It's just a matter of age

What's better than a 37-year old wrist-spinner who concedes 4 an over and bowls a lot of long-hops?

A 25-year old wrist-spinner who does the same.

To give him some credit, Beau Casson definitely showed, after drawing a blank in West Indies' first innings, that he had the ability to keep his head even when Dwayne Bravo went after him like a maniac. Also don't forget that he got two of the most important wickets in the 2nd innings - Xavier Marshall and Bravo.

West Indies ran Australia close for a while, but once they lost Bravo and Chanderpaul, the game was up. In the first test, the game was made even by West Indies' bowling in the second innings but Stuart Clark blew away any hope of a West Indies win.

Overall, the series was quite a good one. Even the second test potentially had a twist at the end, but West Indies hung on. I was surprised with the way West Indies played. Unlike in the past, they didn't seem to turn up expecting to lose against Australia. There could be multiple reasons attributed to it: Warne & McGrath having retired, Brian Lara's absence or the injury to Hayden.

But I think the main reason West Indies did well was because their bowling attack had Australia in trouble on multiple occasions. That they couldn't go on and finish the job could be attributed to incompetence (their own as well as the umpires') and the famous Aussie ability to wriggle out of every troubling situation.

West Indies need to make sure they have at least 4-5 fit quick bowlers (Edwards, Taylor, Powell did play the series, but what happened to Collymore?), 1-2 spinners that they need to groom over a period of time and some better batting (only Chanderpaul & Sarwan made centuries, neither made 130 and a tail that can make at least 70-100 runs).

As for Australia, I guess they'll really be hoping that Casson is good enough to play for a decade at least. From what I've read, the reserve spinners are really not good enough. If Casson doesn't do well, then I guess Australia will end up having Symonds and Clarke as the spinners.

Then again, like I wrote when Warne & McGrath retired, Australia only have themselves to blame for not giving the likes of Nathan Hauritz and Dan Cullen enough opportunities, especially to bowl in tandem with Warne in international cricket.

Labels: australia, casson, macgill, spin

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:38 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Stuart MacGill retires from international cricket

Stuart MacGill, who really ought to have changed his name to 'Stuart Long Hop MacGill' a long time ago, has retired from international cricket. One week or so ago, he had bowled a lot of tripe in the first test at Jamaica.

I've never really had a good opinion about him, and it isn't based just on his 'performance' when India toured Australia in 2003/04. I've watched him play against other opposition, and pretty much had the same conclusion: Quite over-rated. Maybe Warne and Kumble's accuracy resulted in me sub-consciously having a much higher bar on the number of long-hops that leg-spinners were allowed to bowl, but I frequently saw MacGill bowl far too many. It's a pity that he didn't play in the recent India-Australia series, for while India would have given him as many wickets as Hogg got, he wouldn't have played the crucial knock at Sydney that Hogg did.

Funny how none of the Aussie commentators point out that nearly 16% of MacGill's wickets were against Bangladesh. They always do so when it comes to Murali. MacGill also did well against England and South Africa, but that's something you came to expect!

Potentially the only time I had any sort of appreciation for an act of his was when he announced that he would not be touring Zimbabwe in 2004 over moral grounds.

Cricinfo ends its report about his retirement with:

While the end was not as he had hoped, MacGill will be remembered as an example of Australia's incredible depth during the Waugh and Ponting eras, and as one the best contemporary spinners.

In my opinion, MacGill was perhaps the 7th (or at best 6th) best spinner in the last 15 years: Warne, Murali, Kumble, Saqlain Mushtaq, Daniel Vettori, Mushtaq Ahmed, MacGill and Harbhajan being my list.

Labels: australia, macgill, retire

Thus spake Jagadish @ 9:01 am | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

West Indies v Australia first test

The first test between West Indies and Australia at Jamaica has been wonderful to watch/follow/catch the highlights package. A tantalizing final day's play is hopefully in store.

Australia started poorly, but recovered as Ponting made 150 while Hodge, Hussey and Symonds chipped in to help Australia get to 431. In reply, West Indies were rescued only because of Chanderpaul's super century, with some help from Morton and Bravo. Don't forget the immense contribution from Stuart MacGill (2nd best leggie in the world, and all that): 2/100 in 22 overs.

Then Edwards, Powell and Bravo ripped through Australia's top order, only to come up against Symonds again. In the company of Hodge and Haddin, Symonds probably turned the game decisively Australia's way, from 18/5 & 70/6 to 167. To use a favourite slogan: "When you've got Australia by the balls, you hold on. You don't let go".

Imagine if Australia had been bowled out for something like 100! That'd have made West Indies' task so much easier. They'd have been chasing 230-odd, not the 287 that they need to make to beat Australia in a 'live' test for the first time in nine years. Remember the way that Trinidadian bugger enthralled everyone during THAT series? Statistical oddity: West Indies made 431 in their first innings in that game, the same total that Australia managed this time around.

That said, I think Australia will win this one with around 50 runs to spare. Despite winning away, against South Africa & at home, against Sri Lanka in the last 5 months, I don't think this West Indies team knows how to nail down the advantage, especially against Australia.

In the unlikely event that West Indies win the game, they will join India (Calcutta & Chennai in 2001, Adelaide 2003 and Perth 2008) and England (Edgbaston & Trent Bridge in 2005) as the only teams to have defeated Australia in a 'live' test match this decade.

Labels: australia, australia by the balls cliche, macgill, statistic, west indies

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:36 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Spare MacGill please

Sri Lanka are currently making Stuart MacGill's comeback miserable. He has conceded 317 runs for 4 wickets so far (strike rate 80, econ rate 3.5).

If this implies that he won't play against India, I consider the Sri Lankans totally responsible for it, especially if in his absence, some other spinner picks up wickets or Australia opt for an all-pace attack.

That said, it is entirely possible that he will pick up a five-fer tomorrow to ensure he gets picked against India.

Labels: australia, india, macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:52 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Steve Waugh joins his twin and Edward Craig

In his column, Steve Waugh starts off with

Leg-spin is the Poms' achilles heel and it's our great fortune to have the two best exponents of this craft residing in Australia.

While I have no doubt that Shane Warne is the best, putting MacGill in the same class is unacceptable. Especially when there's this other gentleman named Anil Kumble is still playing international cricket.

Then again, myopia is something that seems to run in the family. Mark Waugh, as has been posted here earier, had Stuart MacGill as the second best and third best spinner (not even leggie, mind you!) on the planet. But the Waugh's aren't alone. Edward Craig, deputy editor of The Wisden Cricketer, also called MacGill the second best spinner in the world.

Labels: macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:56 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Edward Craig, meet Anil Kumble

Last night, when I read the Australia v South Africa first test preview, Edward Craig had written

And the Australians are likely to select Stuart MacGill, the second best legspinner in the world, to make life more awkward.

Subsequently, someone may have pointed out to him that Mark Waugh was possibly the only person, aside from MacGill himself, who thought so. The preview now says

And the Australians are likely to select Stuart MacGill, who some claim is the second best legspinner in the world, to make life even more awkward.

Edward, since you even pondered bringing together the words 'Stuart MacGill', 'second' 'best', 'leg-spinner' and 'world', I'll have to introduce you to someone I believe is the rightful holder of that distinction. He answers to the name Anil Kumble.

Labels: macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:19 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Adelaide - Two years ago

When India won at Adelaide two years ago, I was at home. The time was already 11 am and I was being goaded to move my backside and get to work. I obviously couldn't do that without watching the Indian team achieve a milestone, a test match win in Australia. I'd missed watching India's win at Headingley in 2002 "live" on TV. There was no way I was going to miss out on this one!

There were many heroes in that Adelaide game. Irfan Pathan made a promising debut. Ricky Ponting batted beautifully and powerfully to make a double century. Kumble took five wickets. Laxman batted sublimely. Sehwag had a cameo in each innings, as did Gilchrist. The opening day ended with Australia on 400/5 with Gilchrist and Ponting still at the crease. A total of perhaps 650 was in store, surely, we all thought. Agarkar and Kumble had other ideas, with Kumble making an impact on the series for the first [and not the last] time. India's 80/1 thanks to a good opening stand between Akash Chopra and Sehwag became 85/4. The next time an Indian batsman walked back dismissed, the score read 388, with Messrs. Dravid and Laxman tormenting Australia yet again. The tail hung around long enough to ensure Australia's lead was only 33.

Good bowling, over-confidence and a poor batting display resulted in Agarkar running through Australia's lineup picking up six wickets. Lest we forget, Tendulkar made his presence felt as well, with the ball, just as he did at Calcutta in 2001, with the wickets of Martyn [brilliant slip catch by guess who?] and Steve Waugh. Kumble bowled Gilchrist around his legs when it seemed like he was changing the course of the game. India were set 230 to win, three less than what Dravid had made off his own bat in the first innings. My first hope was for Veeru and Chopra to be together till stumps. I didn't care even if they made only 10 runs in the half an hour they faced. As it turned out, they batted quite positively, ending the fourth day with 193 still to get and all wickets in hand.

Chopra went early on, but Sehwag was still there. He looked in great touch and was on the verge of treating MacGill's offerings with the normal disdain he reserves for spinners when he played an atrociously moronic slog and was stumped. Tendulkar and Dravid had a nice partnership but Tendulkar padded up to MacGill and was given out. Ganguly opened the face and was caught at gully. The score was 170/4, 60 runs more for India, six wickets more for Australia. The partnership which finally eased my tension was that between Dravid and Laxman. Laxman keeps coming up with something special in low scoring totals/chases against Australia [Crucial sixties in the Madras test of 2001 and last year's Bombay test]. In fact his mode of dismissal was identical to how he was dismissed in the final test of the 2001 series, caught at mid-wicket, except the catch this time around wasn't spectacular. Parthiv Patel then got out, bowled around his legs by Katich of all people. Fittingly enough, Dravid hit the winning runs through cover off MacGill and Agarkar was at the other end when it happened. Surely a target of 230 could have been achieved with more ease!

The ball apparently fell into the moat and Dravid couldn't find it. Steve Waugh mentions in his book about how he made sure he retrieved the ball, signed it and handed it over to Dravid.

I think Dravid had something like one or two false shots in both innings. His top edged hook off Bichel flew over fineleg for six to bring up his century in the first innings. In the second innings, he survived two frightfully good overs from Brad Williams, including a dropped catch by Gilchrist and a loud appeal for a catch which was rightly negated because the ball had gone off his arm guard.

Dravid's performance was outstanding and astounding. Scoring 233 and then 72, while being on the field for almost throughout the game, was when Dravid finally confirmed to everyone else (I'd been convinced for a while) that he was now ready to take on the mantle of being India's best batsman. He was not out on 199 at the end of day three. He'd moved from 182 to 199 in 38 balls with the help of singles and twos, no boundaries or sixes. He had successfully shielded Kumble from Gillespie. He even had the gall to score a single with one ball remaining in the day's play. The personal milestone could wait for the next day. As it turned out, the double century was scored off the first ball of the next day. Now I'm willing to bet that _any_ other batsman would have tried to get the double century done with so that he'd have one less thing to worry about that night and the next morning.

A lot of water has flowed under the bridge though. He is now India's skipper, and will be in that post for possibly the next two to three years. His skipper in that game apparently now no longer fits in the scheme of things.

Oddly enough, I find no mention of the actual win in Cricinfo's "All Today's Yesterdays" even though they mentioned Dravid's double century and Agarkar's haul in the last two day's editions.

Labels: macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:50 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

From #2 to #3 for MacGill

In the span of less than eight months, Stuart MacGill has dropped from being the second best spinner in the universe to number three in Mark Waugh's rankings.

As his name was being bandied about for a spot on the selection panel, in his 'Sun-Herald' column earlier this year about Nathan Hauritz's selection for the test series against India in 2004 he wrote:

The next selection, which was a major surprise, was the inclusion of Nathan Hauritz in the tour party to India ahead of the second-best spinner in world cricket, Stuart MacGill.

As MacGill picked up 9 wickets to help Australia thrash the World XI last week, he wrote in his column yesterday:

Why has the third-best spinner in world cricket turned out for his country in only 34 Tests?

Now there are two burning questions:

1. How on earth did an Aussie admit that there were actually spinners better than those from his country?
   
2. Just who is the chap who has pushed MacGill to #3? Is it him? Or is it one of these chaps?

Labels: macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:19 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Kumble's baffling omission

The lineup of spinners potentially participating in the Super Test which starts tomorrow reads (in alphabetical order of second name) Stuart MacGill, Muttiah Muralitharan, Daniel Vettori and Shane Warne. It is a glittering lineup. But it is by no means the best available spinning talent. I cannot understand how Kumble, Harbhajan and Kaneria were left out. If we use performances in the same period used for the ICC awards, i.e. between August 1 2004 and July 31 2005, then this is what we get.

Danish Kaneria had 60 wickets in ten tests and his breakup was 15 wickets @ 37 v Australia, 19 wickets @ 32 v India, 15 wickets @ 24 v Sri Lanka and 11 wickets @ 34 v West Indies.

Anil Kumble had 64 wickets in 11 tests and his breakup was 27 wickets @ 25 v Australia, 10 wickets @ 14 v Bangladesh, 17 wickets @ 38 v Pakistan and 10 wickets @ 34 v South Africa.

Harbhajan Singh had 48 wickets in 9 tests and his breakup was 21 wickets @ 24 v Australia, 4 wickets @ 41 v Bangladesh (hiak! hiak!), 10 wickets @ 33 v Pakistan and 13 wickets @ 24 v South Africa.

The incumbents' statistics were:

Muttiah Muralitharan had 22 wickets in 3 tests and his breakup was 5 wickets @ 33 v South Africa and 17 wickets @ 10 v West Indies.

Daniel Vettori had 38 wickets in 7 tests and his breakup was 18 wickets @ 41 v Australia and 20 wickets @ 11 against Bangladesh.

The World side is playing against Australia. Even on the basis of their overall past records against Australia, it is tough to justify the selections. Admittedly it is tough to drop Murali, in spite of his not having played much in the last year. On the basis of performances against Australia in the last year, Kumble and Harbhajan definitely deserved a spot, perhaps Kumble more so than Harbhajan considering his performances during India's tour of Australia in 2003/04. Kaneria has improved by leaps and bounds and his performance in Australia was wonderful, but he lacked bowling support.

Purely based on the numbers, it does seem to me that one of those selections is wrong. I love that chap's bowling, and my wife is a huge fan of his looks, but I would certainly not have picked the bespectacled one.

Labels: kumble, macgill, super series 2005

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:02 pm | Sledge/Read 5 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Two spinners at Old Trafford?

Stuart MacGill seems prepared to turn up in the playing XI at Old Trafford. Apparently the pitch may not aid spinners to the extent that it has in the past. Now whether that is due to quirks of nature or instructions from England's cricketing establishment is open to discussion. I must also clarify that it is the prerogative of the host country to determine the pitches and the schedules. Frankly, I think most touring sides doth protest too much.

I checked some of the recent county championship results at Old Trafford this season, obviously implying Lancashire's home games. I didn't think including limited overs games would give me any sort of impression. The main problem is that there have been only two first-class fixtures played at Old Trafford since June.

The last county championship game played there a couple of weeks ago featured Lancashire and Essex. Essex made 536 and Lancashire simply stepped up and scored 119 more. Gary Keedy, who is apparently among England's top spinners not named Ashley Giles or Gareth Batty, got one wicket from his fifteen overs, conceding nearly six an over. Danish Kaneria, who played a big role in Pakistan's drawn series in India earlier this year, bowled his 70 overs for 208 runs without bothering to trouble that column called 'wickets'.

In early June, Lancashire played Northamptonshire. Murali took 7/125 in the game, but only two of those wickets were top order batsmen. Gary Keedy was fortunate enough to pick up one wicket, Northants' number 11.

Ganesh pointed out that Grant Flower took 3/112 when Lancs made 655. Perhaps that could be an indication that Michael Clarke needs to be used more than he has been so far in the tests, i.e. zero times. After all, Clarke did have the amazing analysis of 6/9 before he and the rest of the Aussie batsmen turned lemmings at Bombay last year.

I know this is not enough of a sample set, but hey, this is all I can go by! It does not exactly seem a great venue for spinners. Australia could probably be better off with using the same bowling attack, if Lee is fit.

While in the context of leg-spinners, read what Samanth has to say about that other Australian leggie whose strike-rate is higher than the great Stuart Charles Glyndwr MacGill.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2005, macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:22 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

MacGill's admission

Stuart MacGill, who apparently stands a good chance to play the Old Trafford test, reckons that playing for Nottinghamshire a few seasons ago saved his career and made him a better bowler. He says:

"Previously, when I bowled a bad ball I would get very down and allow my confidence to dip. Now if I bowl a bad ball I really don't care and just focus on the next delivery. I have a picture in my mind of what I'm aiming to do and, until I get it right, it will stay there."

I think I'd rephrase that to:

"Previously, when I bowled a bad ball I would get very down and allow my confidence to dip. Now if I bowl a bad ball I really don't care and just bowl another one."

Personally, I think he is pretty over-rated as a test match level quality leg-spinner. I know Warne changed the rules of the game when he brought in his immense control along with his drift and spin. Perhaps MacGill would have survived in a different era. The reason the likes of Warne and Kumble have played as many tests and got over 1000 test wickets between them is they are so parsimonious and are always after you. I've seen MacGill bowl a few times and he always had this hangdog look about him, more so after he'd been thrashed around. He bowls one ball per over which screams 'hit me' as it lands at the half-way point on the pitch. You look at his stats and you immediately wonder about the numbers against India and Sri Lanka. I'm surprised he concedes less runs an over against India than Sri Lanka. He feasts on Bangladesh, as does every other bowler. Even though he averages 32 and gives away 3 an over against West Indies, I'm willing to bet that number changes when Lara or Hooper are batting.

I'm fairly sure that if Australia do pick him for Old Trafford, the number of four balls he gives away, unless of course he has dramatically improved his bowling, could be quite critical. Plus if Australia are really considering bringing in Shane Watson, then he could be thrown the ball more often than MacGill if the latter leaks runs by the bucketful.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2005, macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:49 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

MacGill switching to Queensland?

Stuart MacGill, the second best spinner on the planet, in Mark Waugh's opinion alone, is pondering a move from his current state New South Wales to Queensland. Before moving to new South Wales, MacGill started his career with Western Australia. He wants to move there because of the bouncier wicket at the Gabba, the climate and to generally challenge himself with something new.

Labels: macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:59 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Stuart MacGill smashed all around the WACA

Less than a week after his team's potential representative on the selection panel, Mark Waugh, declared him the world's second best spinner, Stuart Charles Glyndwr MacGill ended up bruised and battered with figures of 0/133 in 23 overs in a Pura Cup game against Western Australia. Justin Langer scored a century in a session and was primarily responsible for MacGill's plight. All this on his birthday, no less!

Labels: macgill

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:47 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]