Weekend news: Trescothick retires, Gavaskar to be retired?

Two significant events happened over the weekend.

Marcus Trescothick announced his retirement from international cricket a week after he withdrew from Somerset's pre-season tour of the UAE due to a recurrence of the stress-related illness that caused him to pull out of the 2006 Ashes tour and the tour of India earlier that year. Given his discomfort at touring, it may be assumed that he won't sign up for the IPL.

Sunil Gavaskar is in a soup this time for sure with the ICC bosses. He had written a scathing column last week in which he referred to England and Australia as dinosaurs and defended the BCCI's stand in Australia vis-a-vis the racial remark allegations against Harbhajan.

Gavaskar keeps getting into trouble. In January, after Mike Procter pronounced a 3-test ban on Harbhajan, he was accused of (and rightly so) alleging that Procter's decision was racially biased.

Last year, Gavaskar angered Ponting following his comments on the Australian team's behaviour. In that post, I wrote:

It may not be a bad idea for Gavaskar to realize that there're genuine conflicts of interest between his duties as the chairman of the ICC's Cricket Committee and his rights as a columnist. I don't remember who, but I'm sure I've read a comment piece some time ago by a columnist/editor in (possibly) 'The Times' which talked about Gavaskar's "inability to realize a conflict of interest even when it stared at him in the face". If Gavaskar had concerns about Australia's behaviour, I'm sure there are right 'channels' to get his concerns addressed, especially since his committee 'deals with any matters or issues relating to the game or the playing of the game.' (sic)

One year later, we run into the same problem. While I'm of the opinion that the committee that he heads hasn't really achieved anything of note (umpiring standards are pathetic, player behaviour is pathetic, over rates are pathetic, usage of technology is ambiguous, cricket schedules are pathetic & crazy), I really hope he opts to stay on the committee.

He used to be a very good commentator but in the last half-decade or so, his commentary skills have dipped alarmingly. I'm fairly sure cricket production houses will also favour him remaining on the committee rather than stay on in the commentary box for the simple reason that they won't have to keep erecting a fence every time he goes on air, for that's where he is sitting all the time!

Sample this: At Perth, when Kumble announced that India would bat first, my first reaction was "Go for it, Jumbo! Great, bold decision in the context of the series!". Harsha Bhogle asked Gavaskar what he felt. Gavaskar said he'd have opted to bowl first factoring in the weather, India having 3 seamers and Australia having 2 inexperienced openers. He'd barely finished the sentence when he said that on the other hand, India had batted first and got over 600 at Leeds in 2002 on a green wicket that aided swing bowling, so batting first was a good idea too. This piece of expert commentary really sealed it for me and I've now lost respect in his abilities as a commentator.

So, for the sake of us cricket fans, Mr. Gavaskar, please stay on the committee and off the tube!

Labels: comments, conflict of interest, england, gavaskar, india, perth 2008, sydney 2008, television, trescothick

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:19 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

A scared draw

Australia have just played a Test match which has ended in a draw without any interference from the weather. It is so hard even to imagine this, but it has happened, more so when the team which wanted the draw badly and played to it was Australia and not the opponent!

This was clearly evident on day three when Australia batted 90 overs, scored 260 runs and lost 3 wickets. I certainly don't remember the last time when the Aussies batted an entire day and scored at less than 3 runs per over. Irrespective of the state of the match, no Aussie batsman would even dream of scoring at such a pace. The display of 'batting' on day three almost ensured that a draw was the most probable result unless the Indians decided to gift the match.

India have pushed Australia so much that they even won at Perth and hence 'The Great B*st@#ds' decided to opt for a draw to save some face and ensure that they would win the series 2-1, thanks to Steve & Mark, not the Waughs, but Bucknor & Benson respectively.

If a lot of things had happened efficiently & honestly in the first 2 Tests, the series could have been 1-1 or even 2-1 in favour of India, coming into Adelaide. With such a scoreline, the Australians would have definitely batted differently and would have tried to score at a much better pace and may or may not have lost more wickets in the bargain and most probably would have won this Test match.

It would have still been the Aussie-brand of cricket we all know. Any other team batting out in such a manner isn't any news, but even Australia was pushed to bat for the draw. I am tempted to say that the Indians have pushed them so, but deep inside I know its Bucknor & Benson who gave them the liberty to do the unthinkable to win the series. It does seem to me that Virender Sehwag wasn't wrong at all when he said that Australia were scared of losing.

It seems like the curator had prepared a pitch that'd yield a result on day six. Someone needed to have told him that the rules on test cricket were the same for Australia and other teams. Just because Australia lost the Perth test in four days, it doesn't translate into an extra day in the Adelaide test. Then again, perhaps the curator was just doing what he was told to!

Labels: australia, benson, bucknor, ind v aus 2008, india, perth, perth 2008, pitch, sydney 2008, umpires

Thus spake Ganesh @ 4:12 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Dhoni and Kumble reading from different sheets

There's dissent in the Indian team ranks, and the vice-captain is to blame. Yesterday, in the run-up to the Adelaide test, Dhoni said

It's a moral victory, coming to Australia and not letting them beat us comfortably.

Three things to remember, Mahi.

One, the series is not yet over. A whipping at Adelaide (I don't expect a whipping, but I'm expecting a 3-1 series result) throws away any claims of a moral victory or not being beaten comfortably.

Two, there are no moral victories in sport. You win or you lose. Rohan Bopanna breaking Roger Federer may seem like a moral victory, but it doesn't count if the scoreline reads 6-1 6-0 6-0.

Three, you're in public disagreement with your captain. After the recent drawn Eden Gardens test against Pakistan, skipper Kumble responded to Pakistan coach Lawson's comments about escaping with a draw

I don't believe in moral victories. It's really crazy, I don't know why people talk about moral victories.

The last thing the team needs right now is people publicly disagreeing with each other. The Australian media are having a field day, writing about a schism in the side following Ganguly's omission from the one-day squad. I have no idea why Indian news channels extend their 'exclusive' chats with the likes of Ponting, Clarke, etc. to asking them about India's one-day side. Obviously Ponting isn't going to let go an opportunity to create some more confusion. So on his 'exclusive' chat with NDTV yesterday [Can't find a link to the video], he said

I am surprised and shocked that he is not in the side because right through this Test series, he has certainly looked good with the bat.

Why're the likes of NDTV or Times Now still having exclusives with Ponting and Clarke, when they both were significantly responsible for the controversies at Sydney 2008?

This is something that we sort of touched upon over 3 years ago, during Australia's last test tour of India. Perhaps it is time that the BCCI relaxed its rules for players speaking exclusively to the media. Right now, it makes for some pretty one-sided coverage.

Labels: australia, dhoni, ganguly, ind v aus 2008, india, kumble, perth 2008, ponting

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:59 pm | Sledge/Read 5 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

What not to do when playing Australia

I wrote this in November 2006 after England's ICC Champions Trophy game against Australia.

Risque as it may sound, the one lesson that each and every team which played against Australia in the ICC Champions Trophy needs to learn is "When you've got Australia by the b@lls, you hold on!"

Australia give so few opportunities to teams to get into a position of advantage. Opponents really cannot afford to let those chances go by.

'The Great B*st@#ds' will try and get through every single situation they come up against, such as getting vital partnership-breakers at the end of the day at Sydney & at Perth in India's first innings, clawing their way out of a 61/5 mess and attacking with so much unbelievable abandon and getting through the top order despite conceding a 118 run lead and possibly preventing India from running away with the game today.

Labels: australia, australia by the balls cliche, ind v aus 2008, india, perth 2008

Thus spake Jagadish @ 9:23 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]