Spirit of cricket spoils Sehwag century?

Predictably enough, Suraj Randiv's no-ball to Virender Sehwag, preventing Sehwag from reaching his century with a six, is making the news on the extremely vitriolic TV channels. Did he bowl it deliberately, to ensure that Sehwag didn't reach a well-deserved 100? Who cares?

Sehwag changed his opinion from not taking it too seriously ("It happens in cricket. The other team doesn't want anybody to score a hundred against them. They tried their best. Doesn't matter to me, 99 or 100.") to claiming it was deliberate in the span of a few minutes.

Besides, Sehwag did play out a couple of dot balls. So there's no real basis for him to whine.

Is there anything in the rules that prevents a bowler from doing so? No! Even if it is there in the 'spirit of cricket', it means nothing. Captains and players have acted totally in violation of the spirit defined and no action has been taken.

Did anything prevent India from declaring & setting Sri Lanka around 70 to win immediately after VVS Laxman got out in India's 2nd innings at Galle? There was charity being doled out to Murali in the form of his 800th wicket. VVS perhaps was trying to get the message across by getting run out? Why didn't any of the other batsmen get dismissed timed out, handling the ball, obstructing the field or hitting the ball twice?

Labels: india, murali, spirit of cricket, sri lanka

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:14 pm | Sledge/Read 14 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Tinkering with the review system

The newly introduced review system whereby players can seek reviews of on-field umpiring decisions has just completed one trial run. I'm fairly sure that this isn't the only trial run it will go through. I wouldn't be surprised if it was also used for the India-Australia series later this year, if not for some other series held earlier.

I still believe this is a good thing, as long as the ICC also does something to improve umpiring standards based on the data available on number of decisions changed for each umpire over the course of, say, a year.

In addition to reducing, not removing altogether, obviously wrong decisions handed out to bowlers and batsmen, I believe that the review system will result in batsmen using their bats more than pads, against spinners and slower bowlers, especially. In the Sri Lanka v India series that ended yesterday with a walloping for India, there were 16 lbw decisions given favouring Murali & Mendis, across 6 innings. The corresponding number for Sri Lanka (effectively only 4 innings since they declared at 6 down once and won with 8 wickets to spare yesterday) against Kumble & Harbhajan was 7.

I interpret the numbers to arrive at two decisions:

1. Murali & Mendis were far more accurate than Kumble & Harbhajan. This is also reinforced by the fact that India's spinners only dismissed one Sri Lankan batsman bowled, while Sri Lanka's spinners dismissed 7 Indian batsmen bowled.
   
2. Sri Lanka's batsmen used the pad more effectively (not necessarily lesser) than India's batsmen. In addition, India's batsmen did not figure out that the TV umpire was more inclined to ruling in favour of bowlers when batsmen didn't attempt to (or make a show of) using bat instead of pad. As a result, we had the spectacle in India's 2nd innings at the P Saravanamuttu stadium (3rd test) where Tendulkar was nearly given out lbw twice in a row when facing Muralitharan and the TV umpire ruled in his favour. Next over, he padded up to Mendis and was sent packing by the on-field umpire and by the TV umpire, when it was referred on Tendulkar's appeal for a review.

I'm going to stick with my earlier stand that there should be no limit on the number of reviews that a team can ask. But, there's an additional caveat. We've seen that captains (or batsmen) take a long time to ask for the review. So, the review must be asked for within a time limit of (say) 10 seconds after the ball has gone dead (i.e. from the moment the on-field umpire gave the original decision). The TV umpire must also be given a fixed time limit, of say 3 minutes, within which he should use the available evidence to arrive at a decision. If he is unable to do so, the on-field umpire's decision should stand.

One possible deterrent to players taking their own sweet time to ask for the review is to include the time taken to make that decision while calculating their over-rate while bowling and enforce the appropriate penalty. The other option is for the ICC to slowly increase the minimum over-rate limit, to say 17 an hour and then eventually end at 20 an hour.

The one aspect that the ICC needs to ensure is to make available more technology (and camera angles) to the TV umpire to ensure he gets the decision right, without wasting too much time. If that means using other gadgets (Snickometer, HotSpot, etc.), then they ought to make sure that happens. The inconsistency in decisions needs to be reduced removed. Some common sense is needed as well. If a batsman has been struck on the pad, and the point of impact is nearly 3m from the stumps, it is very tough to accurately determine that the ball will go on to hit the wicket, even if it pitched in line and the impact was in line with the stumps (Ganguly being given out lbw to Murali in the 2nd innings of the 3rd test).

The Indian team may possibly have the feeling that the review system hasn't really resulted in a decrease in the number of decisions going against them. It is in a trial phase. If the ICC does decide that the system is going to stay for the next few years at least, it makes sense to do more trials and then set the the benchmarks. It'd be stupid for the BCCI to now complain about the system, since the major trigger for this system being introduced was the horrible umpiring at Sydney 2008. For starters, if the Indian batsmen used bat more often than pad, they'd get out lbw a lot less often. To paraphrase King Cricket from his superb post last year when Pietersen was given out to a slip catch that didn't look too clean, the main problem was that the Indian batsmen played with pad. As a batsman, if you use pad rather than bat to spinners bowling accurately, there’s a fair chance you’re going to be out lbw.

Labels: ajantha mendis, icc, india, murali, reviews, sri lanka, umpires

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:57 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Sanath Jayasuriya retires from tests, for now

Sanath Jayasuriya, dropped from the test side in 2005 first retired from test cricket in March 2006.

A couple of months later, he promptly reneged on his promise.

Confirming a report in The Sunday Times in November, Jayasuriya has now announced his retirement from tests, on the same day that he smacked James Anderson for six consecutive boundaries in an over.

18.1 Anderson to Jayasuriya, FOUR, wide and overpitched, dismissively thumped in the air over extra cover
18.2 Anderson to Jayasuriya, FOUR, dropped horrible one-day slash, the ball flies high to first slip, Bell gets both hands to it above his head but can't cling on ... that was travelling and Jayasuriya was saved by the fact he hit it so hard
18.3 Anderson to Jayasuriya, FOUR, square drive for four to add to Anderson's annoyance
18.4 Anderson to Jayasuriya, FOUR, pulled through square leg, a much better shot, genuine and timed
18.5 Anderson to Jayasuriya, FOUR, as is that, thumped high over extra cover to bring up his fifty off 62 balls
18.6 Anderson to Jayasuriya, FOUR, he can ... steered down to the vacant third man area, well placed and Anderson shakes his head in disbelief ... he could have had a wicket and instead he has 24 off the over.

Previous instances blogged about here: Lara v Kaneria, Afridi v Harbhajan and Sarwan v Munaf. The last batsman to hit all six balls of a six ball over for four was Chris Gayle.

*Yawn*: In other cricketing news, Murali took his 61st five wicket haul and 709th test wicket to go past Shane Warne.

Labels: book cricket, jayasuriya, murali, retire, warne

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:16 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

A stats post

VVS Laxman got his second test wicket, the first being Adam Sanford, in 2002.

Rahul Dravid and Anil Kumble combined for the 51st time in test cricket. They're now level with Taylor & Warne. Murali and Jayawardene have the record, with 63 dismissals.

PS: I really hope India bat out the next 1.5 days at Eden Gardens, ensuring that Pakistan's bowlers are not fit enough to take the field at Bangalore. The escape scripted by Misbah, Akmal and Sami would have given them a lot of motivation, so declaring would be a pretty poor idea.

Labels: catching, dravid, fielding, india, jayawardene, kumble, laxman, murali, pakistan, statistic, taylor, warne

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:09 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Warne-Murali trophy? Naah!

To commemorate the 25th anniversary of test cricket between Australia and Sri Lanka (lest we forget, they've played the grand total of eight series in this period), there is a proposal by Sri Lanka's cricket board to name a trophy after the two spinning legends.

I have a few [better, imho!] suggestions. If they wanted to use legendary spinners, then why not name it the McIntyre-Dharmasena trophy? If they wanted to celebrate batting under-achievers in tests, why not name it the Law (avg. infinity)-Nawaz (Test batting avg. of 99) trophy? If they had to celebrate pleasing batting, then they could have named it the Waugh (Mark, not Steve! Are you serious?!) - De Silva trophy? They could also name it the 'Audi' trophy in honour of Mark Waugh's four ducks in a row against Sri Lanka (facing a total of 12 balls) and pocket a nice sponsorship from Volkswagen in the bargain! To honour two bowlers with dubious actions, may I suggest the Mura-Lee trophy?

Labels: aravinda de silva, australia, humour, mark waugh, murali, sri lanka, warne

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:44 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Grin and bear it?

It is totally bizarre and stinks of double-standards. Jason Gillespie's viewpoint is that the abuse that Andrew Symonds copped in India is "totally unacceptable" while he doesn't use the same words in the context of Murali being targetted by Australian spectators.

Instead, he advises Murali to 'grin and bear it'. I am emphatically against the way the crowds targetted Andrew Symonds, but for a minute, I am tempted to ask Symonds to 'grin and bear it' as well. Then again, maybe Gillespie is saying this because he's perhaps not going to return to the international side again, having been first dropped in the post-2005 Ashes cleanup and then not having been picked since April 2006 after scoring a double-century.

In fact, right now, he has the 5th highest final test innings score, behind Sandham, Ponsford, Nurse and Aravinda de Silva. Sangakkara's last test innings was 222, but he's definitely going to play another test. Gillespie? Umm, I think not!

Labels: australia, gillespie, murali, racism, sri lanka, symonds

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:43 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

One leg-spinner on another

Murali is the 'leading cricketer in the world', while Shane Warne is on the cover of the 2007 edition of the Wisden Cricketers' Almanack.

The five cricketers of 2006 are Mahela Jayawardene, Mark Ramprakash, Mohammed Yousuf, Monty Panesar and Paul Collingwood.

Michael Atherton can always boast that while Shane Warne didn't get Dilip Vengsarkar out in a test match, while he did. Athers, whose writing is always as enjoyable to read as his batting was, praises Warne's respect for the game. The only jarring part in his piece is when he talks about batsmen who've played Warne well.

No right-hander, in my view, played him better than Kevin Pietersen, who had such exquisite balance that he was able to change direction — with the drift — while still advancing down the pitch.

Pietersen obviously did bat well in 2005 and 2006, but there's this other gent by the name VVS Laxman did so across four series, reducing Warne to a bit part most of the time. It was only in the 2004 series that Warne got Laxman out cheaply and often. Then again, its Athers' article. Maybe he didn't see Laxman bat against Warne.

Wisden 2006 had a section on cricket blogs, and this blog found a place on page 1570!

Labels: almanack, atherton, collingwood, jayawardene, mohammad yousuf, murali, panesar, ramprakash, warne, wisden

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:58 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Lets keep the dodgy actions out please

I just happened to catch Cricket Star, the reality show on Zee Sports. It definitely looked ok. Some of the talent on show, especially in the spin bowling department, was quite good. But those in charge of the show, especially the likes of Kapil, Jadeja, Robin Singh and Manjrekar who're interacting with the young cricketers, need to make sure that they ensure that no one with a dodgy bowling action gets to be on the show. I've just seen an offspinner bowl whose bowling action would elicit a gasp from Muralitharan.

Strictly going by the ICC's standards, Murali does not chuck. But would those youngsters participating in the show, or indeed we, want a youngster's bowling action to be exposed as being faulty after he makes his debut, regardless of whether an on-field umpire calls him for chucking or if the decision is taken by committee? I'm fairly sure that the answer is no.

Which is why it is absolutely critical that this chucking thingie should be dealt with at the earliest, regardless of whether the arena is a reality TV show or an under-14 game.

Labels: chucking, murali, reality tv

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:55 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Meaningless stat of the day

When Andrew Strauss, Warne's 700th "test" wicket, was asked how he felt to be #700, he said:

I think there are probably 699 other guys who felt pretty bad after getting out to Shane Warne and I'm no different today.

When I read that quote, I knew he was obviously wrong. There couldn't have been 699 other players who got out to Warne in test cricket, given Warne'd dismissed several players multiple times.

So here's the list of those who've taken 400 test wickets and dismissed at least 200 batsmen.

Bowler	Count
Murali	270
Kumble	243
Warne	236
McGrath	216
Wasim Akram	205

It does seem highly unlikely to me that Warne can get ahead of Kumble, especially since Warne seems to have dismissed every member of the current England team out at least once! England can help Warne get to #2 by getting the Academy side to play at Sydney rather than the main team. They can't do worse, I suppose!

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, england, kumble, mcgrath, murali, pollock, statistic, strauss, warne, wasim akram

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:27 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Shabbir Ahmed's bowling action is cleared

Shabbir Ahmed, banned a year ago for 'probably bowling some deliveries where his arm bends by more than 15 °', has been allowed to resume his international career since he 'is now once again capable of bowling within the ICC tolerance level which is a 15 degree elbow extension with every delivery'.

I've seen his action before and after he revamped it earlier. There was absolutely no difference. In fact, the first time I saw him, on debut against West Indies at Toronto in 1999, my first thoughts were "How on earth is this action legal?"

So now let's start placing bets on when Shabbir will be hauled up again for breaking the 15 ° barrier? My gut feeling is that if he is picked for Pakistan's tour of South Africa coming up soon, he'll be reported for chucking yet again!

In other chucking news, Martin Crowe, who spoke out passionately against chucking in his Cowdrey Lecture at Lord's earlier this year, has made it abundantly clear that he still thinks the legality of Murali's doosra should be reviewed yet again.

Labels: chucking, murali, shabbir

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:42 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Controversy? What? Why?

Sri Lanka & Jayawardena are being a bit unintelligent in trying to create a controversy out of the Muralitharan run-out, after the 5-wicket loss. I watched it live and I had no qualms about the decision and I am definitely shocked that it has been projected as a controversy. Anyday, I will want Sri Lanka to win over New Zealand. But, that has got nothing to do with unfair cricket. The rules cannot be messed up with.

Muralitharan had no business to go and greet Sangakkara so early. It may be Sangakkara's 100th run for the innings, but just another run in the scorecard and it cannot be excused of any rules and hence Muralitharan is very clearly out as he would have been if he had fallen short in reaching for the first run itself - but that would have been very unfortunate for Sangakkara as he would have finished with 99*. Instead of blaming the Kiwis and talking about spirit of cricket etc., Jayawardena would do well to gift a Laws of Cricket to Muralitharan. As someone rightly said, though its a gentleman's game, they are out there to win and hence they are allowed to do anything within the rules.

Labels: murali, new zealand, spirit of cricket, sri lanka

Thus spake Ganesh @ 3:20 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

#1 and #2 for Murali

Murali has just snapped up yet another 10 wicket haul (for the match, as opposed to the innings, which he nearly did last month) when he dismissed Dale Steyn in South Africa's second innings at the Sinhalese Sports Club, Colombo.

This is his 17th such performance, and his third consecutive 10-fer haul. In fact, there's no other bowler who's taken 10 wickets in more consecutive games, because Murali leads that way with 4 consecutive tests of 10-fers.

South Africa are all set to lose by an innings and nearly 150 runs. In fact, South Africa just about got past Jayawardene's individual score. They still need nearly 70 runs to ensure that the sum total of their two innings exceeds what Jayawardene and Sangakkara made between themselves.

In fact Mahela Jayawardene's triple will provide the rare instance of a score of that order happening in a game with a result. Look at the top scores in tests. Lara's 400 and 375 were in drawn games. Gayle's 317 was in a really boring draw.

Sobers' 365, Hutton's 364, Sehwag's 309, Gooch's 333, Inzamam's 329 and Edrich's 310 have been the only ones where their effort has helped their side win. Hayden's 380 was against Zimbabwe, so it obviously doesn't count. Hanif's 334 is obviously a special case, given Pakistan were following on, 470 runs in arrears.

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 2:20 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Kumble two short

Three months after Murali got to 1000 first-class international wickets, Anil Kumble is on the verge of 1000 first-class wickets. He's currently on 998 wickets and is all set to get to 1000 in the Jamaica test starting tomorrow.

Bishen Singh Bedi, with 1506 wickets, has the most first-class wickets amongst Indians. S Venkataraghavan is #2 with 1390 and BS Chandrasekhar is #3 with 1063 wickets.

Among currently active international cricketers, if we really stretched the definition, Mushtaq Ahmed, who was replaced as Pakistan's bowling coach by Waqar Younis, and has been mentioned with a chance of making a comeback following injuries to several of Pakistan's bowlers, is #1 with 1232 wickets, followed by Shane Warne (1208) and Murali (1158).

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 2:14 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Ok, who's going to play the party pooper?

My crystal ball has been ruthlessly cast aside thanks to Murali's antics. It is now tea on the fourth day and this is what Murali has done in the last hour or so at Trent Bridge.

27.2 Muralitharan to Trescothick, OUT, Muralitharan provides the breakthrough with a beauty! doosra on the off stump, short of length ball making Trescothick move back, tries to defend but the ball slips through the bat-pad gap, brushes the pads and straight into the off stump, Muralitharan unaware and appeals but teammates rush in to congratulate
ME Trescothick b Muralitharan 31 (98b 3x4 0x6) sr: 31.63

England 84/1 ME Trescothick 31 (98b 3x4) M Muralitharan 9.2-2-20-1

35.5 Muralitharan to Cook, OUT, An excellent ball, flighted up on the leg stump, bowled from slightly wide of the crease, comes forward, ball straightens into the pad, looks right in front, Koertzen agrees, and Murali strikes again
AN Cook lbw b Muralitharan 5 (23b 0x4 0x6) sr: 21.73

England 104/2 AN Cook 5 (23b) M Muralitharan 13.5-5-23-2

39.3 Muralitharan to Strauss, OUT, flighted outside the off, may have been a bit quicker, pitched outside off, drew him forward, not quite to the pitch, ball pitches and straightens, gets a faint edge, into the keepers gloves, rebounds to slip
AJ Strauss c Jayawardene b Muralitharan 55 (115b 6x4 0x6) sr: 47.82

England 111/3 AJ Strauss 55 (115b 6x4) M Muralitharan 15.3-6-26-3

45.1 Muralitharan to Pietersen, OUT, Murali gets the big one!! Murali tosses it up, KP comes down the track at first, then picks the top spinner, tries to defend, but by then the ball thuds into his pads, deflects to the inside of his gloves and then lobs up to the wicketkeeper - KP stands his ground, but Umpire Rudi Koertzen finally sends him on his way

KP Pietersen c Dilshan b Muralitharan 6 (17b 0x4 0x6) sr: 35.29

England 120/4 KP Pietersen 6 (17b) M Muralitharan 18.1-6-30-4

45.5 Muralitharan to Flintoff, OUT, Murali that magic man .. this is disaster for England!! all of a sudden the whole of Trent Bridge goes quiet - there's a hush in the ground. Murali throws it up now, Flintoff comes forward to defend, the turning ball takes the inside edge of the English captain's bat and lobs up to the man at forward short leg, its a simple catch for Dilshan - that was an important catch, and an important wicket for Sri Lanka - that's the 100th time Muralitharan has taken 5 wickets or more in an innings
A Flintoff c Dilshan b Muralitharan 0 (4b 0x4 0x6) sr: 0.00

England 120/5 A Flintoff 0 (4b) M Muralitharan 18.5-6-30-5

49.4 Muralitharan to Collingwood, OUT, tossed up delivery from Murali, that pitched on the off stump, keeps low, Collingwood goes back to work it away to the onside, the ball comes off the bat, onto the boot and lobs up in the air, the man at forward short leg Dilshan does brilliantly to dive to his right and comes up with the ball inches off the ground - the onfield umpire Rudi Koertzen isn't sure if it was a bump ball, he checks with his colleague at squareleg Darrell Hair, he too isn't sure - and the duo decide to go upstairs - the third umpire decides Paul Collingwood has to go back. Sri Lanka on a roll here now!!

PD Collingwood c Dilshan b Muralitharan 9 (39b 0x4 0x6) sr: 23.07

England 125/6 PD Collingwood 9 (39b) M Muralitharan 20.4-7-33-6

The question is - which of the other Sri Lankan bowlers is going to ensure that Murali doesn't join Laker and Kumble. Mind you, he's already the only chap to have taken two 9fers!

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:14 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Throw the ball to the spinner please!

The Trent Bridge and Antigua tests have been remarkably similar in one respect: Andrew Flintoff, Brian Lara and Rahul Dravid - all messed up bigtime when it came to getting the tailenders out.

I know it is tempting to get the fast bowlers to blast tailenders out, but from my cricket following experience, tailenders are far more likely to biff their way out of trouble when quicks/medium-pacers are on than if spinners, especially good/unknown ones, are bowling.

England had Sri Lanka at 139/7 in the 41st over. In walked Vaas and in the company of Kapugedera, Malinga and Murali, helped his side get nearly 100 runs more, batting out 25-odd overs. Flintoff threw (metaphorically, despite what Peter Roebuck and I feel) himself, Lewis, Hoggard and Plunkett at the lower order. But there was no sign of Panesar. When Monty was introduced, he controlled the proceedings immediately, bowling (I think) 3 maidens on the trot. The absence of free hits from the (tired) quicks and Monty's superb bowling resulted in Murali's dismissal.

At Antigua, India were 180/7 in the 71st over. Kumble and Sreesanth put on nearly 50 and India ended up with 241. Dave Mohammed didn't bowl a single ball during the stand. In fact, he bowled only three overs after he foxed Yuvraj Singh! I am fairly sure that had he bowled to Kumble, Sreesanth, Munaf and VRV, India would have been all out a lot earlier. During West Indies' innings, Dravid had Sehwag and Kumble bowl in tandem through much of the last session on the second day. After Bravo's brilliant knock ended, they put a lot of pressure on Ramdin and Bradshaw but failed to take wickets. Bizarrely, Dravid opted for the new ball at the start of play yesterday. I felt that he ought to have continued with the spinners.

The ends could still justify the means, but it certainly seems like all three captains let the opposition off the hook.

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:47 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Martin Johnson is too funny!

Martin Johnson's potshot at Ashley Giles during England's tour of Pakistan was too good.

In his column after day one of the Lord's test against Sri Lanka, he wrote thus about Murali's bowling

Muttiah Muralitharan took two of the three wickets to fall, and almost effected a direct-hit run-out with what the more uncharitable chroniclers of his career would describe as by no means his first accurate throw of the day.

Labels: chucking, murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:16 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Double-click for thousand

Bangladesh had competed superbly for the first two days of the Chittagong test against Sri Lanka. Thanks to Ashraful, Bangladesh scored 300 runs on day one, the first time they'd done it. They then had Sri Lanka in a fair amount of trouble at 178/5, but Maharoof and Samaraweera took the score to nearly 300 and then the tail collapsed.

Bangladesh were thus only 19 runs behind in the first innings, and started their second innings well. Then somehow they found the button labelled 'Double click to self-destruct' and followed the instructions. Now they're all out for a pitiful 181, thanks mainly to some biffing by Mohd. Rafique. Murali ended up with 6/54, taking his 1000th international wicket, Khaled Mashud caught by Dilshan. Reaching the milestone of 1000 wickets, in his 100th test. Nice symmetry there.

Sri Lanka thus need 162 to win, which they shouldn't have any problem getting.

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 4:32 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Lots of centuries coming up

I'm unable to find the article online, but the February 2006 issue of Cricinfo Magazine had a small piece on the number of people playing their 100th test around this time.

From Cricinfo's records section, we find that aside from Murali, whose 100th test against Bangladesh is currently in progress, quite a few others are all set to play their 100th test. Rahul Dravid is playing his 98th test. Justin Langer and Shaun Pollock are on 97 tests. Jacques Kallis and Stephen Fleming are on 96 tests.

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 2:24 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Does Murali bend his middle finger?

Murali's middle finger gesture to crowds at the WACA who screamed 'no-ball' whenever he bowled makes me wonder if he did it out of frustration or because he wanted to show to the world that contrary to popular perception, he doesn't bend his middle finger more than what the official stationery device of the ICC can measure. The pictures below certainly show his index finger isn't bent. But is his middle finger bent? Does that violate any ICC laws?
He also took a potshot at Warne's snide remarks made late last year, claiming that there could be a fair amount of jealousy behind those remarks.

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:40 am | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

A great leveller?

Graeme Smith bowls his 10 overs for 30 runs and picks up three vital wickets and Murali gets tonked around for 14 runs from his first over in today's South Africa-Sri Lanka game.

Labels: murali

Thus spake Jagadish @ 4:08 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]