A trial balloon?

From the Daily Telegraph - Twenty20: India block isolation of Zimbabwe

A motion has been tabled to discuss the Zimbabwe situation at next week's ICC meeting in Dubai but it is still unclear if the member countries will be asked to vote on removing their international status.

They are more likely to strip Zimbabwe of one-day status, which would solve the problem of their appearance at the World Twenty20 Championship. Under such an agreement, Zimbabwe would retain voting rights and funding from the ICC.

...

Last night a senior source within the Indian board told The Daily Telegraph they were still behind Zimbabwe and would not support any motion to throw them out of the ICC.

And from Cricinfo - India set to block Zimbabwe action

The Indian board is set to oppose any attempt to have action taken against Zimbabwe at next week's ICC annual meeting in Dubai, according to a report in the Daily Telegraph.
....
On Thursday, a senior BCCI official told the Daily Telegraph that his board were still behind Zimbabwe and would oppose any moves to have them expelled.

Now, English not being my first language, I may have difficulty comprehending the two articles. So help me out here - how does "not support any motion to throw them out of the ICC." and "and would oppose any moves to have them expelled. " translate to "India block isolation of Zimbabwe" and " India set to block Zimbabwe action"?

Furthermore, if "it is still unclear if the member countries will be asked to vote on removing their international status, why the presupposition that India will oppose any move against Zimbabwe?

Also, the whole "expel/throw them out " bit - is the ICC seriously considering banning Zimbabwe from ALL international cricket or is this just a trial balloon, floated first by the Daily Telegraph and now abetted by Cricinfo to gauge which way the Indians are leaning ?

Or is this a petty exercise in putting pressure on the Indians to influence their vote?

---
Also this bit in the Cricinfo piece

Three months earlier Malcolm Speed, the erstwhile ICC chief executive, refused to do just that after the ICC refused advice to act against Zimbabwe officials following an independent forensic audit. Within a month he had been forced from office, largely at India's instigation.

Here is the Cricinfo report dated April 25, 2008

Cricinfo has learnt that though Speed's ouster was largely due to serious differences he had with Ray Mali, the ICC president, and Norman Arendse, the president of Cricket South Africa, over the Zimbabwe crisis, the chief executive's recent comments on the unauthorized Indian Cricket League (ICL) had senior BCCI officials demanding that he leave the post.

Largely at India's instigation indeed!

I wonder!

Given the kerfuffle following the Grant Elliot dismissal, I wonder if Mark Benson could have chosen the following course of action

A Kodak moment!

Pietersen will captain England in Saturday's series finale against the Kiwis, as well as three matches in August — a one-day international against Scotland, a Twenty20 international against South Africa and one ODI against South Africa.

Graeme Smith and Kevin Pieterson shaking hands after the toss - the 20th of August cant come
soon enough!
----
"It's not Kevin Pietersen v Graeme Smith. We won't be having a beer together afterwards."
Kevin Pietersen reminds all of us that it's two teams playing out there at the Kensington Oval and wants all distractions out of the way

Another day, another soft dismissal

27.1 Iftikhar Anjum to Raina, OUT, Raina misses out on the hundred. He punches a back-of-length delivery straight to Fawad Alam at extra cover. But it has been an wonderful innings. Great timing.

After doing all the heavy lifting, Suresh Raina finds another way to get out to a soft dismissal - saw this during his first stint with the Indian team ( barring the 45 against Sri Lanka at Pune), saw it during the IPL, and am seeing it now.

From a batting stand point, India have two glaring issues - Raina's propensity to fall to soft dismissals and Rohit Sharma's inability to switch from one format of the game to another( Amol Muzumdar had commented on this during the Ranji Trophy immediately after the T20 WC).

Its a matter of concentration - of both these players can step up, India have a batting line up to die for!

You stupid, stiff, pompous, English...!

A huge debate has been sparked here, and Elliott is looking utterly aggrieved. England had the chance to withdraw their appeal, but Collingwood decided that, with the match at stake, he had no option
43.4	Sidebottom to Elliott, OUT, all hell breaks loose here. A massive mid-pitch collision between Elliott and Sidebottom, who was closing in on the ball but running straight at the batsman, and Elliott goes down clutching his thigh. England carry on and throw down the stumps at the non-striker's end, and after a long debate, he is given out.

PS:- The umpire making the call - Mark Benson!

PPS:- I hope the Kiwis dont shake hands with the Poms after the game. The Poms dont deserve it.

25/06/1983

This is not a post about the World Cup, nor a paean to Kapil's Devils. Truth be told, there is very little of the cricket that I can recall from that fateful day, 25 years ago.

Repeated viewings of the semis and the finals have entrenched the narrative, but of that specific day, I carry only three memories.

The first is of the odds: 66 to 1 on India winning.

The second - an old Dyanora b/w TV set that we saw the match on

The third and the most lasting - of my father smoking.Not because of the tension of the finals. Or because of India's low total. Nor because he chain smoked.

The reason for the cigarettes and him resembling a chimney was courtesy his wife. And children.Because every time he left the room to light up, a West Indian wicket fell.

I remember vividly him losing his patience when Richards' wicket fell. Because he could not get to see the catch. No more cigarettes said he. No more cigarettes, said us.

He did oblige once, and two wickets fell in succession. And that was that.. No more cigarettes. For keeps.

And Dujon and Marshall started to put together a partnership.And the tone and tenor of our pleadings grew correspondingly- the three of us pleading, begging, imploring and even threatening him to light up once more - for India's sake.

When the last wicket fell, I dont remember watching Mohinder Amarnath's run to the Lords pavilion.. What I remember is a rather grumpy man who had missed out on a chance to watch India make history. And the recriminations that come with such grumpiness.

It was that kind of a day.