umpires indicated a solitary over would be bowled in the two minutes before the scheduled break. It was a testing six balls for Zimbabwe’s openers, as Robiul Islam gave them a taste of what was to come later with his away swing, and they would not have gone into the dining room with much of an appetite.Missing DRS moment of the day
Even if both teams agreed, there is simply not enough in the way of funding for this series to accommodate DRS but it could have been put to good use. For evidence of that, one need look no further than Regis Chakabva’s dismissal. Robiul delivered his stock ball – pitching on off and moving away and Chakabva stretched forward but was beaten. Mushfiqur Rahim collected and Robiul led the appeal for caught behind. Chakabva stood until Tony Hill raised the finger when he walked off in disbelief. Replays showed he had not hit the ball and the sound was the result of bat against pad. It was a classic example of where the batsman is so sure that he would have asked for the review had it been available.Soft dismissal of the day
There had to be one but this time it came from an unlikely source. Brendan Taylor had been Zimbabwe’s example in the first Test and looked set to do the same in this one. He saw off dot ball after dot ball and only allowed himself the occasional release but even he couldn’t resist when Gazi tossed one up invitingly. Taylor eyed the area over midwicket and launched it there but picked out Shakib Al Hasan. He knew immediately that he made a mistake and Zimbabwe would have to depend on someone else this time.

Cricketing heaven is watching Dravid, Steyn and co. do battle from free seats in the players’ lounge

Shubham Arora28-Apr-2013Choice of game
I am a big fan of the IPL, thanks to the format that makes all the teams go through crests and troughs. Teams that underperform in the first half eventually get their act together and give it their all in the later stages while teams who are consistent in the first half of the tournament often lose momentum. Rajasthan Royals fall in the latter category, barring their consistent run in the first edition.Sunrisers Hyderabad may have been rebranded and rechristened, but they retain the core of the Deccan Chargers. They were champions in the second season, but have otherwise always been off the boil. So this match was supposedly between equals. This year’s points table says so, anyway.The atmosphere
“I’ll be going to the match today,” I informed a friend who isn’t from Jaipur. “Oh, to that ground that has more moths than spectators,” he responded. I gave a laugh and let it go. He is a Delhi supporter and I can understand his frustration this year. Thankfully, this was an afternoon game and the moths didn’t pose a problem.The Sawai Mansingh Stadium is small and beautiful. The outfield is lush and the view is clear from every corner of the ground. I was lucky to have premium passes to the players’ lounge on the west side of the ground. The lounge had the closest view, and a sumptuous buffet to go with. I couldn’t have asked for more. This is the sort of experience for which you don’t regret splurging. In my case, I didn’t have to since I got the pass for free.One complaint that I’ll always have with the crowd in Jaipur is that we are not as loud as the RCB fans at the Chinnaswamy. Maybe it’s got to do with the people.Early exchanges
Shane Watson, Rahul Dravid, Dale Steyn. You pitch the first two against the third and the match-up seems delicious. I had never seen Steyn in action live before this match so it was exciting to watch him bowl at a blistering pace. Hyderabad decided to bat first upon winning the toss, but ran into some spectacular bowling from Rajasthan. Within no time, Hyderabad were reduced to 29 for 6. It seemed a lost contest for Hyderabad, until Darren Sammy intervened.Key performer
Darren Sammy resurrected Hyderabad and took them to a healthy score of 144. The outfield was quick, and his shots reached the boundary in no time. This was a competitive total given Hyderabad’s bowling depth. James Faulkner was a joy to watch as well. He was a class apart from the rest of the Rajasthan attack. England might have a tough time later this year with Faulkner in Australia’s Ashes squad.However, Watson’s show in the evening shadowed everything that went before. I was expecting a lot out of him following his century against Chennai, and he didn’t disappoint.Face-off I relished
Rahul Dravid v Dale Steyn. The first ball from Steyn to Dravid was a classic outswinger, and resulted in a play-and-miss. True to his reputation, Dravid absorbed the pressure and kept Steyn at bay with the calmness of a monk. It was a good ploy to shield Watson from the initial Steyn overs. The ball was swinging and once again Dravid shouldered the responsibility.Wow moment
The last over of the game was remarkable to watch. Watson was keen on getting to his century and it seemed like Steyn was adamant on stopping him. Watson kept hitting towards deep midwicket, where Steyn kept leaping and diving to save as many runs as possible. It made for spectacular viewing.Entertainment
This being a day game, the 10 pm restriction on loud music didn’t impact the experience. The DJ has been awesome all these years in Jaipur and it was once again a musical evening. All the activities on the ground reduce the cricket to a side show, and I think that’s what makes T20 a hit. There is so much happening even between the overs making the spectator the ultimate winner.One thing I would have changed
I had thoughts of reaching home early given how the initial overs went. But Hyderabad managed to reach a decent total in the end which was kind of good. However, the game wasn’t close, which left me a little disappointed. The ease with which Rajasthan won surprised me – there were no tense moments, no anxiety, nothing.Marks out of 10
All in all, it was a satisfying experience, and I’ll give it 8 out of 10. It’s always good to see your team win, but this was emphatic and came against one of the better teams this season, making it even more special. The last time Shane Watson performed this consistently, Rajasthan won the IPL. I can hear murmurs of people now saying we aren’t underdogs this time. I welcome them all.

Recent batting collapses have shown just why West Indies need the dour Shivnarine Chanderpaul in a line-up full of T20 stars

<b>Roger Sawh, Canada</b>15-Jul-2013″Chanderpaul in one-day cricket? He’s too old, man! Brethren, he doesn’t score fast enough, he needs 150 overs! He’s been in so many losses man! Brotha, we’ve got to move on from him!”In the above few lines lies a modern-day cricket mystery that I struggle to comprehend.The West Indies’ one-day international cricket team of 2013 is the personification of the phrase ‘all flash and little substance’. Blessed with a galaxy of stars of the Twenty20 arena, it’s a group that would command an IPL owner’s highest bids with ease and, given 20 overs of operation, would most likely deliver breathtaking results. Sadly for them, T20s and ODIs are entirely different endeavours.On the spectrum of cricket formats, ODIs are thought to be in the middle while T20s and Tests lie at their respective extremes. A closer consideration, though, gives a better idea of things as ODI cricket is closer to Test cricket in nature than T20. Batsmen are required to build innings in ODIs, hence the format necessitates patience, soundness of technique, deep consideration, concentration, and conditional awareness. In T20s, a ‘wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am’ fifty in no time at all is a game-changer, but in ODIs, its effect is not quite as prolific – a steady and calculated approach bears greater fruit in a 50-over war of attrition, as the value of an innings lies not just in the shots and runs, but also in the negotiation of bowlers, spells, fielding restrictions and playing conditions.In the West Indies’ set-up, the vast majority of batsmen either completely lack or inexplicably suppress the rare talent of building an innings. It is a talent that Shivnarine Chanderpaul, an evergreen batsman of close to 300 ODIs who has been producing runs across formats despite approaching the age of 40, has bursting forth from his anti-glare eye patches. It is a gift that the powers that be in West Indies team selection are willfully blind to and, as collapses continue to litter modern-day West Indies cricket history, it is a boon that has been simply deserted.Recent history bears testament to the need for a Chanderpaul-like presence. Throughout the course of the Champions Trophy, when Chris Gayle or Marlon Samuels failed to provide a platform for an innings, the team’s batting would generally be lost at sea. In the just concluded tri-series with India and Sri Lanka, fireworks in Jamaica only temporarily hid the batting unit’s frailties, as the team eventually failed to make their own home series final. Fast forward to Sunday, when Pakistan surgically dismantled the West Indies batting approach on a minefield in Providence, Guyana, and you could see the tumour just grow.After pinpointing the ineptitude of the West Indies batsmen against pressure, and recognising the gaping need for an anchor man, Pakistan simply did what their team has the ability to do – they bowled a consistent and threatening line and length to allow the mentally fragile batsmen to whither in the South American heat. If only there were a stabilizer, a thorn in opposition’s side, a Trott-like gnat to hover annoyingly despite the predator’s fiercest swipes. If only substance had not been jettisoned for style and if only conditional awareness had come into play when the squad was being picked to select a player, any player, who could dig deep and tackle the demons of the pitch and the opposition. Chanderpaul is renowned for prizing his wicket like no other – more often than not, he would have found a way to tough things out.Those who support Chanderpaul completely understand the argument against his inclusion. Quite frankly, though, it doesn’t hold when compared with the need that exists. Across the cricketing world, ODI nations have their best Test batsmen in their line-ups because they recognise that the format requires a chutzpah that great Test batsmen possess. From Amla to Trott to Misbah, there is the knowledge that you need a backbone in an ODI batting line-up, regardless of the lack of glamour. Unless another batsman in the current line-up steps up to do the dirty work, the selectors have to plug the enormous hole in their order.Chanderpaul never retired from ODI cricket – he was a victim of a post-World Cup 2011 purge that placed the blame at his feet for the team’s unsuccessful campaign. He was a scapegoat, and he was thrown away in ODIs for the wrong reasons.Chanderpaul is often described as a ‘crab’ at the crease. Crabs don’t make great entertainers. They don’t drive with elegance or pull with panache. They claw. They scratch. They exist in perpetual commotion with themselves, lacking suave but forever battling against all challenges. For the West Indies, there needs to be a survivor among the showmen; not only to see out the difficulties, but to help them develop strong shells of their own.If you have a submission for Inbox, send it to us here, with “Inbox” in the subject line

England’s Test series against Australia begins in a fortnight but if there is any sense of fatigue at nearly five months’ competition against New Zealand, it was not discernible at The Oval

Alan Gardner26-Jun-2013Much had been made in the brief build up to the two T20 internationals between England and New Zealand of their superfluity. The first, won by New Zealand after nearly 400 runs had been scored at The Oval, came two days after the final of the Champions Trophy and, for some sections of the media, the series has already been swallowed up or otherwise eclipsed by a spike in the Ashes mercury.England’s Test series against Australia begins in two weeks’ time but if there is any sense of fatigue at the continuing engagements with New Zealand, it was not discernible on Tuesday night. Almost five months after England’s tour of New Zealand began with three high-scoring T20s, a full house at The Oval showed their raucous appreciation for more of the same on the return leg.Even though England rested a number of players, including Stuart Broad, the regular T20 captain, Graeme Swann and Steven Finn, and New Zealand are approaching the end of an intense tour that has already taken in two Tests, three ODIs and the Champions Trophy, both Eoin Morgan and Brendon McCullum, captains on the night, defended the scheduling.”It’s very important,” Morgan said of the game. “The majority of the Twenty20 team obviously isn’t involved in the Test match or one-day international team so for a lot of guys this is the pinnacle of their summer and I think it’s very important.”England’s Twenty20 specialists – the likes of Alex Hales, Michael Lumb and Luke Wright – seemed particularly keen to grasp their opportunity to participate at last in what the ECB has been marketing as the ‘Summer of Cricket’. If a carnival atmosphere at a packed ground is what the governing body is after, this was another salient reminder of the importance of Twenty20 to the overall health of the game.”It was brilliant,” McCullum said. “Obviously I didn’t expect to have such a big crowd today, but I thought it was brilliant. There was probably a little bit of criticism about these two T20 being tacked on at the end but I think what we saw today was justification for them and hopefully we get another big crowd on Thursday.”Surrey will harbour similar hopes. The club paid a staging fee for both games but, even with discounted £1 entry for under-16s, the economics seem likely to have worked in their favour, once the spending at various food and drinks outlets is taken into account. On Thursday, the expected return to England colours of Kevin Pietersen, also a Surrey player, plus the greater proximity to the weekend could make for an even livelier affair.And all this excitement for an England defeat. Morgan admitted a modicum of disappointment at the result but felt the difference was as little as “one blow and we would have won the game”. He had praise for England debutant Boyd Rankin, who took 1 for 24 on a night when bowlers were fodder, and the way his less-experienced side fought to stay in the game after Hamish Rutherford and McCullum had given New Zealand a ferocious start.It was perhaps Morgan’s dismissal, caught at slip in the 14th over with England matching the required rate, that was the game’s pivotal moment. McCullum’s decision to put Ross Taylor in a catching position, rather than try and protect the boundaries, was indicative of his mindset as a captain and provided the crowd with another moment to savour.”It took a pretty special catch for it to come off,” McCullum said. “We had to take wickets, to me it wasn’t necessarily a risk. If we didn’t have the slip in place we would have seen the game peter out, I think, so we had to keep trying to make some plays and sometimes they come off and it looks great and sometimes they don’t. Thankfully today it did.”

Duncan Flethcer hardly interacts with anyone except his bosses and the players, and the players have always been full of praise for him without being able to articulate how exactly he helps

Sidharth Monga13-Dec-2013Enigma is a word loosely used in sport analysis. Duncan Fletcher the India coach, though, is one man on whom the word enigma won’t be wasted. Fletcher the England coach was ruthless, result-oriented, modern, even before his time. He worked best with young batsmen, preferred pace, and didn’t mind gamesmanship – remember how England riled Ricky Ponting with their substitute fielders during the 2005 Ashes? From what we know of him as the India coach, or rather India under him, for whatever reason youth hasn’t been pushed for actively despite poor results – eight straight away defeats in Tests, accurate trundlers have been preferred to pace, and batsmen dismissed purely by their own fault have been called back.The extent of Fletcher’s role in all this is not known. We don’t know if he has had the free rein he needs. He hardly interacts with anyone except his bosses and the players, and the players have always been full of praise for him without being able to articulate how exactly he helps. You knew Fletcher’s role as a member of the support staff better when India last came to South Africa. No, he had nothing to do with India then. This was when Fletcher was the part-time batting consultant of South Africa. Back then, he would attend press conferences, talk about his role and about his players.Therein might lay an advantage for Fletcher, a big chance to improve the overseas record of the India team under his watch: one win and eight losses outside Asia. Graeme Smith, Hashim Amla, AB de Villiers, JP Duminy and Faf du Plessis were part of the ODI squad that Fletcher worked with. That edge might not have been visible during the ODIs where India struggled to make an impression on pretty much the same set of batsmen – Quinton de Kock being the addition – but Fletcher’s knowledge of South African cricket and conditions will still be a cane to this Indian team walking blind into the den, with negligible experience and little match time.Other than this, Fletcher finally has a young side that he can mould. His expertise, it was said, was the main reason he was brought in as the coach in the first place, after Gary Kirsten didn’t extend his contract soon after the World Cup win in 2011. At the start of his stint, Fletcher followed the Kirsten strategy of letting the senior players be, but with their games waning, it didn’t work. Fletcher, though, managed to stay under the radar. Now, when he is back to what he was supposed to do – aid India in conditions he knows well, in England and South Africa, and facilitate the transition – Fletcher’s role will be under more scrutiny.The problem with scrutinising Fletcher’s role, though, is the same: we don’t exactly know how he works. What is clear, though, is that the players are impressed and singularly take the blame when the team fails to perform. “See, I think no failure can be pinpointed upon the support staff sitting back,” R Ashwin said. “As players we have to accept the failure and say, ‘Yes, we have failed as a group.’ A person cannot go through the entire 11 players on the field, and what’s going through their head and all that.”Support staff can definitely facilitate you from behind. Support staff’s role is always about creating a good environment. Having good facilities to practice and try and aid somebody who is going through a lean patch, and all that. On those regards he has never been short of what he has done. We had poor tours of Australia and England, but he has always been on the mark in terms of arranging practice and in terms of what guys want, going to them, talking to them. He has wanted to make a difference.”There are two things: wanting to make a difference and actually creating a difference. [For] creating the difference the player also needs to play a role. He has always wanted to be the difference that a player wants. He has never been shy of going to talking to anybody, he has never been shy of going and offering a new suggestion for somebody to change his game. It’s always up to the individual to take it or not. But I think for a failure the team has to accept the failure as a lot rather than saying the coach has not had a great record and all that. have not had a great record.”That’s a glowing endorsement at one level, but it doesn’t really say much about Fletcher’s role, other than facilitating training and ensuring good facilities. As a professional, Fletcher will see it as his failure, too, that he oversaw eight straight defeats away from home. He will be desperate to make sure it doesn’t become 10 before 2013 is over.