BCCI & TEN Sports, ICC "Hall of fame" and Michael Vaughan retires

Sometime last week, the BCCI announced that India would play a tri-series in Sri Lanka, with New Zealand being the third team. The announcement came a few days after India were thrashed at the Super Eight stage of the Twenty20 World Cup leading a lot of folks, including the coach Gary Kirsten, to proclaim that fatigue was one of the main reasons for the pathetic showing.

Maybe the BCCI was making a point - "You chaps can keep bleating about burnout. Until you actually collectively start pulling out of series, we'll keep milking you for what it's worth". So doesn't this previously unscheduled 4-match ODI series present a wonderful opportunity for players like the skipper Dhoni, Ishant, Gambhir and Yuvraj to excuse themselves from this tour?

Maybe there's a commercial angle that doesn't seem so obvious here. This would be the 3rd consecutive unscheduled series (or hastily arranged series) that is being played in a country where TEN Sports has the telecast rights for the Indian TV audience. The first was the ODI series in Sri Lanka and the second is the on-going 4-match ODI series in West Indies.

It does seem too much of a coincidence. But perhaps not when you realize that TEN Sports was in fact launched in India by none other than Lalit Modi and his MEN distributed the channel for a few years.

TEN Sports is partly owned by Zee, and the BCCI has basically not been on talking terms with Zee (Subhash Chandra) ever since he took the BCCI to court over the BCCI's allotment of TV rights 4-5 years ago when Zee Sports first won the rights only for the BCCI to move the goalposts when ESPN-Star bleated.

Now, after the BCCI announced an amnesty scheme for those affiliated with the ICL, maybe the BCCI and Zee Sports are becoming friends again. Maybe, like I predicted a year ago, the ICL would be wound-up and the quid pro-quo would involve TV rights, IPL team ownership, etc.

So maybe the new-found bonhomie explains why the BCCI is scheduling matches in these countries/regions. After all, surely the BCCI would have earned more revenue (gate proceeds, in-stadia advertising, etc.) if the games had been played in India.

Now, moving on to the ICC. At the start of the year, the ICC announced that it was creating a "Hall of fame" and the first list would have 55 players.

That '55' number sounds so arbitrary. Why wasn't it 50, surely a more 'round' number? Or did the ICC think they'd create 5 teams of 11 players each from the first batch of inductees? Given that the only wicket-keepers they've picked are Knott, Marsh and Walcott (who only kept wickets in 15 out of the 44 tests he played in), there's no way they could have got 5 playing XIs.

Ok, so that 55 is just a number picked out of the someone's nose. What was the criteria for picking these players? Test records? ODI records? Contribution to the advancement of cricket [especially applicable for those who played in the first 2-3 decades of test cricket perhaps]? Domestic cricket records? Gut-feel? Only those who'd retired before a specific date? There're a few players who really make me wonder about the criteria.

Barry Richards is universally considered to be among the best batsmen who never got to showcase his wares long enough in test cricket (4 tests at a batting average of 72 against a bowling 'attack' of Garth McKenzie, Ashley Mallett and John Gleeson). Watching this video of him batting convinces me that the perception about him isn't wrong. Yet, the hard facts are that he only played 7 innings.

Was David Gower such a good player? Obviously he was a very attractive batsman to watch, and was good enough to make bowlers look ridiculous. But he didn't do it often enough, and most certainly not when the bowling was of decent quality (averaging 33 against West Indies, for example).

Javed Miandad retired from international cricket multiple times, the last occasion being after Pakistan were knocked out of the 1996 World Cup. Martin Crowe played his last international cricket game 3-4 months before Miandad retired. So clearly 1995 doesn't seem to be the cut-off year. Perhaps it is 1996. Why 1996?

Surely, if David Gower finds a place on the basis of him being lovely to watch, Crowe must be a shoo-in, especially considering he averaged 45 against West Indies, 50 against Pakistan and 48 against Australia!

As noted in multiple tweets, Michael Vaughan retired from all forms of professional cricket yesterday, 11 months after he quit as captain. Exactly 3 years ago, I wrote about how he was only 32 and nearly retired because of his wonky knee.

Vaughan was a very pleasing batsman to watch, especially in 2002 and early 2003 when he was consistently dismantling India's and Australia's bowlers. However, the runs pretty much dried up after that series, and the most he averaged in a year after 2002 was 47.6 in 2007. It certainly wasn't for lack of opportunity, since between 2003 and 2008, he played at least 9 tests every year, including against West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

The reality is that Vaughan under-achieved as a batsman. On that front, I'd rank him alongside Stephen Fleming, VVS Laxman, Sourav Ganguly and Damien Martyn (until 2-3 years ago, Mahela Jayawardene would have also been included in this list). TV commentary, newspaper columns, reality TV adjudication, etc. beckon and I hope he does well in his new roles.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2009, bcci, book cricket, england, hall of fame, icc, lalit modi, retire, ten sports, tv rights, vaughan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:23 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Kevin Pietersen is England's new captain

Yesterday, Michael Vaughan and Paul Collingwood resigned from their captaincy roles. Vaughan had taken back his test captaincy from Andrew Flintoff while Collingwood had replaced Vaughan, who resigned before he was pushed.

Kevin Pietersen was announced a few minutes ago as England's new captain. The bit in the media release that made me cough was this:

I have learned a great deal about leadership from playing under both Michael and Paul and fully appreciate the level of responsibility that comes with the job of captaining your country.

The operative word being 'your country'. Was he telling the reporters, the people of England and England cricket fans that he didn't think England was his country? I hope the usage of 'your country' was as a possessive pronoun because he does have some history. He recently did say something totally stupid in a chat with 'The Times' correspondent Paul Kimmage. This is how that conversation went:

Paul: Do you get weird fan mail?
Kevin: Yeah (he says with a grin), pictures of girls with their tits out.
Paul: That's outrageous.
Kevin: I know — but look, it’s your nation, not mine.

Labels: captaincy, collingwood, england, pietersen, vaughan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:33 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Harbhajan Singh catches the Michael Vaughan virus

What is it about cricketers increasingly referring to themselves in the third person? Michael Vaughan, a month or so ago. Now Harbhajan Singh.

I constantly tell myself this could be the start of a new Harbhajan Singh. I have set a goal for myself and try to achieve it. I don't worry about things that are not in my control. All I can do is to bowl and bat well when I get the opportunity.

Labels: harbhajan, india, vaughan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 4:28 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

England have a new one-day captain

Paul Collingwood is England's new one-day captain, replacing Michael Vaughan, who resigned the one-day captaincy earlier this week.

The significant additions are Michael Yardy (remember him? He batted like he was on a skateboard, moving all over the crease and no-one could figure out why he was batting at #4) and Alastair Cook.

Labels: captaincy, collingwood, england, odi, vaughan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:13 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

England take first step towards winning the 2011 World Cup

Barely two weeks after he'd emphatically declared that England were better off with him as the one-day captain, Michael Vaughan decided to quit before he was pushed. He was most certainly misquoted, if you read the ECB media release, for this is what he actually said.

Since Michael Vaughan's team's disappointing performances in the World Cup, Michael Vaughan has been giving careful consideration as to what is the best way forward for the England one-day team and Michael Vaughan's own role within the side.

The only basis on which he'd find a place in England's one-day side was because of his captaincy. One-day cricket is far too fast-moving for England to accomodate such a single-dimensional player (assuming that his fielding and batting count for little in comparison to his captaincy). Clearly, all that spin about how experiments with separate captains for tests and one-dayers weren't so successful had conveniently brushed aside the facts that Ponting won a World Cup while Hollioake led England to a surprise win in Sharjah a decade ago.

Better late than never! We've rambled far too often about Vaughan's hopeless batting record in one-dayers.

But what is also interesting is England's record when he was captain. A positive win-loss record (32-22 from 60 games) seems quite good, until the realization hits us that 43 out of those 60 games were played against half-decent sides (Australia, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa, Sri Lanka & West Indies) and England won 17 out of those games. Ergo, England've been quite poor even when he's been in charge. There're two implications here:

1. His team has always been pathetic. So there's no evidence of his captaincy skills having ever helped his team.
2. His captaincy skills in one-day cricket were a little over-rated, since his inability to adapt to one-day cricket also meant he used the same captaincy principles in test and one-day cricket.

Which obviously leads me to ask what he was doing in the side in the first place? Despite him claiming that he will continue to be eligible for selection as a ODI player, I'd find it bizarre if he was picked. At least now England can get in a significantly better one-day batsman and plan for the next 2011 World Cup.

Labels: 2011 world cup, captaincy, england, odi, vaughan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:56 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Remember me? I used to captain you guys in test cricket

That is what Michael Vaughan, named England's skipper, would probably tell his teammates before the second test against West Indies at Headingley.

Vaughan has not played in a test for 17 months now. His last test match was in Pakistan in December 2005. How long ago was that?

Paul Collingwood hadn't yet scored a test century and was almost always the first one to be cast aside if one of the incumbent batsmen returned to action. Darrell Hair (yes, him!) was umpiring in test cricket. Marcus Trescothick was a couple of months away from his first last minute exit from a test series. Shaun Udal was playing test cricket. 2006 hadn't yet begun, which means Mohammad Yousuf was 1788 runs away from what he'd end up with. Shoaib Akhtar was not yet persona non-grata while Mohammad Asif hadn't yet "arrived".

It is totally perplexing that Vaughan gets to walk into the side after such a long layoff from test cricket, and as captain! I'm not the only one who thinks so. Read what Vic Marks, Christopher Martin-Jenkins and Martin Johnson have to say about this.

Labels: captaincy, england, vaughan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:37 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

The first captaincy change - Shoaib Malik is Pakistan's skipper

The Pakistan Cricket Board has announced that Shoaib Malik is the new Pakistan captain until the end of the year.

Other captains expected to be cast aside in the near future, as a result of their teams' performances in the World Cup, are Brian Lara (possibly both tests and ODIs) and Michael Vaughan (ODIs).

I do expect Stephen Fleming to quit as captain, possibly handing over to Daniel Vettori.

The one captain on thin ground would possibly be Rahul Dravid while no-one knows what would happen to Prosper Utseya.

Labels: 2007 world cup, captaincy, dravid, england, fleming, india, lara, pakistan, shoaib malik, stephen fleming, utseya, vaughan, world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 4:33 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

England out of the World Cup

Labels: 2007 world cup, andrew hall, england, graeme smith, ian botham, south africa, vaughan, world cup

Thus spake Unknown @ 7:23 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Match-fixing in cricket: Separating the facts from the myths

Now I have to make an admission first, given there is still no concrete evidence what so ever of match fixing having anything to do with the murder of Bob Woolmer, I find the constant speculation in this regard increasingly annoying.

In fact I find the whole debate on match fixing annoying. It is not an aspect of our game I like to discuss. But given so many people have been voicing their opinions in this regard off late, and they really are, nothing but personal opinions, here I am blogging about it.

You expect people like Rashid Latif and Sarafaraz Nawaz to be making the noise, as Moin Khan said in response, Sarafaraz probably thinks every match is fixed. So I’m not sure we should take him too seriously, but off late the list of people with doubts and suspicious has seen an increase.

Michael Vaughan joined in by saying his gut feeling was that some corruption in the game still exists, Shehreyar Khan, the ex PCB chief, has now added that he thinks spot fixing (which involves, in case you didn’t know, fixing minor aspects of game, such as the number of extras bowled, as opposed to the entire result of a game it self) still happens and that it is something you can’t really prevent.

In between, SA’s manager has come out and admitted one of their players was approached by bookies on the country’s tour to India two years ago (to which you really have to ask why he is making this public now, where was he two years ago?).

And now people like Lord MacLaurin, the former chairman of the England and Wales Cricket Board, during whose tenure the first through investigation into match fixing took place, have joined in the chorus.

The ICC and the police in Jamaica investigating into Bob’s murder, have also, as a result stepped in and hinted they have expanded the scope of their investigations in this area. And of course, since it is their job to find the man(or men) responsible for Bob’s murder, they ought to thoroughly investigate all the suspicions anyone has raised, but you would really hope, that in such a sensitive time for the game, people would do more then just come up with their ‘opinions’ on whether or not corruption exists.

Its not that I like to live in oblivion about the realities cricket is facing, but murder investigations aren’t solved based on what people’s opinions are. Next time Michael Vaughan is asked for his opinion on match fixing, I’d be much more pleased if he kept his mouth shut.

We’re so not interested in knowing his mere ‘opinions’. If he has facts, if he knows anyone who is involved, any information at all that might actually be helpful, sure, go ahead, don’t just talk to The Sun about it, might as well call a live global press conference.

But spare us of your opinions please Virgil, how about getting some runs for a change, you haven’t done that for a long, long time. Ditto for Shehreyar Khan, Sarfaraz Nawaz and Rashid Latif. I’ve already had enough of people trying to be the self-righteous upholders of the spirit of the game.

Labels: bob woolmer, death, match fixing, moin khan, rashid latif, sarfaraz nawaz, shehreyar khan, vaughan

Thus spake Unknown @ 5:21 pm | Sledge/Read 6 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 ]

A name game

Assume you're England's coach.

Q: What do you call a "batsman" who scores @ 24 runs an innings, after 73 ODI innings? (I prefer using runs per inning rather than runs per completed inning)
A: You call him one of your top players.

Q: What do you call a batsman who's made 25% of his career runs against the combined might of Bangladesh, Namibia, Netherlands and Zimbabwe?
A: You say he can make a huge difference to your side

Q: What do you call a side which won "60%" of its games in 2004 (W 12 L 8 NR 1 overall, but a record of W 7 L 8 NR 1 against teams not named Zimbabwe - 43.75% effectively) and "45%" in 2005 (W 8 L 10 T 2 NR 2, but a record of W 5 L 10 T 2 NR 2 against teams not named Bangladesh - 26.3% effectively)
A: You say the side was heading in the right direction to put up a very good performance at the World Cup

Q: What do you call a "batsman" whose last 10 ODI scores are 1, 57, 0, 0*, 0, 59, 1, 15, 26 and 17?
A: You say that he's put up very consistent performances at the top of the order.

Read/Listen. Then react the way you want.

Labels: 2007 world cup, england, fletcher, vaughan, world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:02 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Michael Vaughan? Michael Vaughan?! Michael Vaughan?!

Good grief.

Labels: australia, england, vaughan

Thus spake Geoff @ 11:32 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Bye bye, Andrew Flintoff?

There was a report in the 'Daily Telegraph' yesterday that Michael Vaughan could be made captain of the one-day side for the triangular series (Australia and New Zealand are the other two teams) and the 2007 World Cup starting in March.

While Michael Vaughan's one-day record (ODI avg. 28, 1730 runs from 71 innings, strike rate 68, no centuries and 15 fifties) has been documented here earlier, this obviously leaves Andrew Flintoff in the lurch altogether!

England is all set to slip to a 5-0 defeat before lunch tomorrow, making Flintoff the second English captain (after "Johnny Won't Hit Today" Douglas) in the history of test cricket to lose an Ashes series 5-0.

Update: You can vote in our poll and cast a vote for your choice of the best test team in the last twenty years.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, england, flintoff, vaughan, whitewash

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:42 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Australia vs England - Fourth Test - Day 1 & 2

Whenever there is a low score in the first innings of a match I like to reserve judgement until we see the other side bat - so often you realise conditions aren't what they appear or some factor is influencing things, and the game is more even than it appears. So too I warned on Boxing Day as England's dismal performance unfolded. Out psyched and out played. Warnie took all before him - big players perform on big occasions - this was one of the biggest, and Warnie is one of the biggest. Five wickets on Boxing Day, the first of which was his 700th and didn't he do it in style. A classic, dipping, drifting leg break, straight through the gate of Andrew Strauss just when the Aussies needed a wicket too - fantastic, unforgettable stuff. Then it was Australia's turn - and led by Freddie Flintoff, they managed to stay in the hunt.

A great morning session had them right in the hunt with Australia at one stage slipping to 5 for 80 odd - enter the men-mountain - twin peaks - Symonds and Hayden. Awesome stuff. They turned things around in one session and by tea, England looked, in fact "were" insipid.

England are out of this match! They were poor, soft and unimaginative in the second session and now, 5 nil is a very real possibility. Without Vaughan at the helm, they've lost their hardness - their belief and their competitiveness.

I'm not saying for a second, Flintoff is not a leader - he is, but I don't think he's a captain. You have to be a leader of sorts to be captain, of course, but you don't have to be a captain to be leader. Flintoff's leadership in the 2005 Ashes series was far more effective than it is now. I read a lot about the difference between management and leadership. Flintoff can lead his side like Braveheart (is that a bad analogy to use in this scenario?) but he doesn't manage it real well. Vaughan has been sadly missed, for the slant he adds to leading the side, and managing it also.

England will need to regroup quickly after this tour - my money now is on the 5 nil result the Aussies so desperately want. What a way for this champion side to go out, and go out they will, as many won't play Tests again after this - and no-one will take their title away for a long time.

England will then have plenty of re-grouping to do, and I feel they should stop paying so little attention to the One Day game. Sure, I don't place even 1/4 the importance on success in that arena, but they need to grab back that team morale, that "feeling" that was so obvious just 15 months ago - and with a World Cup around the corner, what better way to put this disaster behind them. Can they do it? They can - they should let Flintoff lead by his performances, but not by title.

Congrats too to Andrew Symonds. What an awesome innings! Do you get the feeling he was happy to risk his maiden Test century, just so he could bring it up with a towering six! How appropriate.

How stiff must poor Watson be feeling now. Clarke, now Symonds have now more or less relegated him to a fringe player. And Matthew Hayden - how much must he love the MCG? That's something like 5 centuries in 6 Tests in Melbourne for him. That aggressive stand in the middle of the mess that was 5 for 85, was something.

Cross posted on STUmpcam

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, australia, england, flintoff, hayden, symonds, vaughan

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 3:43 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 ]