Whither "restraint of trade" ?

South Africa's move to bring Kent allrounder Ryan McLaren into the national side has failed after the county did not release him from his three-year contract. McLaren, who's on a Kolpak deal until 2010, has withdrawn from the ODI squad to face Kenya and Bangladesh.

So, whatever happened to "he is just a player and he should be allowed to play wherever he chooses" and "it is grossly unfair for a cricketing body to prevent a player from plying his trade" and "sporting bodies cannot dictate what contracted players should do", you know, the usual bile directed towards the BCCI whenever the ICL issue crops up.

Day 1 - Playing for the draw

It started with the toss - playing Watson and White with absolutely no match practice behind them was the first indicator.

White's selection did not surprise me - Australia lost Perth because of over rates and they were not going to repeat that mistake again.

But playing 8 batsmen and going light in the bowling department pointed to a team that was intent on grinding things out, playing time and only when losing was no longer an option was it going for a win ( shades of Sydney 2007).

The second indicator was Ricky Ponting's innings - he had to exorcise his ghosts and so the 100 could not be better timed. It was the post 100 innings that surprised me. 102 in 185 balls was stretched to 123 in 243 balls - 58 balls for an additional 21 runs when the Indians were there for the taking.

The final indicator - the session by session breakdown of the runs scored

Lunch - 70/1 in 26 overs ( RR 2.69)
Tea - 91/1 in 30 overs ( RR 3.03)
EOD - 93/2 in 33.2 overs (RR 2.79)

Granted that the early loss of a wicket and the assistance available to the seamers called for consolidation in the first session. And the partnership between Katich and Ponting did well to turn the heat on India in the second session.

It is the approach in the 3rd session that intrigues me. India was there for the taking , Ponting had already scored a 100 and the game was favorably poised for the Australians. And yet, instead of ramming home the advantage, the Australians decided to adopt a wait and watch approach.

And the wicket in the last over of the day's play definitely did not help. Ideally, Australia should have had at least 300 runs on the board as this would have been the ideal cushion for a bunch of players making their debuts in India.

400 is the minimum Australia should be targeting. If they continue at the current rate, it will take them an additional 52 overs - effectively 5 sessions to get 400.

5 sessions out of 15 for 1 completed innings - not the intent expected from a team that has not previously lost at the Chinnaswamy stadium.

Pricky, take a bow!

Good, solid, old school batting.. Lots of guts.. Plenty of determination.

A well deserved first century on Indian soil.

Another feather in the BCCI's cap

Suresh Shastri will become the first umpire from India to officiate a South African first-class match when he stands in the SuperSport Series game between the Dolphins and the Lions, starting on Thursday in Durban.

The BCCI and Cricket South Africa (CSA) organised an umpires' exchange programme under which two umpires from India will officiate two first-class matches in South Africa's domestic competition while two South Africans will stand in Duleep Trophy games in India. CSA has a similar programme with New Zealand Cricket for the past 11 seasons.

"I think we can create an intensity in the field which at certain stages might make their old blokes look like they're past their use-by date."

Strong words Pricky. They might just come back to haunt you!

Another blast from the past

For those lucky enough to see it, it was an hour to remember!

The hour that will live forever

By Stephen Brenkley at Headingley
Sunday, 25 August 2002

In the evening gloom of Headingley two batsmen, one great and the other very good indeed, decided to transform the Third Test. The end of a perpetually gloomy second day was approaching when Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly unfurled a sequence of breathtaking strokes.

For almost an hour they supplied an irreproachable example of what it means to take apart bowlers. Unforgettable deeds have been performed at this ground – sometimes they seem to run at least one a Test – but this joined them immediately in the pantheon.

At 5.58pm England took the third new ball. At 6.09pm, with four of five bulbs aglow on the meter, the batsmen were offered the light, which they declined. At 6.14pm there were five lights on. At 6.56pm play was suspended for the day.

In the 68 balls which were bowled in that spell, including a no ball and one which took a wicket, India added 96 runs. They went from 488 for 3 to 584 for 4. Any side subjected to this kind of blistering attack in a one-day match would feel terminally aggrieved. This was a Test.

It was marked not only by its big hitting, of which there was a multitude – nine fours and five sixes – but by its constantly cheeky running, designed to irritate beyond distraction a side who had been in the field for two days. Tendulkar and his captain were glorious. The old ground was dark but they illuminated it.

It went like this. After 162 overs, Nasser Hussain, England's captain, decided they should take another new ball. Matters had hardly gone their way over the first two days but some swift inroads would curtail the tourists' advantage. Besides, it was dark and Hussain must have toyed with the notion of being able shortly to seek the sanctuary of the dressing room. That was the only way England were about to gain any respite, but it was not arriving in a hurry.

Matthew Hoggard took the first over. It was pretty uneventful. Five runs were scored. There was no indication that India meant business. They had spent the match simply grinding the home side down. There had been the odd flourish. No more. No need.

The second over with the new ball was bowled by Andrew Caddick. The first ball went towards point, briefly in the air. No chance, no run. Caddick cajoled the second into rearing at Ganguly. He could only fend it away and it looped towards first slip. Since edges usually fly in that direction, it was an agonising delay while the ball arrived. You cannot practice slip catches like this. Robert Key dropped it. No more runs came. Then Hoggard bowled a maiden.

Around now the umpires gave the batsmen the chance to go off for bad light. On the scoreboard, four of the lightbulbs which give a guide to how poor the daylight has become were on. At Trent Bridge a fortnight ago, England scampered off with only one light showing.

Through the gloom you could swear that Ganguly almost sneered as he refused the offer. And at the same time a light came on in the batsmen. "We decided that in the last 10 to 15 overs that we needed some quick runs," understated Ganguly later. "We had to carry on because the match is interestingly poised." They did not exchange many words but now they clearly declared war. Drinks were taken.

Caddick's next over went for nine, including consecutive fours at the end; Hoggard, struggling as well for his length, conceded six. Caddick went for 11 including a stunning six by Tendulkar, stepping across his stumps and heaving it into the corner of the new Headingley Lodge. It tested the hideous concrete and the concrete was not found wanting.

Hoggard and Caddick, England's opening bowlers do not forget, had another over each in tandem. Twenty-four runs came. Ganguly, out for 99 at Trent Bridge, was there again. Not for long. Ashley Giles was brought on to slow the pace of the ball. It went quicker. Ganguly started the over on 99 and finished it on 120. Four, six, six, four, the new Western Terrace peppered. Key was not in the slips any longer. Nobody was.

Alex Tudor came on. His second ball went for six. Caddick was brought on at the Kirkstall Lane end for Giles. Five runs.

And then Tudor struck with the first ball of the new ball's 12th over. Ganguly, being outrageous, stepped back and saw his stumps splayed. The new batsman, VVS Laxman, arrived. India prepared to resume. There were seven overs left.

But suddenly they departed. Nasser Hussain had intervened on behalf of the fielding side – which is not necessarily permissible under law 3.9(b)(ii) – and the umpires decreed that the light was too bad to continue. It was a coruscating 58 minutes of cricket. And nine balls later, on Saturday, Tendulkar, too, was out.

You and me Pricky, both

agree on this...

I've said to the boys right from the start that we have to play a brand of cricket that's going to take the game late into the fifth day because that's how most Test matches end up here, whether it be a result or a draw.

After all, prolonged and painful trumps quick and easy. Every single time!

Goodbye Sweet Prince

People better than I will write paens and create magic with words to describe the life and times of Saurav Chandidas Ganguly and the impact he had on India's cricket.

For me, a gesture made at the end of an obscure tournament defines the man

There was one heartwarming moment at the very end. Ganguly was called to the dais, and the trophy presented to him. Rather than take it in his hand, he stood there, took the mike and said, "I'd like the boys up here please". And he waved the entire team forward, had them lift the trophy while he stood by, underlining his little speech earlier about the way the team had played as a unit.

Go well, The Prince of Kolkotta, with the thanks of a grateful nation!

Karma

If Ganguly plays through the series, his swan song will be at Nagpur, where, four years ago, he drove the first nail into his own captaincy by citing injury and pulling out of the Test against Australia. India were thrashed on a green top in that match to go 2-0 behind in the series. Ganguly has one opportunity left to settle the score.

The 900lb gorilla in the room

had nothing to do with this..

The West Indies Cricket Board has lost its case with telecommunications company Digicel in London's High Court and has been forced to withdraw its sanction for the Stanford 20/20 for 20 match on November 1.

The decision makes it possible that the game is called off or, if it does proceed, that the Stanford Superstars side will be greatly weakened. Sources close to the organisers were quick to insist that the match was still on.

The WICB entered into a contract with Stanford to make all their players available for the event, but it cannot now do so. If anything like a full-strength side takes the field against England Digicel could claim that it is a representative team in all but name, which would again put the WICB in breach of its contract with them.

Digicel's case against the board claimed that if the Stanford match was officially recognised then, as official sponsor to the WICB, it had branding and other commercial rights associated with that deal.

However, the court ruled that the WICB had to remove its sanction for the game as not doing so would put it in breach of contract with Digicel. It is understood that costs running into hundreds of thousands of dollars were also awarded against the board, and it might also lose the US$3.5 million in fees it was in line for from the game itself. As this was an arbitration, there is no recourse for the WICB to appeal.

Dear Pricky,

"If we can make their fielding look as bad as it is by some good running between wickets and good hustling and good pressure then you know straight away all the old stuff about the old bodies and Ganguly can't field and Dravid looks a bit slow, all of that stuff will come out."

I am touched by your concern about the age of the Indian middle order

And your adroitness in exposing this particular weakness... brilliant!

But tell me this, and dont pull any punches while you are at it, where are you going to find 11 fit men to execute this rather brilliant plan of yours?

PS:- Micheal, remember that under the new ICC laws, there are no comfort breaks!

Not even close!

In the last week or so, in the build up to the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, I have read enough opinion pieces ( on websites, newspapers and blogs) that seem to hedge their bets on who will win the Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

The overwhelming consensus seems to be that it will be a close contest and that we should not be reading too much into Australia's performance in the two practice games.

I beg to differ.

There is everything to be read in the performance of a team that, in the lead up to the Champions Trophy in India, had asked for a revised target from Mumbai so as to get more match practice. And on not reaching that revised target, had accepted the result as a defeat.

For a team that prides itself so much in its attention to detail in preparing for a game and plays the game with so much pride, I am surprised people think that the practice games will have no bearing on the Test series at hand.

Remember the huge reams of paper wasted of the impending "demise " of the Fab 4 following their performances in Sri Lanka against a freak of nature and the highest wicket taker in the history of Test cricket?

Contrast that with the Australian first XI who muster 218 runs against an outfit that is not even the Rajasthan Ranji first XI, fall to 218/9 before narrowly avoiding the follow on against a scratch Board President's XI outfit and eked out 127/2 in their second essay at a run rate of 3.34 rpo in a no pressure situation.

Australia come into the series on the back of a 3 match ODI set against Bangladesh at Darwin. The last test match played by them ended in early July.

Their opening pair is a scratch pair, with neither Hayden or Katich partnering each other at the top of the order. Hayden comes in to the first test on the back of an Achilles heel injury that made him hors de combat for the West Indian tour. And not too many runs in the three innings played in the warm up game.

The Prick has had a wrist injury in the lead up to the India series and an average of 12.8 in India. And his IPL performance (39 runs in 4 innings, avg 9.75) has not been too flash either.

And while much has been made of his 50 against the BP XI in the second essay, the fact remains that he barely played Piyush Chawla in the course of that innings.

Australia dont have Damien Martyn. And there is no Andrew Symonds either.

If India's batting is vulnerable ( as everyone seems to point out), what about Australia?

In the bowling department,India is miles ahead in the spin department. And even if South Africa proved that spin may not necessarily be the way forward in India, the Indian pace department is no push over either.

Ishant Sharma, Zaheer Khan and Munaf Patel hit their straps in both the Md Nissar Trophy and the Irani Trophy. And all three exhibited far more rhythm than the 4 Australian pace bowlers on display in the Board President's game.

Pace, bounce and swing - in all three departments the two bowling sides are evenly matched.

Much has also been made of the previous visit by the Australian's to India ( in 2004-05). And of the tactics used. And how we are going to see more of the same.

And it is a valid argument.

But here is what is not mentioned when that particular argument is made

1. Indians are notoriously slow starters. And India was coming into the Border Gavaskar series after a 3 month hiatus with very little domestic cricket in the lead up and a batting lineup devoid of any form.

Which is not the case this time around.

2.India did not have a settled opening pair for the entirety of the series. Yuvraj Singh, Akash Chopra and Gautam Gambhir partnered Virender Sehwag at the top of the order.

Which is not the case this time around.

3. Injuries to key players ( Sachin for the first 2 tests, Saurav for the remaining 2) did not help the cause.

Which is not the case this time around.

4. Remember this? Odds are, we wont have a deja vu.

5. The Australian bowling line up in 2004 consisted of players who had previous experience of playing in India - Glenn Mcgrath (1996, 2001), Jason Gillespie (1996, 1998, 2001), Michael Kasprowicz (1998, 2001) and Shane Warne (1998, 2001). The less said about the current crop's experience, the better.

And despite all this, the score line in 2004 read Australia 2 India 1 with a what-if-the-rains-had-not-intervened match at Chennai.

It is nobodies argument that the Border Gavaskar Trophy wont be a contest - the nature of the game and the temperament of the two sides and past history all point to it.

But, a close contest?