Should test matches be reduced to four days?

A couple of weeks ago, in an interview to India Today, ICC President David Morgan indicated that reducing test matches to being 4-day affairs was on the agenda.

Q: Other than merely re-emphasising its importance, what is being done on the ground to restrengthen Test cricket?
Another thought that many people have, that we are examining is whether Test match cricket can be played over four days rather than five.
Q: How quickly will we see a four-day Test? Has the mental shift been made?
The mental shift has been made in that it has been talked about and examined, I think that has already occoured. I would be very surprised if within a year you haven't seen some significant changes in Test match cricket. Over rates, pitches, daynight Test cricket … I think in a year's time you will see for yourself changes that have occoured in Test match cricket.

Let's examine if there is any evidence to support the ICC's stand. I took all tests that had been played after 1 Jan 2006 and excluded games involving Zimbabwe & Bangladesh. That's a total of 123 games. Surely that's a decent sample set. Then I excluded the Antigua farce and the terror-impacted Lahore test.

So now I had 121 tests and here're the results expressed in average duration of the test.

• The average duration of a game with a result (draws are 5-day affairs since the Antigua & Lahore tests have been excluded) has ranged between 4.2 and 4.4 days. It was 4.3 in 2006, 4.4 in 2007 & 2008 and 4.2 in 2009 [so far].
  
• West Indies and Pakistan win in the shortest period (average of 4 days), but that data is skewed because they've only won 2 & 5 tests respectively in the time period chosen. Among teams with at least 10 test wins, South Africa get things done in the shortest time - 4.1 days.
  
• The shortest tests also happen in South Africa, lasting 4.2 days on an average. Both these stats indicate that South Africa have been quite ruthless over the past 3.5 years.
  
• Australia have surprisingly taken the most time to win overall (4.6 days) and the number is identical for home games.

You can view the spreadsheet online, copy the data over to your local machine and play around with it to get more pivot reports.

The evidence does seem to suggest that more and more tests are getting over in around 4-4.5 days. So while David Morgan may not be quite right about getting to 4 day tests within the next year, I see it happening after the next 2-3 years for sure. Hopefully the changes include imposing overs restrictions on test innings, including giving toss-winning teams the option to pick the overs limit for their 1st and 2nd innings.

Of course, less than 4 years ago, this same ICC, in their infinite wisdom, staged a six day test! After the dreary draws at Lahore and Faisalabad Faisala-kabhi-nahin during India's tour of Pakistan in 2006, Pakistan's cricket establishment (captain, former players, administrators, etc.) began talking about the need for 6-day tests, especially in winter, since the weather conditions invariably interfered with play. Of course, they conveniently forgot that the Lahore and Faisalabad tests could have really gone on for perhaps another 2-3 days with no chance of a result because the fault was in the pitches used.

In other news, John Buchanan's comments in his soon-to-be-released book which focusses on the Twenty20 game, have surprisingly generated outrage in the Indian media & Indian cricket establishment. It's his book, he has a right to have an opinion. It could be right or wrong. When excerpts from Adam Gilchrist's autobiography caused a furore in India, I wrote:

Adam Gilchrist's autobiography, "True Colours: My Life", is to be released next week. As is to be expected, and as we've seen with cricketer autobiographies (Trescothick, Pietersen, Wright, Fletcher, Flintoff, Hussain or Lehmann), there is a tendency to selectively leak 'scandalous' portions of the book. The aim is to create a buzz around it, with the hope that it translates into more sales when the book is released.

Adam Gilchrist's revelations about Tendulkar are nothing but just that. He has his point of view, and others have theirs. Its his autobiography, and he has a right to choose what to say, and what not to say. If he reckons that the best way to sell his book, when there's an Australia v India series on, is to say things about India's cricketers that rile their fans, then that's his judgement.

Personally, I've never had a great opinion of Buchanan. He's said enough stupid things (blaming losing opponents for his bowlers not executing their skills & predicting that Australia's 2007 World Cup side would have ambidextrous cricketers, just to take a couple of examples). If he really does point out in the book that Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly & Laxman aren't suited to Twenty20 cricket, then is that necessarily a wrong thing to say? In any case, none of them play Twenty20 internationals anymore (Tendulkar is the only one to have played a T20 international) and Laxman probably sat out all of the 2009 IPL edition.

I wrote before the BCCI announced the 2007 Twenty20 World Cup squad that Dravid & Ganguly shouldn't be in the squad while I was ambivalent about Tendulkar. If I had to arrange the 4 batsmen in decreasing order of ability in Twenty20, the order would be Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman. So exactly what's new about what Buchanan says? Is the outrage based on "How dare this foreigner tell us our greats aren't good enough at T20!"?

I'm guessing everyone who is outraged actually thinks the same way about Laxman and a lot of people would feel so about Ganguly & Dravid. The only questionable comment is about Tendulkar, and given he averaged 31 (strike rate 106) and 33 (strike rate 120) in the 2008 & 2009 editions of the Indian Premier League, there's enough evidence to suggest Buchanan is right! In any case, I haven't read the book, so I really can't comment on other issues.

Today at Cardiff, the venue for the first Ashes test, Ricky Ponting became the 2nd fastest to reach 11000 test runs, taking 9 innings more than Lara and one less than Tendulkar. Next in his sights - going past Border's Australian record of 11174. After that, he'll go on and get the test runs and centuries records for sure, unless injury strikes him down or he gets totally demotivated after being dismissed 8 times by Graeme Swann in this series.

Last week, India won the ODIs in West Indies to notch up 5 consecutive series wins. I was curious to find out other similar streaks and here's what I found.

• 6 by West Indies in 1985-1986
  
• 6 by Pakistan in 2001-2002
  
• 6 by New Zealand from 2007 to 2009

But the runaway victor in this category is Australia with a whopping 10 consecutive series wins between Dec 2002 and Sep 2004, including an unbeaten 2003 World Cup campaign.

I could have probably excluded series where there were lesser than 3 ODIs. But I couldn't have excluded series involving the minnow teams because they turn up at the various World Cup-like events. Even then, I don't think the results will differ too much from the ones above.

Labels: 11000, ashes, ashes 2009, autobiography, buchanan, innovation, ponting, statistic, streak, test cricket

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:47 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Ricky Ponting on pressure, no pressure on Ricky Ponting

When Australia start a series as favourites, the pressure is always on the opposition. After all, they're facing the #1 side. They'll feel the pressure from the crowds when they don't do well.

When Australia go into a series not as favourites, the pressure is on the opposition. After all, they'll feel the pressure of being the favourite. They'll feel the pressure from the crowds when they don't live up to the favourites tag.

You really have to admire Ricky Ponting's ability to say it with a straight face.

I really never thought it'd come to this - an Australian captain comfortable with an 'underdog' tag, and even worse better, insisting that his side would "take the positives" (I thought that was © England cricket team!) from a pyrrhic win over South Africa at Sydney.

Labels: australia, ponting, south africa

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:01 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Exclusive: ICC to appoint Ricky Ponting to umpires panel

In a dramatic revelation exclusive to Cricket 24x7, an ICC source who preferred not to be named has announced that the ICC is considering appointing Ricky Ponting, Australia's captain, as an umpire in their panel. An agreement has been struck with Cricket Australia which will allow Ricky Ponting to be the first player to umpire even though he has not retired from the game. Although Ponting has never publicly expressed interest in the role, his comments last January about umpires being stressed out and the need to expand the panel do offer a hint.

There are apparently multiple reasons for this move by the ICC:

• The ICC umpires panel has taken a hit in the recent past, with the exits of Darrell Hair, Ian Robinson and Peter Parker. In addition, Simon Taufel had spoken about the possibility of quitting and Steve Bucknor didn't have a great start to the year.
  
• The ICC, and the other cricket boards, are encouraging former players to take up umpiring and Paul Reiffel has moved up the Australian umpiring ranks to now become an ODI umpire. Ricky Ponting is part of the natural progression. His appointment isn't expected to impact his media commitments. As for impacting the captaincy, Cricket Australia sources revealed that it couldn't possibly get worse anyway.
  
• The ICC is embarking on a cost-cutting measure. So we could potentially see some of the bad umpires replaced over a period of time by players and the individual cricket boards would pay the bills.
  
• The most important criterion, and the clincher, is that Ponting has already displayed, twice within a year, his ability to be pro-active and one step ahead of the umpires. The ICC has been extremely impressed by Ponting's eagerness & willingness to declare out Sourav Ganguly in early 2008 and Jacques Kallis a couple of days ago, both at Sydney in controversial circumstances, when the on-field umpires, unsure about whether the ball had carried (to Clarke & McDonald respectively), had referred it to the TV umpire who was still taking a look at the replay for the 23rd time from the 7th possible angle.

It is expected that Ponting would first be drafted in to the International Panel and then promoted to the Elite Panel. It is not yet confirmed if Ponting will be allowed to umpire in games that he captains in, but it is likely to be the case if the ICC is really serious about cutting costs.

Labels: exclusive, icc, ponting, umpires

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:33 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

How's this for bad luck?

When Ricky Ponting got out at the Kotla a few minutes ago, bowled Sehwag, he became the 13th instance of an Aussie getting out at that score. Try that for bad luck - 13, 87, Aussie ... geddit? No? Ok, then you need to learn more about the linkage.

Clem Hill has got out twice on 87. Is that about as unlucky as it can get? To most Aussies, perhaps. Not for Clem. He had three consecutive scores of 99 (Melbourne), 98 & 97 (Adelaide) in the 1901/02 Ashes!

In any case, there's no reason to believe that Australia are the ones most hard done by when it comes to getting out on 87. England top the list at 18 while India are level with Australia.

Labels: australia, ponting, statistic, superstition

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:59 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Open letter: Sort out your woes first, Ricky!

Dear Ricky

In an SMH report titled "Curator's gift pitch perfect for Kumble", you are quoted playing India's super selector.

Is it Dhoni's team or is it Anil's team? I guess we'll see in the next Test.

Remember, before the series started, you were wondering about whether Ganguly would be in the squad after he had been left out for the Irani Trophy.

You now wonder about India's selection issues, after Dhoni's captaincy turned out to be one of the factors in the 320 run thrashing of your side. It is entirely likely that Australia will come back in the series, and even win it. But right now, all the problems are yours not India's.

One of your openers hasn't made any runs, and averages less than Mitchell Johnson. The other opener and the #3 batsman (incidentally you, the captain) haven't done anything since the first day at Bangalore. The #5 batsman scored a pyrrhic half-century at Mohali, after flopping in the earlier three innings, and had to be shielded from facing the last over on day 4.

Only one of your bowlers has 5+ wickets and a strike rate below 60 so far. Your rookie quick bowled much better than your 'senior' speedster, who has largely bowled tripe, and didn't bowl a lot on day four at Mohali for 'tactical' reasons. In cricket at league, street or school levels in India, an attempted booming cover drive that results in the ball going off the inside edge to fine-leg for four is termed an 'idea shot'. Is that the same manner in which your coach uses the phrase 'tactical reason'?

Your team's over rate is a concern. I'm not even going to write about the spin factor. As an indicator of how things have changed, the incumbents haven't performed, and the replacements are either worse, or injured. Your captaincy & tactics, including being ultra-defensive at the start of India's 2nd innings at Mohali, are being ripped apart by the Aussie media.

The 'new age' fielding suddenly disappeared at Mohali where India scored at nearly 5 an over for 65 overs, only 96 of those runs coming in boundaries. Your keeper leaked 39 byes at Bangalore, the highest by an Australian keeper, ever!

You have so many worries. And yet, you find time to worry about India's composition at the Kotla!

Cheers!

Labels: aus v ind 2008, ponting

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:31 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Verbal warfare begins!

Zaheer Khan - "They know they can't take 20 wickets and they are on the back foot. They couldn't get me or Bhajji out. I have never seen an Australian team play such defensive cricket, which is a good thing for us. On a fifth-day pitch the spinners could not do us any harm. That shows what their spin attack is all about."

Ricky Ponting - "We were the only ones in the game trying to take the game forward. We played aggressive cricket. I am not surprised by the way they played, the Indian team do play a lot of drawn games."

Did anyone say this was going to be a quiet series?

For the record Ricky, in 2008 so far, 3 out of Australia's 7 tests have ended in draws while 3 out of India's 10 tests have ended in draws. I know my arithmetic, and its easy to see who has the higher ratio of draws!

Playing for a draw isn't necessarily a negative mindset, especially if you're trying to squeeze out the best possible result from the match situation. I guess India could point fingers at the way Australia played at Adelaide and say that Australia were focussed on getting a draw and a 2-1 result. Maybe we should focus on your team scoring at 2.8 runs an over in the first innings at Bangalore and not taking 10 wickets while having 83 overs to bowl on a deteriorating pitch in less than ideal light conditions for batting. Australia had an opportunity to bat when the pitch was at its best for batting and bowl last when it was at its worst for batting. The first innings run rate was despite having 6 wickets in hand at the end of the first day and the failure to get India all out will be exaggerated by the fact that India were 24/2, having lost the two batsmen who really mattered in that situation, and nearly 5 more hours to play out!

This isn't about who the better side is. The obvious answer, at this point in time, is Australia. Australia have been the gold standard for over a decade now. India aren't quite there yet. The side needs another quick bowler, a good backup spin option, and capable replacements for the middle order. It is work in progress. Part of the learning curve is to fight it out for a draw. They failed to do it at Sydney earlier this year, and on several other occasions in the past. A draw is a far more acceptable start to the series. Once Australia got 430 on the board, it was always unlikely that Australia would be in the backseat.

While Zaheer was tempting fate when he spoke about Australia being unable to take 20 wickets and the defensive cricket, he is obviously right about your spin options. It has been Australia's fault that no young spinner has broken through for such a long time. There have been many opportunities for Australia's selectors to provide more chances for Cullen, Hauritz and White to bowl alongside Warne. Yet they kept recalling MacGill, picking Hogg, and then McGain, leaving Casson to wonder what he did wrong.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, bangalore, india, ponting, sledging, spin, zaheer khan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:32 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Ponting and Australia play percentage cricket on day one at Bangalore

As mentioned yesterday, I watched the first day's play from the ground (T-stand, to the left of the press and scorer box). I reached my seat just as Hayden was trudging back, for a duck. Given our past history, was I glad or what?!

If any of the readers of the blog were there, you should have raised a hand when I displayed a poster I made which repeated a Cricket 24x7 cliche "When you have the Aussies by their b#lls, you don't let go - cricket24x7.blogspot.com". Admittedly, I was pushing it by claiming that 0/1 in the 1st over was a case of 'having them by the b#lls'!

This isn't a report of the proceedings. Read the Cricinfo bulletin if that's what you want.

For starters, I had a great view of the cricket, sitting a couple of levels above where long-off to the right hander (if the bowler was bowling from the Pavilion end) would have been. The seat was good and there was lunch and tea provided as part of the what I paid (Rs. 1100+) for the ticket. Finding a place to park the bike was a real pain though, since I made two rounds of the stadium before parking in Cubbon Park.

In my opinion, Hayden's early dismissal resulted in two things. Firstly, Ponting was able to come in and face the seamers, rather than starting against spin. Secondly, Australia ended up playing percentage cricket. There were hardly any risks taken. In fact, there may have just been one sweep until tea. Towards the end, I did see Hussey sweep one while Ponting was out lbw sweeping. The batsmen were very content pushing the ball around in the gaps and picking up a lot of singles and twos. There was also no attempt to go over the infield, or play some rasping cuts.

Ponting played a very controlled innings. It was as though he was determined to score a century, even if it meant he'd have to forsake his normal style of play. His celebration was fairly exaggerated, but he totally deserved to do so. After all, he's now improved his hopeless batting average against India in India by 60%!

Katich gave him a lot of good support, including soaking up the pressure from Harbhajan early on. Ponting didn't face a single ball from Harbhajan until the off-spinner had bowled 15 deliveries.

Hussey got far too many of his runs against the spinners off edges past the slips, a lot of them uncontrolled and not deliberate. He did hit some very nice shots through cover though. Clarke pounced on a couple of bad short balls from Kumble, but did little else.

India's bowling was largely tidy. It's very rare that a side keeps Australia down to less than 3 an over. I'd say Zaheer and Kumble were the two best bowlers. Kumble, despite not picking up a wicket, was a little shoddy to start off with, but came back in his next few spells. He didn't bowl too many googlies or other variations early on, but started using them later.

Zaheer was very good almost all day and also experimented with having Dhoni stand up to the stumps to prevent Ponting from lunging forward to cover for the ball's movement. Ishant bowled brilliantly against Ponting but was below average against Katich, bowling far too wide on either side.

Harbhajan, despite picking up Ponting, had a bad day. There wasn't much turn on offer, so instead of sticking to a off and middle line, he frequently erred in length, giving the batsmen time to pick up the runs on the onside. He also didn't try bowling around the wicket too often to Ponting.

I was very surprised that Sehwag bowled so late in the day, and only bowled four overs. He's almost always done a decent job with the ball and has a knack of making things happen. Perhaps less surprisingly (given the last thing India would have wanted was for Australia to race away after a slow consolidation), Tendulkar didn't bowl his assortment stuff.

Overall, India's fielding was very poor. There was one definite dropped chance (Hussey dropped by Dhoni off Kumble when he was on 1) and a couple of half-chances that Gambhir (at short-leg) may have taken on some other day. But the catching wasn't the problem. The batsmen repeatedly stole singles and converted at least half a dozen singles into twos. By my estimate, India conceded around 20 runs through poor fielding, and a further 20 through poor field placements.

Kumble's field placements were baffling a lot of the time, and downright pathetic a couple of times. Harbhajan's first ball to Ponting was nudged through leg slip for four. It was definitely a poor ball, but not having a leg slip to Ponting was asking for a lot of trouble. It meant that whenever the two spinners erred in line and length, Ponting could get an easy single.

He also frequently had a fielder at long on to Ponting. Ponting was never even trying to advance down the track. Katich did it a few times. So why Kumble chose to try and prevent a lofted shot is very tough to understand. Maybe his reasoning was that the mid on (typically Sourav Ganguly or Zaheer Khan) was conceding quick singles due to slow reactions anyway, so might as well insure against an attempted sixer!

Towards the end of the day, when Hussey was cover driving beautifully, he had a deep backward point! When Sehwag (I think) was bowling and Clarke had just come in to bat, there was a deep mid-wicket fielder! In the last over of the day, there was a fielder placed on the point boundary for Clarke!

As for the controversies, there wasn't too much around today, perhaps largely because of Chris Broad reading out the riot act to both sides. It is interesting though that the ICC did nothing earlier this year when Hayden had a go at Harbhajan and Ishant. Better late than never, I guess!

There were some close-ish lbw shouts, including one fairly give-able one against Katich off Kumble. But nothing else was really going to cause alarms for the umpires. There was a moment though when the Indian supporters in the stands would have thought 'Aha, payback time for claiming one-bounce catches'!

Kumble to Ponting, the ball ended up almost as a yorker. Ponting tapped it back to Kumble who caught it and appealed. Koertzen first said no, and then discussed with Rauf, who also felt Ponting had hit it into the ground. TV replays are turned off on the screen at the ground, but after I got home to watch the highlights, it did seem like it was a catch since the ball had come back to Kumble directly off the bat, and not after it had hit the ground. If the umpires had referred to the third umpire, there was a high change Ponting would have been out on 110. Kumble can feel happy about the possibility that Koertzen will do his thing and say 'sorry, mate'.

A totally unrelated question - Close-in fielders use helmets while standing at short leg or silly point. But when the position isn't used, the helmet is placed behind the keeper. This brings in the probability of the ball hitting the helmet, resulting in a five run penalty. Is there anything that prevents the fielding side from asking the square leg umpire to hold on to the unused helmet(s)? After all, if the umpires can hold on to miscellaneous stuff given by the players (caps, sunglasses, mobile phones!, etc.), why not the helmet?!

Overall, I'd say Australia are in front, like Stu wrote, but just about. Perhaps by around half the length of Bill Lawry's nose :)


At tea time, I estimated (and predicted to Ganesh, who is happily holidaying instead of turning up at the ground to watch the game!) that Australia would end at 275/3. This was on the basis of them scoring 75 in the first session and 91 in the second as well as the pitch really not helping any sort of bowling. Hayden's and Katich's dismissals would really have to be attributed to batsman error, Hayden's being umpiring error if you're a one-eyed Aussie :)

My benchmark was that if Australia lost 5 wickets, it was India's day, regardless of the score made. If Australia had ended up losing 3 wickets, it would have been comprehensively their day. At 4 down, it seems to be a fairly even contest, but Australia still have Watson, Haddin and White to come. They can all bat (and score rapidly), but they've never played test cricket in India. In fact, the three have 6 test matches between them, with Cameron White making his debut.

So, the game could still turn either way. If Australia make 400, they'll be happy. If India can get Australia for 350, they'll be more than happy.

From a stat perspective, Ponting's century meant he now had the most centuries by a skipper. At the ground, I wondered if Hayden had the records for most centuries and runs by someone who'd never captained a test. Turns out my guess was right. Kallis could have had the record for most runs, but he skippered in one test!

The corresponding record holders for one-day internationals are Gibbs (most hundreds), Mark Waugh (most runs). Murali, obviously, holds the bowling records (most wickets and most five-fors) in tests and one-dayers!

PS: Congrats, Bangladesh, for beating New Zealand in a one-dayer. Now, only England & West Indies remain!

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore, field placement, fielding, ponting, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:14 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

First Test - Day 1 - Aussie take

Ponting showed us today why he is a legend of the game and destined to become it's leading run getter. I have been a bit critical of Ricky Ponting (as a captain, never a batsman) in the past and was even sceptical of his ability to lead Australia out of the current "lull" the popular press would have us believe they are in. He led from the front today.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore, ponting

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 4:53 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Ricky Ponting's broken record

No, this isn't about Ponting's statistical feats. By his own admission, Ricky Ponting says he's flogging a dead horse when he brings up the topic of batsmen accepting the fielder's word.

To me it's like flogging the dead horse, to tell the truth. I go to every referee meeting before a series wanting to play the game like that, but almost every other captain in the world is not interested.

Ever wondered to think why that's happening, Ricky? Maybe because its a stupid idea, given the high stakes involved? Maybe because teams the world over aren't interested in trusting an opposition fielder, especially an Aussie?

At Sydney earlier this year, Michael Clarke nicked to first slip and stood waiting for the umpire's decision, and later claimed that he was too shocked to move. Later in the game, he claimed that he'd taken a catch cleanly, when there was no evidence to indicate it was actually as clean as he thought. You acted as the third on-field umpire and said Clarke had taken it cleanly, and then later claimed a catch (off Dhoni) when the ball, although under control, was touching the ground while resting in your palm, and then had the temerity to claim that a journalist (G Rajaraman) who pointed it out was questioning his integrity and thus had no place in the room.

I sincerely hope Anil Kumble doesn't get hoodwinked this time around as well. The reality is that there is a huge trust deficit.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, india, ponting, sydney 2008

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:58 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Ponting preempts Indian selectors

Ricky Ponting told CNN-IBN that he thought it was interesting that Ganguly wasn't named in the initial squad for the Border-Gavaskar trophy.

He seems to have far more knowledge of the Indian squad than we do. The selectors have not yet named any 'initial squad'. The only squad named is the squad for the Irani Trophy.

But if Ricky Ponting is a little surprised (& feels it interesting) that Ganguly isn't in, then I wouldn't mind it. The last time he said he was surprised at Ganguly's exclusion, India won the tournament.

PS: What's with Australia 'A' and New Zealand 'A' playing in India when Cricket Australia is concerned about the main team's visit? Are some lives less precious? I'm actually even more surprised that New Zealand Cricket hasn't withdrawn their team on security grounds, given that they'd normally do so when someone farted loudly or if a transformer burst.

I'm not trying to trivialize the effects of the blasts in Delhi on Saturday. I'm just pissed off at the double standards: It's ok to play in Jaipur and in London, but not in Pakistan. It's ok for second XI players to continue with their tour, not first XI players.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, ganguly, india, ponting

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:46 am | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Ricky Ponting gets 10000 test runs

As was perhaps widely predicted from the moment he made his debut 13 years ago, Ricky Ponting went past 10,000 test runs last week, during the second test against West Indies, 2 months after his statistical twin did so.

Of course, Dravid's recent run of inconsistency (and early-career inability to convert 50s into 100s) has meant that Ponting has gone way past him in terms of test batting average (58 v/s 54) and centuries (35 v/s 25).

Brian Lara, with 11,953 runs, currently is top of the pile, closely followed by Sachin Tendulkar (11,782).

Unless his career is cruelly cut short by injury or some other self-inflicted damage, there's absolutely no doubt that Ponting will end up breaking the test records for most runs and most centuries.

Labels: 10000, australia, batting, dravid, greats, ponting, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:54 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

What level of the ICC code of conduct has Ponting breached?

When asked about Harbhajan slapping Sreesanth, Ricky Ponting, hardly the type to let one go outside offstump, was quoted in the Courier Mail as saying

The (slapping) incident was him dealing with a guy that he has probably played 20 Tests with. After this latest issue in India, I think people should be making their own judgments about Harbhajan. He has again done something wrong.

He then pointed out how Harbhajan had got away with a 50% fine despite being accused of a racist remark.

It certainly wasn't the outcome that we expected," he said. "He ended up being fined 50 per cent of his match fee. As it is I will cop a 20-30 per cent match fee fine most one-day games because I am behind in the over rates.

Ponting's comment on the outcome of Judge Hansen's hearing is public criticism of a match-related event and the outcome of a related hearing. The ICC Code of conduct deals with such comments, and there are two types of penalties prescribed for breaches of the code.

• Level 1 (Reprimand and/or upto 50% match fee fine): "Public criticism of, or inappropriate comment on a match related incident or match official"
  
• Level 2 (50-100% match fee fine and/or 1 test/2 ODI ban): "Serious public criticism of, or inappropriate comment on a match related incident or match official."

So, which one has Ponting breached and will he be hauled up?

Labels: harbhajan, icc, ponting, sreesanth

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:14 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Target practice

Aussies typically announce well in advance that they're going to target the captain. In addition, when a captain performs poorly against Australia, invariably it was all a grand plan to target the captain. The assumption is that a weak and under-performing captain's performance would reflect in his decision making as well his team's performance.

Try this. The captain scored 268 runs from 7 innings, 140 of them coming on the flattest test pitch in the series. He also made 145 runs against a specific opponent from 6 ODI innings, 124 of which came on, you guessed it right, the flattest one-day pitch in the series.

Was this a case of India's bowlers and fielders targetting Ricky Ponting without actually announcing it well in advance, unlike McGrath's pre-series predictions which always had great media coverage?

Maybe, just maybe, Ricky Ponting isn't the great batsman everyone makes him out to be. Why? Try this.

One of the measures of great batsmen is their ability to be consistent in all conditions. After all, you're not considered a great batsman unless you've batted well on bouncy Australian/South African pitches or seaming/swinging English/New Zealand pitches or on spinning sub-continental tracks or cashed in against poor West Indian/Zimbabwe bowling.

Ponting's overall career summary is awesome (9776 runs with 34 centuries at an average of over 58). He averages very close to 50 against every single opponent (lowest of ~ 48 against England). So that tells us nothing.

Let's do some scratching - home average 62, away average 51 and neutral average 85. Are we getting somewhere? Hmm ... let's see. Let's throw out the numbers that don't have enough data (2 neutral venue tests, 2 tests in Bangladesh, 1 test in Pakistan & 1 in Zimbabwe).

He averages 42 in England, 12 in India, 97 in New Zealand, 65 in South Africa, 54 in Sri Lanka and 98 in the Caribbean.

Twelve! That's how pathetic he has been in India. Hey, so let's give him some benefit of doubt. Maybe he had one bad tour which screwed up his numbers.

Nope. On 3 successive tours (and I'm ignoring the last one where he failed twice in his lone test in 2004, at the Wankhede), he averaged 13.5, 21 and 3!

But let's give him some credit. On the 2000-01 tour, he actually hit a six in a test match in India, lofting Harbhajan (yes!) in the direction of the Buckingham canal perhaps.

67.6 Harbhajan Singh to Ponting, SIX, steps out and does the charge, hits it very well and clears the long on fence, Ponting atlast sorts Harbhajan out a bit

Ricky Ponting gets runs against India only at home. He averages 79 at home and 12 in India.

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, india, ponting, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:13 pm | Sledge/Read 7 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Some nitpicking on a superb day for cricket fans

This isn't a party-pooper sort of post, but I guess its the right day to get it off my chest, in no particular order.

• Harbhajan and Yuvraj shadow-boxing after Hayden got out was totally hilarious. I'm very surprised Ponting doesn't see the funny side of it. He told NDTV something like "Harbhajan finds new ways to celebrate. It wasn't very funny". I agree with you, Ricky. It's hard to find it funny when you're copping it! Then again, it certainly wasn't an unprovoked celebration!
  
• Apparently Harbhajan is in trouble with the match referee for making monkey gestures and spitting, both directed at a section of the SCG crowd. Is this guy a moron or what? He's just about managing to get into trouble every week! He was in a definite soup over the 'monkey' abuse issue, and evaded a ban because of a combination of inter-board politics, administrative gaffes and a lack of conclusive evidence.
  
• Brett Lee's beamer to Sachin Tendulkar is just another beamer in his international career. Notice how none of the commentators actually says 'beamer'. He seems to keep bowling one so regularly. Please find me other bowlers who do that. In 2005, he bowled one to Abdur Razzaq in retaliation to Razzaq bowling him a beamer. Then, it was McCullum's turn, which drove the Kiwis mad even as some Aussies made some pathetic excuses about lack of height, the ball slipping, it wasn't high enough to qualify as a beamer, etc.. He didn't apparently learn from his 'mistake', for he then bowled one to Trescothick during Australia's Ashes tour in 2005. I have absolutely no doubt that Tendulkar accepted the apology mainly to avoid yet another controversy.
  
• Was it really tough to lipread what Virat Kohli, the India under-19 team captain, was shouting after his side won the tournament? Hint #1: There were two words he kept repeating. Hint #2: The first word has 4 alphabets, the second has 3. Hint #3: The first word starts with f, the second starts with o. I know he was letting off steam. It's huge pressure for a young kid. But there're younger kids watching the television, those aspiring to be under-19 captains one day. Such language is unacceptable. After all, if the national team cricketers abuse opponents, or their mothers, it is assumed that it is a must-do thing in international cricket!

Labels: australia, beamer, Commonwealth Bank Series, harbhajan, hayden, india, lee, ponting, tendulkar, under-19 world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:35 am | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Harbhajan v/s Hayden & Ponting

Apparently during an India v Australia game at Adelaide ten days ago or so, there was a fair amount of banter between Ponting and Harbhajan, going by this PTI report.

Apparently, Ponting kept having a go at Harbhajan in Adelaide, asking him "to show what he had got" in the middle.

Harbhajan, on his part, had then cheekily remarked: "Mate, whatever I have shown in the middle has been better than yours' in the series so far."

It appeared to have stung the Australian captain who asked Harbhajan to "f... off" after the latter was dismissed.

If the dialogue reported did indeed happen, it is a superb response from Harbhajan! Remember that at that point in time, Ricky Ponting had scored 25 runs from 5 innings, which he duly rectified the moment he got a nice batting track at Sydney to score a century. Harbhajan, in contrast, had 3/74 from 22 overs.

I totally loved that retort. Does anyone else also think that Hayden's comments to the Brisbane radio station on Harbhajan being an 'obnoxious little weed' and about taking on Ishant in a boxing ring should land him in quite a lot of trouble?

As per the ICC's code of conduct, using language that is obscene, offensive or insulting is a level-1 offence (upto 50% of the match fee penalty). Using language that is obscene, offensive or of a seriously insulting nature (barring the verbals that happen during a game) is a level-2 offence (upto 100% of the match fee penalty and a 1 test/2 ODI ban). After the appeal hearing, Harbhajan was found guilty of a level-2 offence.

Obnoxious implies Harbhajan is annoying, offensive or disgustingly objectionable. Little refers to Harbhajan being smaller-built in comparison to Hayden (and the rest of his teammates). This is obviously a case of racial stereotyping, and hence vilification (just like Tony Greig's "Those little Shri Lonkans" chant). Weed again refers to Harbhajan being obnoxious and detrimental.

Clearly this is a case of offensive and seriously insulting language. If someone tells me I'm a weed, I'd be pretty offended and feel insulted about it, since it implies that I shouldn't be existing. Add in the 'little' part and this very clearly qualifies as a racist remark. Actually this also makes for a libel/defamation suit since Hayden said "That is why he's been charged more than anyone that has ever played in the history of cricket." while referring to Harbhajan. That is totally incorrect. As pointed out in an earlier post, Inzamam has been charged the most number of times.

Yet, I have this nagging feeling Hayden will be let off by Cricket Australia and the ICC, despite being charged with breaching the Code of Behaviour, with a minor slap on the wrists and receive a letter that reads something like

Dear Matthew,
I saw your remark on Harbhajan being an 'obnoxious little weed' the other day.

I'd be really grateful if you could tone down your language. We've got tons of problems with those BCCI buggers. We need the money!

We'll be putting out a media release soon charging you under some clause of our code of conduct. Let me know if that is ok with you.

Cheers

James (CEO, just in case you forgot)

PS: I loved your imitation of Ishant's Indian accent *ROFLMAO*

Update at 6.30 pm: Was I clairvoyant or what? Hayden has been 'reprimanded'. Basically, he's got away with it. Perhaps insulting opposition players is acceptable for Cricket Australia.

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, harbhajan, hayden, india, ponting, racism, sledging

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:35 pm | Sledge/Read 4 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 ]

The outcome of Sydney 2008

The outcome of the events at Sydney last week, where pathetic umpiring and a charge of racial abuse marred a superb game, will hopefully make international cricket better, for administrators, players, match officials and fans/spectators.

After the game, a chat with Ganesh, went like this:

14:24 me: i see a few benefits coming out of this entire test:
14:25 1. icc could do something about umpiring standards

2. icc could clearly define what constitutes a racial abuse and what doesn't - is bastard racial, for e.g?

3. teams will swear to not agree to ponting's gentleman agreement on catches

14:26 4. players will stop walking [esp. if #1 isn't handled]

Among these, if the ICC can ensure #1 and #2, then a lot of the problems could be solved. Good umpires will refer to the third umpire at the right time and take decisions on the field at the right time. They will get a higher %age of decisions right. Continuing with my tirade against the ICC's repeated claims to umpires getting 94% of their decisions right, the Sydney game was a classic example of what happens when umpires get 100% of all irrelevant decisions right and 0% of all critical decisions wrong.

It is fairly obvious that Symonds and Hussey benefitted significantly from umpiring errors [Symonds went from 30 to 162 while Hussey went from 45 to 145], Ponting had the best worst of both worlds while Dravid and Ganguly suffered significantly.

To my mind Hussey not being given out in the second innings when he edged RP Singh down legside having scored 45 perhaps had as significant an impact on the outcome as the other umpiring cock-ups. It is strange that his let-off is not discussed as widely as Symonds' or Ponting's.

53.4 Singh to Hussey, no run, a big noise, huge appeals for a strangle down the legs, India think they have their man and replays suggest that he did press the face of the bat on to it

It is high time the ICC clamped down on:

1. Umpiring standards: The ridiculously poor umpiring can & should be fixed by expanding the panel and ensuring that the workload is distributed evenly across four qualified umpires rather than the situation currently where two umpires slog it out in the sun and are under tremendous pressure, with the other two enjoying the comforts of an air-conditioned box and called upon only every now and then [especially the fourth umpire!] to do some work. In addition, there must be something done to increase the accountability of umpires. They can't just say sorry to players for bad decisions and get away with it. Players are dropped for poor performance. Why should umpires be handled with kid gloves?
   
   
2. Walking: The act of a batsman walking insults the collective intelligence of umpires, teammates and spectators. It is a great tool to be (ab)used [and there are several instances where it has been] either by players walking selectively (after they have scored a lot of runs, but not if they're on a pair, for e.g.) or by players appealing to the umpire's conscience for the umpire could assume that the 'walker' player's appeal for a catch/lbw was valid since he was inherently honest.
   
   
3. Pre-series agreements on taking the fielder's word for catches: This sort of agreement is total rubbish and I have no idea why Kumble agreed to it when several other captains (Vaughan & Fleming, to name two) have disagreed with Ponting's suggestion. Ricky Ponting got enraged at the post-match press conference when it was suggested that he had actually grounded the ball after 'catching' Dhoni in India's second innings at Sydney. He was affronted enough to take the query as an question about his integrity and advised that the journalist should not even be in the room [I take it that no-one who has any questions about Ponting's conduct should be in the press conference henceforth]. In fact, he held up his conduct in the first innings [where he didn't claim a catch that Dravid had edged since it had bounced] as an example of how he plays the game. It sort of reminds me of the 'walking' business where a player's conduct could be used by umpires to influence their decisions in his favour. That is exactly what seemed to happen with Ganguly dismissal. Clarke caught the ball and rolled over. Ponting asked Clarke (he who edged to first slip and didn't walk) if he caught it. The umpire asked Ponting if Clarke caught it. The umpire took Ponting's word for it. Mr. Ponting is an honourable man. Didn't you see the way he did not appeal after Dravid's edge fell short in the first innings? Thank us for small mercies. Ponting's argument perhaps goes like this: "I didn't appeal for that catch. This shows how I play the game. Hence if I appeal for a catch, it is always a valid appeal and the umpires are duty-bound to adjudicate in my favour."
   
   
4. Sledging/Abuse: There should be a total ban on any sort of sledging, including banter. There's no saying when a comment becomes offensive, and there is a huge difference in the way people see barbs aimed at them. Sad as it might seem, it means that witty & creative comments obviously also become a victim of the tough measures to prevent situations from boiling over.

PS: Steve Waugh, in his column, wrote about the things that Australian cricketers hate.

On the other hand, Australian teams can't stomach time-wasting and perceived manipulation of the rules, including calling for runners, over-appealing and the alleged altering of the condition of the ball.

So let's see how Australia's players fared at Sydney.

• Time wasting: Wasn't Clarke wasting everyone's time by staying at the crease after edging to slip?
  
• Manipulation of the rules through using runners: Let's see what Hayden did. After he'd reached 71 [off 132 balls], Hayden got himself a runner (Ponting), since he had started limping a couple of overs later. When he got out on 123, he had faced 192 balls. In the 60 balls that he played after apparently getting injured, going by Cricinfo's commentary and based on what I saw on TV, he played at least 10 booming drives and 10 sweep shots. Add in a couple of pulls and a couple of reverse sweeps. I don't know too much about sportsmen's bodies, but it seems highly unlikely that a batsman with a serious-enough injury to warrant a runner, would be able to play such shots by placing so much stress on his leg.
  
• Over-appealing: When Ricky Ponting 'catches' the ball, falls down and his appeal is turned down, he mentions at a press conference that he caught the ball. Isn't that carrying on with the appeal a little too long?

Labels: australia, benson, bucknor, icc, ind v aus 2008, india, ponting, racism, sydney, sydney 2008, umpires, walking

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:10 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Such a ridiculous stat

I could be wrong on this, since I'm not sure I used Cricinfo's StatsGuru v 2.0 properly.

The last time Australia, hereinafter occasionally referred to in this blog as 'The Great B*st@#ds' (for the way they manage to fight back and win so bloody often), lost a test after scoring less than 350 in their first innings while batting first was the the world record chase game where West Indies chased down 417 after both teams scored 240 in their first innings (Would it have been one of the rare occasions where both sides scored an identical first innings total?)

This is only the third time that the captain of 'The Great B*st@#ds', Ricky Ponting, hereinafter occasionally referred to in this blog as Ruthless Ponting, has scored less than 10 runs in a test match. The last two times this happened were during a couple of special games: Hobart, 1999 [he got a pair in fact!] where Gilchrist & Langer took 'The Great B*st@#ds' to an improbable victory and Eden Gardens, 2001 where Laxman, Dravid & Harbhajan took India to an even more improbable victory.

Labels: australia, ind v aus 2008, india, ponting, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:45 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Minnow words

'Minnow' is a term used to refer to small fish. In sport, it also refers to small/underdog teams who're competing with established giants.

At this World Cup, although Geoff had England in his list of ODI 'minnows', the minnow teams are (in alphabetical order): Bangladesh (despite wins against Sri Lanka, Australia and India in the last 2.5 years), Bermuda, Canada, Ireland, Kenya, Netherlands, Scotland and Zimbabwe.

Ergo, half of the teams in this World Cup count as minnows. Australia's thrashing of Scotland and Sri Lanka doing the same to Bermuda will undoubtedly get people asking the ICC more questions about why these countries are playing at the World Cup. Like Stuart pointed out, a close game between the minnow was realistically the only way there could be some interest in a game, say between Ireland and Zimbabwe.

This discussion on minnow teams is interesting and it comes at a time when Tasmania, who topped the points table in this season's Pura Cup, find themselves in the Pura Cup final, against New South Wales, starting next week.

If Australia's cricket administrators had stuck to their stand and not included Tasmania in the domestic competition at all, or had included it say in the 1990s rather than in 1977/78, we may not have seen the emergence of the likes of David Boon or boring run-machine Ricky Ponting.

Ponting ought to realize that Tasmania was a minnow too. He spoke out against minnow teams for this World Cup and also during the 2004 ICC Champions Trophy. To be fair to him, he does have a point. The ICC gives these teams a series of big games once in a couple of years (at the ICC Champions Trophy and at the World Cup). There's no doubt that these minnow teams feel hopelessly out of depth in such events. The better way to get these teams to improve their standards are to first make them play more games with each other (which the ICC is doing) and to have them play against at least one major team on an annual basis, so that by the time they get to a major ICC tournament, they've played against at least some of the major teams at least once.

In other minnow news, there seems to be dissent in the English ranks. When England were 4-0 down against India last year, Hoggard commented that he'd rather take a 5-fer in an Ashes win than a 5-fer in a World Cup win. Of course, they were his views. Michael Vaughan though seemed to offer a different take now that the Ashes were lost 5-0. He said

I guess winning the tournament, with the relative inexperience of our bowling attack and where we've been in one-day cricket recently, would be a bigger achievement than winning the Ashes.

The general rule of thumb, by the way, is that England always have an inexperienced bowling attack. Find me one series in the last couple of years where England's captain/coach haven't been quoted as saying their bowling was inexperienced. I'm fairly sure they said it before the 2005 Ashes too.

Back to what Vaughan said though. He's obviously saying that he'd be happier with winning a World Cup (with this team) than the Ashes.

Labels: 2007 world cup, australia, bangladesh, bermuda, canada, england, holland, kenya, minnows, netherlands, ponting, scotland, tasmania, vaughan, world cup, zimbabwe

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:02 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Merciless Australia destroy Scotland, Kenya win against Canada



In St. Kitts, Ricky Ponting's Australia fired a clear warning shot today, mercilessly destroying Scotland.

That Australia would beat Scotland was clear. It was also evident that they would win by a wide margin. That they won by such a margin was impressive, considering that the Scottish bowling had done a reasonable job for the first 45 overs of the match. A flurry of runs at the end and a dominant bowling performance led to the huge margin of 209 runs.

Ponting became the 2007 World Cup's first centurion in making 113 off 93 balls to lead Australia 334/6 and the big win, the second largest ever in the World Cup. Ponting also tied the World Cup record of 4 centuries and took sole position of second place in the all time World Cup runs scored list. Two things stand out in my mind about the Aussie performance (besides Ponting's ton):

1) Brad Hogg gives Australia some serious lower order depth. He blasted 24 today off the final over, in making 40 off 15 balls. Not bad for a number 8. The batting will be even deeper with Andrew Symonds' return.

2) The Aussies have to be concerned about Shaun Tait. Yes, he bowled at over 90 mph and yes he took a couple wickets. But to go at 5.62 runs an over against Scotland? I wonder what the Proteas will do to him. Retiring Glen McGrath will have to once again be the leader of the Aussie attack.

In St Lucia, Steve Tikolo's Kenya executed a clinical victory over Canada. They restricted the Canadians to 199 and then reached the target with 7 wickets in hand. Tikolo palyed a captain's knock of an almost run-a-ball undefeated 72. Kenya have a very real shot at making it to the next round and should not be overlooked by New Zealand or England. Former Bajan Andy Cummins played credibly for Canada, conceding 32 runs off his 8 overs. He becomes the second player, after Kepler Wessels to play for two countries in World Cups.

Tomorrow, look for carnage in Trinidad as Sri Lanka takes on Bermuda, and for an Irish upset in Jamaica as Ireland plays Zimbabwe.

Labels: 2007 world cup, australia, canada, cummins, kenya, ponting, scotland, world cup

Thus spake Sean @ 10:00 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]