Finally!!

Modi defends IPL

Indian Premier League chairman Lalit Modi insists his organisation would not be to blame for Sri Lanka pulling the plug on their proposed tour to England next summer.

Sri Lanka appear ready to pull out of the two Tests and three one-day internationals, which are scheduled to precede next summer's Ashes series, because star players like Muttiah Muralitharan and Kumar Sangakkara are contracted to the IPL.

But Modi denied any suggestion the IPL was to blame for the clash of dates early next summer. Speaking at the Global Sport Summit in London, Modi said: "The ICC's tours programme is fixed seven years in advance. Everybody commits to that and players commit to their countries on that basis.

He added: "There are gaps in the scheduling. Based on those gaps players and countries make other programmes to fill them. The Indian Premier League took into account the ICC's fixed programme and signed players on three-year contracts.

"The Sri Lanka board gave their players a no-objection certificate for three years to play in the Indian Premier League.

"Unfortunately the Zimbabwe tour to England was cancelled. The ECB (England and Wales Cricket Board) had an obligation to Sky television to bring another team in.

"It is always portrayed that the Indian Premier League is stopping the Test matches being played. There was never a scheduled Test in the first place.

"The Sri Lankan tour would breach the contract with the Indian Premier League."

Just why the BCCI ( and the IPL) don't have a dedicated PR cell is beyond me!

What's eating Subramanian Badrinath?

Since that infamous " "For God's sake, allow me to fail,"" quote, here are S.Badrinath's performances in various ODI's and List A games

27* (143) vs Sri Lanka
6(237) vs Sri Lanka
6(258) vs Sri Lanka
10(284) India A v/s Australia A First Test
1(207) India A v/s Australia A
69(168/5) India A v/s New Zealand A
22(305) India A v/s New Zealand A
16(252) and 36(302) ROI v/s Delhi
2(455) and 14(292/4) BPXI v/s Australians
10(186) India Blue v/s India Red
and now 27 chasing 261 in the India Red v/s India Green match.

1 score of 50 or more in his last 11 innings. Has Subramanian Badrinath jinxed himself?

Reconcile this!

WHATEVER may have been said and written in recent days, I can assure everyone there is absolutely no problem between Brett Lee and me.

Our discussion just before lunch on the fourth day of the second Test was all about over rates and our struggle to maintain them, particularly when India was scoring so freely.

Brett was obviously disappointed he didn't bowl in the first session and didn't know the reason until I told him late in the session. He knew he wasn't going to be opening up in the morning because we wanted to take the pace off the ball and try to limit India's batting early on.

What Brett couldn't understand is that Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle had the chance to bowl before him. But by the time I wanted to bowl Brett, we were five overs behind on our over rate.

If he were to come on and we went six or seven overs down then I could be suspended under the ICC playing conditions for slow over rates.

Once we had a chance to talk it through he was fine with it. He said to me at the lunch break, "I'm a bowler, I want to bowl, and you're a batsman, you want to bat".

But there are other things I have to think about on the field as well. We talk about over rates at every team meeting. We get behind and I'm forced to bowl guys I sometimes don't want to bowl in the circumstances.

It's unusual that Mike Hussey bowls for us, although he did a reasonable job.

That indicates I was trying to get through the overs without giving the batsmen the option of just running down the wicket and hitting the spinners back over their heads.
----

The on-field dispute between Brett Lee and Ricky Ponting has taken a twist with the coach Tim Nielsen saying a poor over-rate was not the main reason the strike bowler was not used in the first session of the fourth day in Mohali. Lee, who has failed to penetrate in his first two Tests in India, argued with Ponting on a morning when the part-time medium pacer Michael Hussey, the debutant Peter Siddle, regular Mitchell Johnson and spinner Cameron White were all preferred to him.

Ponting and Michael Clarke, the captain and vice-captain, both justified the decision by saying the team was about five overs behind the required rate - they also wanted to slow the speed of the ball down - but Nielsen said they were only three behind. It's not a level that would cause any player to fear a fine.

"We made a decision to take pace off the ball," Nielsen said. "You don't see Hussey bowl too often. We changed things around because things weren't working for us. The over-rate wasn't crazily out of control: three down at the time. In the end it was a tactical decision."

If he is fit...

he plays.. If he is not, Dhoni leads the side for the 3rd Test. Simple as that!

Anil Kumble is a man who, despite suffering a broken jaw, came out to bowl with his face bandaged to give his team a chance to win.

Anil Kumble is a man who sat himself out of the Mohali Test when there was every temptation to play with the injured shoulder. And he did this because he wanted to give his team a chance to win.

So, newsflash Pricky. Anil Kumble is the captain of the team until he or the selectors decide otherwise.

Hello?

Remove Ranatunga or no dollar deal

IPL chief tells Sri Lanka delegation By Channaka de Silva Indian cricket officials infuriated by haughty statements allegedly made by Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) interim committee chairman Arjuna Ranatunga have declared that they would sever all cricketing ties with Sri Lanka as long as Ranatunga is in office. Lalit Modi, the chief of the Indian Premier League (IPL) which is organised by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and BCCI Secretary N. Sirinivasan had declared the BCCI stance in no uncertain terms when they and other IPL officials met a high-powered Sri Lankan delegation in Bangkok last week to discuss a deal between the IPL and SLC. The chief of the Sri Lankan delegation and the acting SLC Interim Committee chairman S. Liyanagama who is also the secretary to the Sports Ministry would convey the situation to Sports Minister Gamini Lokuge shortly, as soon as the minister returns to the country from an official overseas visit to Bali. Ministry sources added that Liyanagama would strongly recommend the removal of Ranatunga from the SLC chair in his report to the minister on the Bangkok discussions. Sources privy to the Bangkok discussions told the Daily Mirror that the BCCI reps said that they would not go ahead with a proposed US $ 40 million deal over the next ten years, mainly as Ranatunga had made several public statements to the effect that the IPL offered the deal only as they could not avoid it due to Ranatunga’s stand on the issue. IPL officials had told the Sri Lankan delegation that they offered the deal only to help out the cash-strapped SLC as they felt it is only fair to help a friend in need and not for Ranatunga to seek personal glory by taking credit for it. They said they were capable of attracting the Sri Lankan players they want, and knew how to get those players for the IPL ahead of all other commitments irrespective of whether SLC liked it or not. They had promised the Sri Lankan delegation that they will go ahead with the proposed deal or an even better one once Ranatunga is out of office, but had declared they would not strike any deal with SLC till then.They had indicated that there was a likelihood of two future Sri Lanka tours by the Indian team in the calendar scheduled for 2009 and 2010 being cancelled unless the situation at the SLC changes. Ranatunga who is out of the country was not available for comment. The proposed US $ 40 million IPL deal was arranged between Modi and Sri Lanka Cricketers Union representative Graeme Labrooy after the Sports Minister Gamini Lokuge, ordered the cancellation of a proposed England tour in 2009 that clashed with the dates of the IPL tournament and wanted all national players released for the IPL. It was a goodwill gesture that was aimed at mending the already sour relationship with Indian Cricket Board – the economic powerhouse of world cricket. Minister handpicked a four-member Sri Lanka delegation comprising of Liyanagama, SLC Chief Executive Duleep Mendis, SLC interim committee member and former Players’ Union chief Sidath Wettimuny and Labrooy. Sources said that there was no issue about the location of the meeting which was held in Bangkok, as all IPL officials and member franchises were having their regular meeting there. “Some people think Bangkok was chosen for talks due to some shady reason. It is absurd because if there was anything like that, what would have been the difference between Bangkok and an Indian city?” asked the source. Meanwhile international media reports claimed yesterday that Pakistan Cricket Board’s newly-appointed chairman Ijaz Butt has also lashed out at Sri Lanka at his first ever press conference in Lahore on Monday. Butt criticised Sri Lanka for not supporting Pakistan’s stand to get their due chance to host the Champions Trophy during the ICC Board Meeting in Dubai in which Ranatunga represented Sri Lanka. “I was surprised over the silence of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka in the meeting,” Butt said.

Excuse me, but "They had indicated that there was a likelihood of two future Sri Lanka tours by the Indian team in the calendar scheduled for 2009 and 2010 being cancelled unless the situation at the SLC changes."

And "They said they were capable of attracting the Sri Lankan players they want, and knew how to get those players for the IPL ahead of all other commitments irrespective of whether SLC liked it or not" ?

If there is even a modicum of truth to these two statements, Mr Manohar needs to have a little tete-a-tete with his minions.. Because, while there is no such thing as a free lunch and everybody is working only out of self interest, the BCCI does not own everything it sees. And while their anger towards Ranatunga may be justified, they have absolutely no business pushing around the SLC like that.

Cancel the 70 million dollar contract, thats the BCCI's prerogative. But as they say in a different context - Your rights stop where my nose starts.

The BCCI will do well to remember that!

Update:-

IPL stand not intimated to us yet states Sri Lanka Cricket

Referring to our article “Remove Ranatunga or No Dollar Deal” that was published in “Daily Mirror” yesterday, Sri Lanka Cricket Media Manager has sent us the following clarification. Firstly, Sri Lanka Cricket wishes to inform the public that the mentioned remarks from the IPL delegation in Bangkok headed by its Chief Lalit Modi was the IPL stand and Sri Lanka Cricket is yet to receive an official statement from BCCI confirming its stand. Sri Lanka Cricket deny the mention of Mr. Ranatunga making several public statements to the effect that IPL has offered this deal due to his stand on the IPL issue, in fact Mr. Ranatunga has not made any statements on this deal which was conveyed to the Interim Committee during a meeting with the National Captain Mahela Jayewardene, on the IPL issue when Mahela requested the presence of Cricketers Association representatives Mr. Promodhaya Wickramasinghe and Graham Labrooy to present a proposal to the Interim Committee which suggested to cancel next year’s English Test series and release all IPL players for 10 years. IPL Chief Lalit Modi offered the above deal to Labrooy and IPL contracted National player Muttiah Muralitharan during a meeting in India recently which also offered financial benefits for SLC for the next decade if agreed on the deal. The proposal was discussed and a hand-out was given to all Interim Committee members by the Cricketers Association which was subsequently taken-up in Bangkok by both parties on a request made by the Hon. Minister of Sports Gamini Lokuge.

Sans comment!

ANIL Kumble had the Indian press corp in raptures last summer when he declared: "Only one team had played the match in the right spirit."

The tourists – both players and media – were dismayed with the events of India's Sydney Test loss to Australia, remembered for the ugly spat between Andrew Symonds and Harbhajan Singh and shocking umpiring decisions.

The Indian captain's comment lit an explosive fuse that raged for months.

But yesterday the injured skipper was noticeably quiet when his team motored to a victory tainted by ugly local tactics that were by no means in the "spirit of the game".

No doubt Australia was outplayed in Mohali. Comprehensively outplayed.

But the behaviour of some of the Indian players was a disgrace. And stand-in skipper M. S. Dhoni is at the top of the pile.

How wicketkeeper Dhoni could appeal yesterday for an edge off Mitchell Johnson that clearly bounced before his gloves was bewildering.

Umpire Rudi Koertzen immediately rejected Zaheer Khan's appeal and should have had a stern talk with Dhoni.

The locals like to harp on about how Sourav Ganguly was dismissed by a controversial catch at slip by Michael Clarke in that Sydney Test.

Clarke was unsure whether he caught it, but Ricky Ponting was and, under the catching pact between the nations at the time, Ganguly had to go.

That incident is still a sore point, but what Dhoni did was inexplicable, especially for a man who covets the top job on a permanent basis.

Throughout the first two Tests, India has made a mockery of its pledge to play this series in the "right spirit".

Batsmen have refused to walk when obviously caught, there has been continual glaring at umpires when appeals have been rejected, and the verbal lip directed at the Aussies has made even the hard-nosed tourists question whether the line has been crossed.

Zaheer was hauled before match referee Chris Broad last night for the level-two offence of "conduct contrary to the spirit of the game".

Zaheer made a fool of himself when he abused Matthew Hayden after he was dismissed by Harbhajan on Monday.

Zaheer initially ran to the stumps from fine leg to celebrate with his teammates, but changed direction to run 15m to get in the face of Hayden.

Zaheer faced losing between 50 and 100 per cent of his match fee last night – the likely penalty – although he could be suspended for a Test or two one-day internationals.

The meltdown came just a day after he rang Brett Lee in his hotel room to apologise for a spray he gave the Aussie quick. Lee and Shane Watson were under intense verbal fire when batting on day three, prompting umpires Asad Rauf and Koertzen to intervene.

While Lee laughed off the banter, Zaheer was worried he had crossed the line and rang him to make sure there was no lingering animosity.

Australia hasn't been entirely innocent, but, at the moment, it appears only one team has been playing in the right spirit.

The article begs the obvious question - How did Jon Pierek know Zaheer Khan had phoned Brett Lee in his hotel room to apologize?

Done and dusted!

1-0 India. Their biggest victory ( in terms of runs). "The perfect Test match" to quote MS Dhoni.

Now, to bring the Trophy home!

On Peter Siddle

"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death....

What a lion hearted performance on the 4th day!

300 odd behind, an unsympathetic captain, a cringe worthy field setting. And yet, the young man ran in, and ran in hard. And bowled.

And bowled.

And how!

His numbers do not do justice to the opportunities he created or the heavy balls he bowled or the effort he put in.

If only his captain had been awake to the possibilities!