Congratulations, The England

for winning the Test series against New Zealand and breaking Harry Potter's heart!

Conflicted interests?

Mark Taylor ( Director, Cricket Australia, Commentator on Channel 9 and member of the ICC Cricket Committee) "has condemned the International Cricket Council's 'zero tolerance' approach to sledging".
---
Here is India's forthcoming itinerary ( as of the 7th of February 2007)

India - forthcoming Test and one-day series

---

Year	Month/s	Teams/Tournament	Tests	ODIs
2006/07	Jan	HOME v West Indies	-	4
2006/07	Feb	HOME v Sri Lanka	-	4
2006/07	Mar-Apr	AWAY: World Cup (Aus, Eng, Ind, Sth Africa, New Z'lnd, Pak, Sri Lanka, W Indies, Zim, B'desh, Kenya, Ireland, Bermuda, Canada, Scotland, Netherlands) in West Indies
2007	May	AWAY v Bangladesh	*tbc	*tbc
2007	Jun	AWAY: Afro Asia Cup (B'desh. Ind, Sth Africa, Pak, Sri Lanka, Zim, Kenya) in
2007	Jun-Sep	AWAY v England	3	7
2007	Aug	AWAY v Scotland	-	1
2007/08	Sep	AWAY: Twenty20 Championship (Aus, Eng, Ind, Sth Africa, New Z'lnd, Pak, Sri Lanka, W Indies, Zim, B'desh) in South Africa
2007/08	Nov-Dec	HOME v Australia	-	*tbc
2007/08	Dec-Jan	AWAY v Pakistan	*tbc	*tbc
2007/08	Dec-Feb	AWAY v Australia	*tbc	*tbc
2007/08	Jan-Feb	AWAY: ODI series (Aus, Ind, Sri Lanka) in Australia
2007/08	Feb-Mar	AWAY: ODI series (B'desh, Ind, Sth Africa) in Bangladesh
2007/08	Mar	AWAY v Bangladesh	*tbc	*tbc
2007/08	Mar	HOME v South Africa	*tbc	*tbc
2008	Apr	AWAY v South Africa	*tbc	*tbc
2008	Apr	AWAY: Asia Cup (B'desh. Ind, Pak, Sri Lanka) in Pakistan
2008	May	AWAY v Zimbabwe	*tbc	*tbc
2008	Jun	AWAY: Afro Asia Cup (B'desh. Ind, Sth Africa, Pak, Sri Lanka, Zim, Kenya) in Malaysia
2008	Jul-Aug	AWAY v Sri Lanka	*tbc	*tbc
2008/09	Sep-Oct	AWAY: ICC Champions Trophy (Aus, Eng, Ind, Sth Africa, New Z'lnd, Pak, Sri Lanka, W Indies, Zim, B'desh) in Pakistan
2008/09	Nov-Dec	HOME v England	*tbc	*tbc
2008/09	Dec	AWAY v Pakistan	*tbc	*tbc
2008/09	Jan	AWAY v South Africa	*tbc	*tbc
2008/09	Apr	AWAY v New Zealand	*tbc	*tbc

ndia v England 2006 ( series itinerary)

India v England 2007 ( series itinerary)

So why are India and England playing only 2 Tests and 7 ODIs this time round?

Because, according to the BCCI - "What can we do?" Shah asked. "Because of the FTP we need to squeeze other events too."

And according to the ECB - "The tour would have finished on January 5, and the problem is we have an agreement with our players that we will only tour South Africa and Australia over Christmas," a top ECB official told TOI.

Makes me wonder - Did anyone bother looking up the FTP at all?
--
PS:- SoulBerry has a petition to save the 3rd Test.. Please do look it up.

EOW probe in ’96 World Cup accounts case reveals Jagmohan Dalmiya misappropriated BCCI funds worth Rs 2.90 crore; charge sheet to be filed in court on March 26

A controversy out of nothing

courtesy Cricinfo.

Here is the Gavaskar article in full.

Grow up!!

• Ganguly & Dravid have played more than enough Tests, have captained the country and Dhoni should give respect when it is due. They would no doubt be hurt
— Former player Gundappa Vishwanath

• In the near future, if the juniors don’t do well and the selectors decide to bring back the seniors, one can well imagine the scene in the dressing room
—Fo coach Anshuman Gaekwad

And this reaction, for a yet to be published interview!

PS:- And now, a reaction from Ratnakar Shetty!!

PPS:- The blog is back!!!

PPPS:- Kapil Dev, the second-highest wicket-taker for India in Tests, will not be present at Anil Kumble’s felicitation function. The former India captain, a one-time teammate of Kumble, has not been invited by the Board of Control for Cricket in India. The BCCI, however, has invited all the former captains to the March 25 function in Chennai where the India Test captain will be honoured for taking 600 Test wickets.

Come now, CMJ

Remember this gem from Andrew Miller on the Pawar nomination for ICC President-

With the Asian bloc unbreakable, all it would take for a Pawar victory would be a shifting of support of the African contingent, and then Pandora's Box really would be cracked open. For all his faults, Sonn remained a cricket-lover at heart, something that has not always been apparent at the fiscally obsessed BCCI. With Pawar installed at the head of the ICC, the way would be cleared for the takeover of the ICC that has long been threatened by the frustrated Indians, who represent 70% of the game's income and whose early exit from the World Cup conveniently distanced them from most - if not all - of the tournament's myriad failings.

Now, CMJ chimes in on Inderjit Singh Bindra's possible appointment as ICC Chief Executive

India's grip on world cricket would become more or less total if the 50-50 decision on who succeeds Malcolm Speed as chief executive of the ICC in June favours Inder Singh Bindra, one of the three most powerful men in the sport on the sub-continent. The four senior ICC figures charged with making the choice between Bindra and the rival preferred by two of them must be made soon, probably at the ICC's next meeting, on Monday and Tuesday of next week.

Makes you wonder where these profound reservations were when Malcolm Gray and Malcolm Speed (Australians both) were the President and Chief Executive of the ICC!

Noose reports!

International Cricket Council (ICC) is investigating Harbhajan Singh's reported outburst against Matthew Hayden and Adam Gilchrist to nip in the bud any open conflict between Indian Board and Cricket Australia, a media report has claimed.

According to 'The Australian', match referees Mike Procter and Jeff Crowe have asked India to reign in Harbhajan.

"We are aware of Harbhajan Singh's comments and are in dialogue with the two boards (Australia and India)," the newspaper quoted an ICC spokesman as saying.

Harbhajan could be charged with unbecoming conduct, which carries penalties, including suspension, the report added.

Just like they, or rather the ICC appointed match referee Jeff Crowe did, when there were unsubstantiated reports of Harbhajan doing the "monkey scratch" at the SCG

The Board of Control for Cricket in India will ask the ICC to investigate the actions of match referee Jeff Crowe, who pursued unauthenticated media reports against Harbhajan Singh.

Many newspaper reports in Australia accused off-spinner Harbhajan of making monkey gestures at sections of the crowd during the first Commonwealth Bank Series final between Australia and India in Sydney.

Following the reports, referee Crowe proceeded with an investigation into the alleged incident, but decided to take no action against Harbhajan after inspecting all the available evidence.

It is good to note that the ICC is taking cognizance of all media reports that come its way. So here are two more media reports for the ICC's perusal

A Herald Sun report said Australian supporters shouted "Show us your visas, show us your visas" at Indian fans, interviewed by their reporters. The visiting fans described the chant as "offensive, ugly and racist".

Even some Australian fans found the chants racist.

"That is racist," a home supporter, Heath Robbins, was quoted as saying.

"It is attacking a person's country and they should be kicked out of the ground as they should for any offensive behaviour to any other people," he said.

CA spokesman Peter Young said no action can be taken against those involved in the chant because it was not reported to the police or security.

"Police have confirmed the chant took place and conducted extensive interviews with both Indian and Australian supporters and they did not find anyone who was offended," Young said.

and

Witnesses said Harbhajan, who was last week branded an "obnoxious little weed" by Matthew Hayden, was retaliating to sustained crowd abuse during Australia's innings.

It was claimed some fans taunted the divisive spinner to "show us your knot" and "get a haircut" – both references to his Sikh roots.

And just in case the ICC honchos were not aware, here is the the Anti Racism write up on the ICC website

Anti Racism and Diversity

Across the world, cricket has a rich and diverse history and regularly demonstrates its capacity to break down boundaries and draw cultures together. There is a strong tradition of fans from rival teams enjoying matches side by side and the off-field camaraderie amongst players is a celebrated feature of the game.

Against this backdrop there is clearly no place for discriminaton so following an independent report from India's Solicitor General, Goolam Vahanvati, the ICC Anti-Racism Code was strengthened in November 2006.

This Code - one of the toughest in world sport - confirms a level of commitment from the ICC and its Members to promote and encourage participation at all levels regardless of race, colour, religion, national or ethnic origin and to ensure that there is no discrimination in the sport.

It requires ICC Members to impose punishments on spectators found guilty of racial abuse, from ejection from the venue to a life ban, and deliver preventative measures at international matches.

To assist Members with the adoption of the new Code, the ICC introduced an implementation template and check list shortly after the Code was adopted and since the start of 2007 it has begun to monitor the application of these measures around the cricket world.

Members failing to uphold the Code face penalties if racist incidents happen at a venue under their control. These penalties range from warnings through to fines and the possible withdrawal of international status from a venue.

The ICC's commitment to ensuring the diversity of the sport is respected by its participants is also enshrined in the Code of Conduct for Players and Officials where on-field racism is considered one of the most serious acts that can be committed, with the possibility of a life ban for anyone found guilty of such an offence.

At the ICC World Twenty20 2007, the ICC celebrated its inaugural Diversity Day with events involving both the South Africa and Pakistan teams and young people from racially diverse communities.

Given their penchant for acting on newspaper/media reports, will the ICC act now?

Bull!

TEST all-rounder Andrew Symonds is at odds with Cricket Australia bosses - but he's not allowed to tell you why.

His column filed for today's The Sunday Mail attacked administrators, who last night pulled the article.

Under Cricket Australia rules, all players writing newspaper columns must have their material read then approved by CA media director Peter Young.

Young last night told The Sunday Mail: "There are inaccuracies in the column – Andrew does not understand the full story.

"I cannot provide approval for publication. He needs to be briefed on the situation. There will be a player briefing next week."

----

ANDREW Symonds' column will no longer appear in The Sunday Telegraph.

After twice being gagged by Cricket Australia, Symonds has been bullied into believing the only way to do a column with this paper is to have it ghost-written by cricket officials.

This paper had no interest in running a column that is not only vetted by Cricket Australia but also written by its employees.

---
Does this mean that when Symonds wrote this

INDIA is never an easy place to tour, but I am surprised at how hostile it has been.

There has been quite a bit of feeling between the two sides, and now that it has started, I can't see things changing greatly. We certainly won't be taking a backward step.

The feeling has come from the carry-on that surrounded India's World Twenty20 win. When we got here, it was just everywhere.

Our blokes thought it was over the top. Some of the things their players have been given and the way they are treated, it's like they are rock stars and princes.

The Indian Government gave them a heap of money. Yuvraj Singh got a Porsche. Blokes are getting houses and blocks of land.

It was all over the papers and even the Indian hockey team blew up. Two days before our first game, the Indian players didn't train because their guys were shooting commercials.

It's been irritating because it's been in our face. We see them on television every day.

and ostensibly said this

"The thing is, we've only been playing them for five minutes," Symonds said.

"They're saying they've built up this new Indian team, but we'll see how much they've changed at the end of our summer.

"OK, they've beaten us in a Twenty20 game and one one-dayer in four years. You can't gauge much on that, but we'll see how this so-called new Indian team goes on our soil."

The Indians have won just one Test in 26 years in Australia - a four-wicket win in Adelaide in 2003.

"You don't become a great player overnight and it's the same as a team: you need sustained success to be respected.

"When other sides say you're a great side, that's when you're a great side," Symonds said.

"They've got some world-class players but it's how they gel together. As soon as we spot one sign of weakness or selfishness, that's when we go in for the kill."

the CA was onside?

Whatever happened to the CA knowtowing to every Indian whim and fancy?

Gangs and the Wall

John has, in his post, raised a pertinent question - How do they put 20000 runs to pasture gracefully?

I have put in a longish comment which I plan to elaborate on here.

India's immediate need is not its ODI team or its Twenty20 team. Our immediate needs are to find a couple of quality spinners who can take over the mantle from Anil Kumble and to find steady replacements for the greatest middle order the Indian team has had.

While the quality of what we will lose cannot be compensated,a move away from the super bats era to a more total-cricket era will be more than welcome.

India's strength in the longer form of the game is its bowling - the depth and the variety we possess is second to none.

If we can compliment this depth in bowling with a batting lineup that is steady, if not spectacular, and one that gives the bowling line up enough runs and enough time to take 20 wickets, our cricket will be well served in the near and medium term.

The trick is - how? How do we jettison what we have and bring in the untried and the untested and expect to maintain similar, if not the same, standards?

This is where the comment I made on John's blog comes into play. I reproduce it, in full.

John,

I think this senior junior thingie is the wrong debate - what has been evident in the Oz tour has been the acceptance of an horses for courses policy.

The presence of SRT or RD or SCG is required because of their experience - the been there done that thingie.

Now, of the three, SRT has been known to be the go to guy for all matters of issues cricketing - even when SCG or RD or MA were captains. He, therefore, lends himself well a s the obvious choice for the mentor role with the team.

RD and SCG do not bring the mentorship capacity to the table - what they have is their primary skills as batsmen and the baggage of being ex-India captains.

Do we need pure batsmen or batsmen bowlers in the team- there are enough candidates who can fill that role.

Do we need ex-India captains and their baggage and their ability to form alternate power centers?

If the GC experience has taught us anything, it is the fact that multiple power centers is detrimental to the team as a whole.

There will be cases when we may still need to play all three in the same team. Just that those cases may be few and far in between.

At the same time, pensioning them off is not necessarily a smart thing because, with the IPL money, if they decide to say good bye to Test Cricket also, we are in a deep hole as we do not have people who can readily slot into the role that RD and SG have played thus far.

I think it is more prudent to keep RD and SG in the fray, getting them to play the odd ODI over the next year or so, while utilizing their services in Test cricket as we groom their successors in the longer form of the game ( by having a policy of rotation - 2 seniors + 1 junior in the middle order always for the next 20 Tests).

Assuming we do have a rotation policy in place,we are giving the new kids enough time and latitude to find their feet in test cricket.

Not only will they have the luxury of fitting into their batting positions, they will have the luxury of playing under the shadow of two/three senior players - as good a safety net as any.

And there are 10 odd tests to assess their ability - an important factor so that we do not all come out feeling short changed.

Given age and ability, the policy can also be modified so that the person anointed to take Ganguly's place, for example, is given a greater number of opportunities right off the bat, assuming Ganguly is the first of the Fab 4 to retire.

Can it work? The proof of the pudding...

19.10

Now you know why you are bargain basement price Pricky.

Homecoming

The World Champions are home!

Done and Dusted

We won.Its over. Come back home.

Ban or no ban Mr Atherton?

The furore that has followed his rather too frequent use of the beamer is easier to justify. The beamer is the hardest ball for a batsman to pick up precisely because it pitches (or doesn't pitch) so far from where the batsman expects. If it is bowled on target, as Lee's invariably is, then it can be lethal. Lee was visibly sheepish after his latest beamer at Marcus Trescothick during the NatWest Series final. After taking Andrew Strauss's wicket shortly afterwards he remained head bowed rather than celebrating in his usual fist-pumping fashion.

His visible embarrassment and immediate fulsome apology convinces me that Lee's beamers are unintentional, although other international bowlers doubt that such a quality performer can be so far out of kilter. The other reason for giving Lee the benefit of the doubt is that he is such a demonstrably decent fellow. His popularity among team-mates, current and former, is legend. Michael Slater, one of the few Australian pundits prepared to speak frankly about former team-mates, says "he's just a champion".

---

Rather an apology than nothing, but it seems to me that the apology is irrelevant. The damage could have been severe. A batsman is conditioned to look for the ball on a downward trajectory out of the bowler's hand, and therefore will not necessarily pick it up. (The only other time I've seen one bowled in a Test match, by Glenn McGrath, it stuck straight in Mark Ramprakash's grille without the batsman flinching).

Moreover, an apology doesn't necessarily mean it is sincere. With match referees on the prowl, any bowler with an ounce of survival instinct is bound to apologise, deliberately bowled or not. And the batsman/batting side has no option but to accept it, for if it is not accepted then the moral high ground shifts in favour of the bowler, whose integrity is suddenly in question.

....

If bowled deliberately there cannot be a more cowardly action on a cricket field; if bowled accidentally it is still potentially lethal. Either way it should incur an immediate one-match ban. (Only obvious extenuating circumstances, such as a one-day game played in the rain, should save the bowler from such a penalty).

----

40.1	Lee to Tendulkar, 1 no ball, spears in the full toss, a no-ball which appeared to crash into his helmet
That seemed to slip out, it hit him on the shoulder in fact. Tendulkar is typically sanguine and accepted the apology readily, the umpires are having a word with Ponting now

When ignorance is bliss,

He is part of a caste system in a country whose tiered society benefits only those at its pinnacle. The Indian spinner definitely does not sit at the bottom of such a system.

it is folly to be wise Ms Wilson!

Goodbye Dizzy

Prem Panicker, in a different context, on Jason Gillespie-

Hold off on the celebrations for just a second -- and with everything you've got, applaud a man with a brittle body and a heart bigger than the stadium he performed prodigies in today.

Jason Gillespie was incredible -- and you use that word only because you can't find a stronger one. India needing 155 to win, 70 overs to get it in, and a batting lineup that had, in its two previous innings, batted over five sessions and scored at speed.

Glen McGrath, the more visible face of Australian fast bowling, was good in his first spell, but never threatening. Colin Miller at first change seemed to be bowling his off spin on a different pitch from the one on which Harbhajan, yet again, performed brilliantly. Shane Warne -- the spearhead, the man expected to flatten India with the backing of two quality seamers -- was smashed out of the attack. And despite two wickets against the run of play, India was running away with the game.

Or would have, except for one man who just did not know how to give up.

Long after everything else about this series is forgotten, one image will remain evergreen -- a tall, lanky young man, walking back as slowly as possible to the top of his bowling mark, trying to use every extra second to give his body some rest, talking to himself every step of the way. Turning. Facing the batsman. Pausing -- and visibly gathering himself for yet another supreme effort, then bursting out of the blocks to send down yet another sizzling delivery.

Jason Gillespie single-handedly lifted his team. The other ten seemed to realise, suddenly, that there was something special happening in their midst, got a second wind, and lifted their own game.

An Australian reader, in mail day before yesterday, said: "This Test is looking for a hero." Today, it found one -- and as so often happens, that hero happened to be part of the team that lost.

A hero indeed!