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 ]

Australia vs England - Fifth Test - Day 1 & 2

So, after 2 days, we have a fairly evenly poised match. England, collapsing all too predicatbly in the first innings, losing their last 5 wickets for just over 50 runs. Australia now, similarly set at the end of day two, to England at the end of day 1. I'd rather have Hussey in than Collingwood though, and Australia's tail than England's - but there is a certain "pep in the step" of England. They seem a little more determined to at least inflect something in the form of damage on these Aussies - maybe Langer, McGrath and Warne (and maybe some others) losing their last test is just enough motivation for a down and almost out English side. Who knows? Who would be game to predict anything.

It is probably stating the obvious but just about anything could happen yet. It seems a result one way or the other is more likely than a draw given the low first innings total, but with Hussey and Symonds in and Gilchrist to come Australia could yet make 500 - of course, they could also quite conceivably trail on the first innings too, not that that may matter either. Who could say anything confidently really? I would add though, that a run chase by Australia on day 4 and 5 will be somewhat harder in Sydney with Panesar in the side, than Adelaide without him - The POMS will know that and therefore be despearate for early wickets, hopefully Hussey and Symonds have thought of this two, and play them out of the game in the first two session tomorrow. They are the sessions that will set up this match.

If England can get two wickets in the first session tomorrow, it's game on - if not, it could just be slipping away. I am no longer willing to say there is anything that can happen, that will put the Aussies out of the match just yet ;-)

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, england, hussey, panesar, scg, sydney

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 2:37 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Someone hasn't a clue

Picture this. Australia are 117/5 when Monty Panesar comes in to bowl on day two at the MCG, trying to get out of a hole (self-dug and thanks to some good bowling). He bowls a lovely first over. But he was bowling to a field, amazingly enough, which was totally unsuitable for the situation. There was a fielder at long-off and a fielder at long-on. I'd have thought that with folks like Hayden and Symonds, who love to take on spinners, especially by hitting down the ground, Flintoff would have not had those fielders in the deep, inviting Hayden and Symonds to take a few risks.

But they didn't even have to, when they could just tap the ball down the ground and get four singles an over! This was perhaps the exact moment when England lost its grip. A test match that could have been a fascinating, low-scoring one is now doomed to be a one-sided one with the low-scores, in all likelihood, emanating from only one side!

I've commented a couple of times recently about how captaining a side with two spinners isn't exactly easy. I am now convinced that Flintoff can't even captain a side with one spinner in it!

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, england, flintoff, hayden, panesar, spin, symonds

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:13 am | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

A tall seamer and a spinner

No, not they (or indeed they [2]), but he and he!

England have lost the Ashes. At this stage, there are only two things that are important for the Test team: avoid the green-and-gold-wash, and sort the side out for the future. The first seems achievable enough, as all three Tests so far have gone to the fifth day. A little more application and a draw is not beyond England's reach.

The second is more difficult. The side as it started the series is clearly not the model for the future, but none of the players currently in the side are anywhere near retirement age. Monty Panacea should be a fixture as the first and only spinner. His batting is not as bad as made out - Hoggard's form of late has been far worse - and his fielding is improving. England don't have the spinners to consider playing two except on dustbowls, especially when their best two are left-arm orthodox. The nonsensical and oh-so-English media campaign to bring him into the side as England's saviour should not disguise that he is a very good bowler with an action that looks unlikely to break down and a temperament to match.

(A quick digression about Monty. Yes, he's exuberant, but apart from that, doesn't he remind you a bit of Glenn McGrath if McGrath was a spinner? He doesn't do too much with the ball, but he can move it a lot if needed; his main weapons are bounce and accuracy; he seems to be pretty much unflappable; he has bedded in at number 11; and he fields in the deep.)

The batting is fairly solid. Paul Collingwood again appears to be the most vulnerable, if only because Andrew Strauss is now the senior batsman (he's been playing Tests for less than three years), Ian Bell and Ali Cook will be persisted with, and Kevin Pietersen would storm off to play for Ireland moaning about quotas if he was dropped. If Michael Vaughan came back, that would complicate things, but if Michael Vaughan came back his knee might not last very long anyway.

With the quick bowlers, Hoggard will play. Flintoff will play - whether at six or not is another matter. Harmison may play, as retirement from ODIs is by no means the end of a player's career (ask Shane Warne). Harmison is different, though. There is a sense that he is retiring in instalments rather than making this decision to prolong his career. English cricketers don't seem to hang around at the top for as long as those of other countries.

Sajid Mahmood could well be the future. It's difficult, because he's so unreliable. He seems to have very little control at times, but apparently this is not a mental issue - the word is that of all the England team, he's the least likely to be affected by sledging, and the least likely to lose his head at a crucial moment. The problem is purely technical, getting him to work out a way of bowling that he can fall back into with little effort. What would help in this is getting bowling, but Andrew Flintoff bizzarely under-used him at Perth. If there was one ground in Australia that, according to stereotype, you would say was made for Mahmood, it would be Perth.

The most important thing is not to rush to judgement. Two years ago, a raw quick bowler was ignored by his captain on a tough away tour even though Harmison had yet again gone wonky. It wasn't Mahmood, of course, but the man who last summer became a nightmare for the Australians: Simon Jones. There's no reason Mahmood can't go on to be even better than Simon Jones. He has the pace, although he is less skiddy. Whenever he bowls, I always find myself wondering where the effort is. The limbs are loose as he bounds in, and then he just seems to roll his arm over before the ball is fired down.

So, Andrew: please let Sajid bowl in Melbourne. You have a five-man attack which contains a reliable, calm spinner. Let the quick bowlers bowl shorter spells, let them come charging in. Please? Merry Christmas, everyone.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, england, panesar, sajid mahmood, whitewash

Thus spake Geoff @ 5:08 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

'Tis the time to retire

So, the rumours turned out to be reality. Shane Warne today confirmed that he was retiring from international cricket after the final Ashes test at Sydney.

Interestingly enough, England winning the 2005 Ashes was what made him stick around for one more year. So perhaps, we ought to be thanking England's victorious team of 2005 for giving us the privilege of watching his theatrics for another year!

Shane, it's been a pleasure watching you bowl perform, over the past 15 years, right from the time Ravi Shastri and Sachin Tendulkar tore into you at Sydney in early-1992. Have fun!

In other news retirements, Homesick Harmison has decided to retire from one-day international cricket.

England's one-day squad for the triangular one-day series, also involving Australia and New Zealand (I suppose it does take three sides to make a triangle. Then again, not involving Australia and New Zealand would perhaps be the only way England won that one-day series!), tentatively contains the wonderful ODI batsman, Michael Vaughan and "Mr. Can't bat, can't field", Monty Panesar. "Mr. Can bat, can keep", Geraint Jones has been put out to pasture. England're carrying two wicket-keepers, one of them a 36-year old, for a series where they're unlikely to feature in anything more than 8 games.

Updates:

Warne writes about how he told Ponting about his decision to quit.

The next aspect worth wondering about is how Australia will cope with the absence of Warne and McGrath from the next season/year/test tour. In fact, with Australia's next test series possibly in June (in Zimbabwe), and more likely to be in November, at home against Sri Lanka, I'm fairly sure that we will see a good sized exodus happening - on grounds of boredom, form, etc. While it is possible that Gilchrist will play on, Hayden's poor showing so far (except for one knock of 90), and him being overlooked for the World Cup, could fast-track his retirement. It'd be easier for Australia to cope without McGrath in one-dayers. But losing Warne and McGrath at the same time in tests could be devastating. McGrath's retirement thrusts Brett Lee (219 wickets from 57 tests, bowling avg. 32.4 and strike rate 54.2) into the forefront as the leader of the fast bowler pack, a role that I'm not convinced he can play, especially in test cricket.

I think Australia have missed a trick by not developing enough spin backup for Warne. The only serious contender is Stuart MacGill, who's shite and nearly 36. The others, like Nathan Hauritz, Dan Cullen and Cameron White, have hardly been given any opportunities in international cricket, especially to bowl in tandem with a master.

Myopic Christopher Martin-Jenkins rates MacGill as the #2 leggie! Just as well he didn't say #3 was Ian Salisbury or Chris Schofield.

Stuart MacGill, the second-best leg spinner in world cricket, who turns the ball as much as Warne, has a better disguised googly and has taken 198 wickets at 27 in his 40 Tests, will be an able replacement for a while if the selectors are prepared to overlook his volatile temperament.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, book cricket, england, harmison, panesar, retire, shastri, tendulkar, vaughan, warne

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:23 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]