All posts by n8rngtd.top

Hamid’s headband, Shapoor’s distance sprint to the wicket, and Mirwais’ shining scalp provided examples of the glories of an inclusive global tournament

Andy Zaltzman18-Feb-2015When Asghar Stanikzai visualised his role in his country’s World Cup debut, I doubt it would have involved trudging back to the pavilion with the scoreboard reading 3 for 3 after three overs. Nor would legspinner Samiullah Shenwari have seen himself being ejected from the attack for following through onto the pitch after just seven balls, unless he had been treating himself to a nightcap of some extremely unpasteurised cheese. Such is the cruel hand of sporting fate, which dashes far more dreams than it makes, and is one of the least reliable scripters of Hollywood feel-good movies.”You have not seen Afghanistan play yet,” coach Andy Moles said afterwards. He was lying. Perhaps not intentionally, and you could understand what he meant after a disappointingly conclusive defeat. But he was lying. We saw Afghanistan play for the 50 overs of Bangladesh’s innings, and they were largely excellent, occasionally magnificent, especially in the first 30 overs, when their pace attack restrained and then shuddered Bangladesh.Hamid Hassan, pacey, hostile, with the shoulders of a champion, and, most importantly, headbanded like a fast bowler should be, was denied his nation’s first World Cup wicket by an umpiring blooper and an understandable reluctance to risk his team’s only review in the third over of the innings. Shapoor Zadran, the gargantuan left-armer with the epic run-up, was dangerous and awkward. Then medium pacer Mirwais Ashraf, with his admirable pate, induced an edge from Tamim, caught by the outstanding wicketkeeper Afsar Zazai, leaping balletically to his left like a young Olga Korbut diving out of bed to whack her snooze alarm, then trapped Anamul leg before. Shapoor struck twice, and Bangladesh were 119 for 4 in the 30th over.With Hamid’s headband, Shapoor’s distance sprint to the wicket, and Mirwais’ shining scalp, Afghanistan almost have a composite Dennis Lillee of a pace attack, requiring only an angry moustache and accompanying short-form vocabulary.Shapoor is one of this World Cup’s most glorious sights. Not for him the scientific homogeneity of a biometrically precise fifteen-to-twenty-yard gathering to the crease. Shapoor bowls off a proper, old-school, certifiable fast-bowler’s run-up, a 40-yard gallumph of unmistakable cricketing pugilism, hair flapping behind him in a resplendent tonsorial semaphore that screams “I mean business”, culminating after more than 25 power-bustling strides of varying lengths with a leaping, ground-shaking, full-body hurl.Who knows if this is the most productive way for Shapoor to bowl? Who cares? He is a swashbuckling throwback to a time before the controlled coaching of maximum efficiency, an anti-Woakes in an age of precision honing. He also, more importantly, bowled superbly, taking 2 for 20 off 7 overs, spearing in yorkers, hurrying batsmen with awkward bounce, fire and angles, giving his team parity before Shakib and Mushfiqur applied 280 ODIs’ worth of experience to turn the game Bangladesh’s way, before Mashrafe and Rubel scuppered the Afghan reply and broke Asghar’s dream of a match-winning 17-ball century.So it is that, of the 13 non-Test nations to have played in the World Cup, only Zimbabwe have won their debut match; Ireland tied on their maiden appearance (against Zimbabwe in 2007), and the other 11 have all lost, from Sri Lanka and East Africa in 1975, to Afghanistan, all by margins ranging from decisive to obliterative. (South Africa are the only team apart from Zimbabwe to have won their first World Cup match since the inaugural tournament in 1975.)Shapoor running in from the boundary is proper, old-fashioned fast-bowler behaviour•Getty ImagesWho knows when another cricketing nation will make its World Cup debut? Afghanistan were the first to do since Bermuda and Ireland in 2007, and the chances of a newcomer claiming one of the two qualifying places up for grabs in 2019 and 2023 are remote, unless Monaco starts attracting cricketers like it does tax-allergic Formula One drivers. Or unless the ICC changes its bafflingly insular 10-team format for forthcoming World Cups.Within those three opening overs of Afghanistan’s reply, the game was decided, but there was more than enough in the debutants’ performance to suggest that, if the World Cup insists on constricting itself to 10 teams, this sport will be making one of the gravest and most avoidable errors in its history. It will be turning its back on its own future, snuffing out its own evolving narratives before they come close to fruition, coating one foot in a golden ski-boot whilst unloading a pistol into the other.If that format is persisted with, cricket will have failed. Frankly, given their remarkable curve of progress and passion for the game, if Afghanistan have not played a Test match within 10 years, cricket will have failed. Canberra played host to another vibrant occasion that demonstrated how good a Cricket World Cup could be. If cricket ignores the evidence it is laying before itself, it will have proved itself to be an idiot.****Hamid should have further cemented his place in Afghan cricketing history as his nation’s first World Cup wicket-taker, when Tamim edged a drive to the wicketkeeper which went undetected by the not-quite-all-seeing eye of umpire Steve Davis. Had there been two DRS reviews available in each innings, Afghanistan would almost certainly have reviewed it.Why there is only one review per innings in ODI cricket, when there are two per 80 overs in Tests, is one of the many logical quirks that cricket’s administrators seem to hold unfathomably dear.Since ESPNcricinfo’s ball-by-ball records began, bowlers have taken a wicket every 40 balls in ODIs, and every 70 balls in the first 80 overs of Test innings. This equates roughly to 7.5 bowler’s wickets in the average 50-over ODI innings, and 6.9 in the first 80 overs of Tests.Assuming there are a proportionate number of appeals and assorted near-wicket-incidents in both formats, then, logically, you would assume that there would be the same number of referrals available for an ODI side as in the first 80 overs of a Test innings; particularly as a team with only one referral at its disposal is less likely to use its one review than a Test team is to use its two, knowing they will be replenished after 80 overs.The equipment is there, but is only being partially utilised. If the reason for only having one review is to accelerate the game, then perhaps we should consider some of the approximately 100 other means of speeding up play, ranging from asking umpires to move at something more than a geriatric dawdle, to not having 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th men scuttling on the field in brightly coloured bibs every time one of their team-mates needs a drink, smile, cuddle or update on an eBay auction.And finally, a couple of stats:

• Bangladesh became the second team in World Cup history to see its top four all reach 15, without any of them going on to post 30. The previous side to do so – Bangladesh, in 2007. It was the 8th time this has happened in all ODI cricket.
• Afghanistan made cricket history in more ways than one. They became the first team to lose both openers for 1 when chasing in a World Cup match. And the first team to lose three of its top four for 1 in any ODI.

ESPNcricinfo staff10-Mar-2015Paul Stirling and William Porterfield put on 89 for the first wicket in quick time•Associated PressR Ashwin and Suresh Raina stifled Ireland in the middle overs and picked up key wickets•Getty ImagesNiall O’Brien top-scored for Ireland with a run-a-ball 75 helping them to 259•Getty ImagesThe Chase: Shikhar Dhawan and Rohit Sharma put on 174, India’s highest opening stand at World Cups•Getty ImagesDhawan raced to his second ton of this World Cup, off just 84 balls•ICCAfter Dhawan fell, Virat Kohli and Ajinkya Rahane combined to guide India to an eight-wicket win•Getty ImagesThe win hands India their best-ever run at World Cups, with nine consecutive wins•ESPNcricinfo Ltd

Much about Lahore has changed during Pakistan’s isolation from international cricket, but the city remains friendly and welcoming. Pakistan’s players and fans are pleased cricket is coming home again.

Umar Farooq in Lahore21-May-2015Still Lahore Lahore aye!
The city is known for its openhearted, welcoming and friendly nature. In the past six years the city has been modernised with wide roads, huge buildings, parking plazas, overhead bridges, underpasses, more cinemas than ever. In short, the city has grown a lot in the time of isolation from international cricket. But the nature of the Lahoris has remained the same. They might be starved of the entertainment of international cricket but their hospitality remains warm. They might not able to greet the team due to the tight security but the match tickets were sold out within two days ahead of the first Twenty20.Gaddafi Stadium back to life
With no international cricket, the state of the stands had deteriorated and the far ends of the stadium reflected a scene of gloom. The stadium used to have two press boxes – one for the local media and one for the foreigners – but with no international teams visiting, one facility had been converted into the corporate office of Pakistan Super League and the marketing department. The press conference room on the ground floor was the ugliest and most neglected room in the stadium.But now with Zimbabwe’s visit, the stadium is alive again with every corner of the venue beaming and reflecting a fresh look. The stands have been refurbished, the media facilities have suddenly been upgraded, the ugliest room has become the brightest room and journalists who rarely visited the press box in the past few years are now desperate for accreditation.The ground and the pitches remained the best feature of the stadium through Pakistan’s isolation and have been very well maintained. The surrounding stands might have been a gloomy backdrop but the ground had retained its lush, green grass. And with a foreign team romping around in the field training ahead of their first international fixtures, the venue has blossomed.Home sweet home
Since the attack on the Sri Lanka team in 2009, Pakistan have been forced to play away from home, mostly in the UAE. The players often complained about the homesickness that came with spending more time living away from home throughout the past few years. Now the Pakistan players can feel the sense of comfort of home. They might be staying at a hotel during the series but they are just minutes away from their families.Home advantage
Nearly three dozen players have made their debut outside Pakistan and have never played any international cricket on their home soil. Although the UAE might have been their home for the past six years, they have always been deprived of the true sense of a home advantage, an advantage that would give them confidence from playing in front of their home crowd and on grounds where they grew up playing cricket.One of Pakistan’s best prospects, Umar Akmal, has played 16 Tests, 111 ODIs and 59 T20s in the past six years but is yet to play a single fixture at home. Likewise Ahmed Shehzad, another talented batsman who became the only Pakistani to score a hundred in every format, has never played at home. Of the current squad, only Shahid Afridi, Shoaib Malik, Mohammad Sami, Wahab Riaz, Mohammad Hafeez and Sarfraz Ahmed have played internationals at home.Security gates
The fears of a terrorist attack on a cricket team became a reality in 2009 when the Sri Lankans were attacked at Liberty roundabout. The incident changed everything, and gave powerful evidence that Pakistan could not be regarded as safe, even for sportsmen. Over the years that perception became stronger. Gaddafi Stadium is situated within the Nishtar Park Sports Complex and the authorities have had to protect the facility with some strong measures, installing 14 huge metal gates at every entry point into the complex to instil a sense of security for the athletes.

ESPNcricinfo staff09-Jul-2015Moeen Ali unfurled some typically elegant strokes on his way to a fine 77•Getty ImagesThe Cardiff crowd gave Mitchell Johnson an ovation upon reaching his unwanted, wicketless century. The enigmatic fast bowler responded with a doff of his Baggy Green•Getty ImagesMitchell Starc fared slightly better than his namesake – here he castles James Anderson to complete his five-wicket haul, and end England’s innings, too•AFPAnd acknowledges the crowd in celebration•Getty ImagesAlastair Cook took a fine catch to dismiss David Warner off the bowling of James Anderson….•AFP…then was struck by an edge off Steve Smith a few minutes later. Joe Root did his best to stifle his laughter….•Getty ImagesSmith looked comfortable against the bowling of Moeen Ali, handsomely driving three fours in an over•Getty ImagesMoeen had the last laugh, though, picking up the wickets of Smith and captain Michael Clarke•AFPChris Rogers played a series of expansive strokes, including this uppercut and a hooked six – his first in Test cricket•Getty ImagesBut Rogers edged behind for 95 to hand Mark Wood his first Ashes wicket. Cue rapturous celebration•Getty ImagesAdam Voges played patiently, but when he drilled Ben Stokes to James Anderson at cover with 15 minutes remaining, England’s fielders knew it had been their day•Getty Images

Guess who is the world’s second-best opening bowler in Tests this decade

Andy Zaltzman02-Sep-2015The final instalment of the two-year Anglo-Australiac cricketing hypermarathon is almost upon us, after a compelling if pointless one-off T20 international that provided as much closely fought action and in-match uncertainty as the entire baffling five-Test series. While T20 international cricket is rightly avoiding overkill, it is also committing underkill. A three-match series, played over three or four nights, or even a five-game series in a week, would give the matches greater meaning and context, without flogging the golden horse-goose until it starts laying economy gherkins instead of solid platinum donkey eggs. As the old saying goes. And it could provide a rather more condensed and satisfying finale to the summer’s cricket.As it is, the cricketingly disappointing Ashes has given the traditional post-series afterthought ODIs a greater degree of interest than they have had in the past, as England seek to continue their two-decades-overdue awakening from 50-over slumber. There may be some similarities between the ODIs and the Tests in that the first day of each match will almost certainly decide the outcome.Australia have at times appeared almost as mentally jaded and drained as England did 18 months ago on their Ashes-surrendering tour, which is (a) a considerable achievement, (b) not much of an excuse for failing to engage brain and bat simultaneously at the crucial moments of the series, and (c) understandable. The Smith era truly begins with their new captain – after possibly the least convincing 500-run series in Test history – seeking to retain the aura of absolute certainty with which he guided his team through the knockout phase of the World Cup.All told, the Ashes was stacked with statistical and procedural quirks. Australia kept all of England’s batsmen quiet apart from Joe Root, but bowled, overall, disappointingly, and lost. Josh Hazlewood – 16 wickets at 25 – had a worse series than Mark Wood – 10 wickets at 39. David Warner and Chris Rogers averaged 52.8 between them, the third highest-averaging series ever by Australian openers in England (behind Mark Taylor and Geoff Marsh in 1989, and the 1948 pair of Arthur Morris and Sid Barnes (who were replaced by Lindsay Hassett and Ian Johnson for one Test each). Yet the 2015 partnership failed, badly and decisively, at the critical pivots.England’s bowlers swung between raging intensity and somewhat listless resignation, but touched heights of brilliance, collectively in Cardiff and individually at Edgbaston and Trent Bridge. Question marks hover over almost as many players as at the start of the series, and some have regressed. We have learned little that we did not know before about them. They timed their peaks and troughs rather better than they had over the previous 15 months.A testing, engrossing winter schedule will, I think, reveal far more than this scatterbrained series. Australia will leave with three principal messages in their heads: “Please can we do that again”, “Please let us go home”, and “Please let us never speak of this until the end of time.”A two-question quiz for you:1. Who is India’s best ever opening bowler?

2. Who is the second best Test opening bowler this decade?Answer 1: R Ashwin, who, in 14 innings as an opening bowler in Tests has taken 45 wickets at 21.48, ahead of all other Indian new-ball operators (from Amar Singh and Mohammad Nissar in the early days, to modern legends such as Kapil Dev, Javagal Srinath, and Pankaj Singh (who, admittedly, falls six innings short of the eight-innings minimum criterion, but has some catching up to do in the wickets column).

Would Australia have won the Ashes if Lyon and Fawad had been steaming quietly in with the new conker? Was John Bracewell the real Richard Hadlee? Could Peter Such have been the English Michael Holding?

Answer 2: R Ashwin. Among the world’s new-ball operators this decade, he is behind only Dale Steyn (average 20.69) (with, it should be said, a fair few more new-ball wickets than Ashwin), as are almost all bowlers on almost all criteria over the past ten years.Do these answers prove that Ashwin is, in fact, a tearaway fast bowler trapped inside a spinner’s body? Only when given the shiny, glistening new leather sphere of destiny does his inner Lillee scream out the true nature of his being, as his average plummets by ten points compared to how he performs when not given the new ball.Or do they prove that all teams have been barking up the wrong Test tree and at the wrong five-day cat by slavishly adhering to tradition and using seamers as their opening pair? Would Australia have won the Ashes if Nathan Lyon and Fawad Ahmed had been steaming quietly in with the new conker instead of Hazlewood and Mitchell Starc? Was John Bracewell the real Richard Hadlee? Could Peter Such have been the English Michael Holding, if only he had been given the chance?No. No. No. No. And probably not. They do show, unsurprisingly, that Ashwin has been regularly effective with the new ball in conditions that suit him. He has been a major figure in many Indian victories – his 6.69 wickets per win (87 in 13 wins) is behind only Rangana Herath this decade (7.08 wickets per win), and fractionally ahead of Saeed Ajmal (6.67) and Steyn (6.58). Also unsurprisingly, Steyn compares favourably with the other major pacers of the decade, including Mitchell Johnson (5.35), James Anderson (4.93), Ryan Harris (4.25) and his own team-mate Morne Morkel (3.83).Ashwin’s Test career has been littered with striking successes, but also scarred by a costly notable failures. He has been entrusted with the major burden of responsibility for India’s fortunes, as well as summarily dropped based on what he might (or might not) be able to do outside Asia. He will remain perhaps Virat Kohli’s most important player.For Sri Lanka, some considerable signs of promise amid the clanging post-Sangakkara alarm bells. Their pace attack collectively averaged 27, the first time Sri Lankan seamers have averaged under 30 in a Test series in 22 attempts dating back to 2009, when Nuwan Kulasekara and Thilan Thushara led them to a 2-0 win over Pakistan, and, un-coincidentally, Chaminda Vaas played his last Test (they had averaged under 30 in 16 out of 39 series over the previous 10 years). In the intervening 21 series, the Sri Lankan pacers had averaged almost 46, so even another home series defeat has at least provided some certifiably authentic straws at which to clutch, even as the heroic Angelo Mathews – averaging 70 in 19 Tests in the past two years – wakes up in a cold sweat on an almost nightly basis while having a recurring nightmare about walking in to bat at 25 for 3. Every innings. For the next ten years.Michael Clarke: the new CL Badcock•Getty ImagesSome other statistical curiosities from the Ashes:● Alastair Cook and Michael Clarke failed to trouble the honours boards, making it the first Ashes since 1981 without a captain’s century.● Clarke became the first Australian captain to play a complete Ashes without scoring 50 since Ian Johnson in 1956. Johnson was an offspinner. Not the ideal precedent.● Clarke also became the first Australian top-six batsman to play through an entire Ashes series without even scoring a half-century since CL Badcock in the four-Test 1938 rubber (whose highest score was 9 in eight innings) (Twitter would have melted had it existed at the time). All in all, it was one of the least appropriate exits from the Test match stage for a player of Clarke’s stature, a man who has played some of his era’s defining innings, a captivating cricketer and captain of often radiant brilliance and occasionally patent flaws. However, he shares good company – Victor Trumper’s highest score in 1905 was 31.● Adam Lyth matched Clarke’s anti-achievement. England top-six batsmen playing entire fifty-free Ashes series is a rather more common occurrence, though these failures have mostly taken place away from home. Paul Collingwood did so in Australia in 2010-11, as did Allan Lamb in 1986-87, MJK Smith in 1965-66, and Cyril Washbrook in 1950-51. John Edrich played all five Tests in 1972 without reaching 50, but he did make 49 and 45 in the first innings of the two (low-scoring) matches that England won.● Moeen Ali became the first player to score 30 or more six times in a series when batting at eight or lower. Only two players had done so five times – Bert Oldfield, wicketkeeping wizard, for Australia in the 1924-25 Ashes, and Chaminda Vaas, who reached 30 five times in six innings in the three-Test series in England in 2006, in four of which he was left not out.● The combined wicketkeepers of both sides averaged just 18.37, the worst in an Ashes since 1978-79 (which was not helped by the fact that Alan Knott and Rod Marsh were absent Packering).● Ben Stokes became the first England batsman to score three ducks batting in the top six in a home series. He too shares this dishonour with Trumper (1907-08 Ashes). And with Ponting (v Pakistan, 1999-2000).● Stuart Broad’s series-leading 21 wickets is the lowest highest-wickets tally in an Ashes since 1986-87. Ten different bowlers took ten or more wickets for only the third time in an Ashes series (after 1903-04 and 1954-55).

South Africa need two spinners to play in India, but that means their batting depth is lessened. Finding a middle ground will be vital to their chances of levelling the series

Firdose Moonda in Nagpur24-Nov-20151:26

Moonda: Tricky for SA to find right balance

Twenty wickets win a Test match, or so the saying goes. The number of runs needed is never specifically quantified. It can be won with as little as 85 runs, successfully defended in 1882 . Or it can need as many as 836, the highest ever target set . Anything in between will do as well.But South Africa’s batting has been a bit too brittle to set up a game. Only one total over 200 in three innings and only two half-centuries, both to the same batsman. AB de Villiers has carried a line-up whose experience has deserted it. Hashim Amla and Faf du Plessis, South Africa’s No. 3 and No. 4, have contributed 51 runs. Du Plessis has only scored one. The other problems have mushroomed around that: the opening partnership has not posted more than 15; neither has JP Duminy.The last 20 days, since the first moment of the Mohali Test, have been spent analysing reasons for South Africa’s struggles. The conclusion is that they have lacked the application in unfamiliar conditions against bowlers operating in their own backyard. It is not so much that South Africa have been outspun as they have thought they were being outspun and so they ended up outspun. They played the men, not the deliveries they bowled. They anticipated rather than acted. We’ve heard all this in different ways and now Amla has both admitted the problem and added another layer to the debate.”We haven’t played our best Test cricket. For the first three innings in Mohali, we were pretty much in it (before the second-innings batting collapse) but in the last Test, we didn’t bat properly again. It hasn’t been our full, flowing Test cricket that we are normally used to,” he said. “When the team doesn’t score runs, there’ll be a lot of different theories thrown about. Had we won (in Mohali) similar questions would have been thrown towards India.”Amla is right in everything but his reasoning. South Africa have underwhelmed with the bat and so have India. The difference is that India have not needed to overwhelm. Even when it seemed that they had not scored enough runs in the first innings in Mohali, their bowlers compensated. South Africa’s attack has not been able to do the same, even though as Amla pointed out, “our spinners have also done a pretty decent job.” As proof of the gulf, Imran Tahir has half the number of wickets (6) as R Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja (12 each) while Simon Harmer has five wickets, but South Africa have only been able to play him once.Therein lies the main problem. They can barely afford the luxury of the two specialist spinners, nevermind three, without compromising on the length of their batting line-up and so they end up short-changing both departments. In many ways, this is the long-term effect of the retirement of Jacques Kallis, something South Africa thought they had successfully transitioned through but may not have, especially now that Vernon Philander is injured.Seven batsmen of which one is a genuine allrounder, two seamers and two spinners would be an ideal XI. If Philander was fit, South Africa could regard him as the two-in-one option. So that leaves Duminy and one of their selectors, Ashwell Prince, has already said that they don’t regard him as the frontline allrounder.As an interim solution, South Africa could go back to asking AB de Villiers to keep wicket and install an extra batsman, which they have in the squad, at No. 7. But then they would have to confront both his chronic back problem and the message they are sending to other teams. Not to mention leave them a little unsure of their ability to take 20 wickets, after all even India are sticking to a five-bowler strategy. The upside though – and one they need badly – is it would give them some confidence that they can bat deep.Since strength in numbers may not be an option for South Africa right now, they need to find strength in individuals, which has also worked for them in the past. South Africa have gone without a Test centurion only five times in a series of more than three matches in their history and only three times have they been century-less away from home. They have also never won a series of three matches or more in which no-one has scored a hundred.So the message is clear: someone needs to score and score big. That someone will need a partner or a few partners with staying power and that is what South Africa have worked on developing. “Even our lower-order guys have put a lot of time into playing the ball as you see it and not as you imagined it,” Amla said. Instead what South Africa need to imagine is the number of runs needed to win a Test match and then to go out and score them.

Or: Four Stats I Have Dug Up and Polished Before Deciding it Was Bedtime and They Would Have to Do For the Stats of the Year

Andy Zaltzman19-Dec-2015Stats correct up to the start of the Hamilton TestSTAT 1. In their recent tweak-aggravated demolition by India, South Africa were bowled out in less than 50 overs on three occasions – as many less-than-50-over skittlings as they had suffered away from home in the previous 83 years, in a total of 152 Tests.

After being demolished at the MCG in February 1932 – bowled out for 36 and 45 in a total of 54.5 overs – the South Africans had been bowled out in fewer than 300 balls only at Lord’s and Nottingham in 1960, and in Ahmedabad in November 1996. Then they went to India. And India saw them coming. In the space of five weeks of remorseless slow-bowling cross-examination on pitches that must have made Hedley Verity and Clarrie Grimmett contemplate comebacks from their long-occupied graves, the Proteas added Mohali, Nagpur and Delhi to that list. They lasted a comparatively heroically long-winded 59 overs in their one innings in Bangalore before the merciful rains denied them the opportunity to subside again.Furthermore, South Africa had not posted a sub-150 score in 33 Tests over four years, since November 2011. They failed to reach the 150 mark in four innings in the four Tests in India. Away from home, they had been bowled out for under 150 only once in 57 Tests since August 2003.Overall it has been a good year for collapse fans. In the 40 Tests played this year, teams have been bowled out for under 150 on 15 occasions, ranging in length from Australia’s 111-ball, Ashes-surrendering, Broad-immortalising 60 all out at Trent Bridge, to South Africa’s epically ineffective, Boycott-shaming 143.1-over 143 all out in Delhi.Seventeen times in 40 Tests has a team been dismissed in under 50 overs, the most in a year since 2005, and a rate of 2.35 Tests per sub-50-over blast-out. From 2000 to 2014, teams had been bowled out in under 300 balls once every 3.56 Tests. In all Tests played from 1920 to 1999, the rate was once every 7.05 Tests.Stat conclusions:
a) Modern batsmen possess many skills that previous generations did not have. Disappearing down a collective plughole in an array of technically questionable shots is one of the less useful of those skills.b) There have been some silly pitches this year, and even sillier batting, and not just in the recent Indian triumph.c) Bring back Kallis. And Gary Kirsten. And Jackie McGlew. And Bruce Mitchell. Will there ever be a true South African grinder again?STAT 2. West Indies have completed a 21st consecutive year in which they have failed to win more Tests than they have lost.
The last time West Indies had a “winning year” was 1994, with four wins and two losses. They had the same number of wins and losses in both 1995 and 1996, then 15 consecutive losing years from 1997 to 2011. Wins over Bangladesh helped them achieve results parity in 2012 and 2014, either side of a dismal 2013, when they were thoroughly clouted in India and New Zealand.In 21 consecutive years from 1976 to 1996, West Indies never lost more Tests than they won, and posted 17 winning years out of 19, up to and including 1994. Watching their “display” in Hobart, it was possible to conclude that some of the current side would have struggled to get in as spectators in the 1980s, let alone as players.A loss in the Boxing Day Test at the MCG would be West Indies’ eighth Test defeat in 2015, equalling their record number of defeats in a year, set in 2004 and 2005.It would also make them only the second team in Test history to play 10 or more Tests in a year and lose at least 80% of them, after England in 1993 (played 10, lost eight).Stat conclusions:
a) I really don’t want to think about it.b) Cricket doesn’t really want to think about it.c) Someone should really think about it.STAT 3: Test stumpings have occurred at their highest rate since 1956.

If you like seeing bails whipped off by grinning wicketkeepers, this has been a fun year for you. There were 37 stumpings in the first 40 Tests of the year this year. With three Tests remaining (including the Hamilton Test now underway), that is already the second most stumpings in a year, behind the 41 sets of bails whipped off by glovemen in 2004 (in 51 Tests).Even if there are no more Test stumpings, and the current figure of 0.92 stumpings per Test drops to 0.86, it will remain the highest rate since 1956, when 16 batsmen were caught out of their ground in 15 Tests (although only two of Jim Laker’s 46 Ashes wickets was a stumping).Before Hamilton, there had been one stumping every 338 overs of Test cricket this year, again the highest rate since 1956 regardless of whether or not there are any more such dismissals before the end of December.This decade as a whole has seen the highest rate of Test stumpings since the 1950s. Up to the end of the 1950s, 3.46% of all Test dismissals were stumpings. Since then, that figure has fallen to 1.61%, suggesting that as the world became more sexually liberated in the Swinging Sixties, batting became considerably more prim and less willing to be caught with its metaphorical trousers down.Hedley Verity: said to be contemplating a resurrection-induced comeback in the wake of the pitches for the recent India-South Africa series•Getty ImagesThe least stumpedous decade was the 1980s, when there was on average only one stumping every two and a half Tests, or one every 808 overs, making stumping less than half as frequent as in the 1950s.Of the years in which more than five Tests have been played, the stumpiest was 1921 – 20 stumpings in 11 Tests, one every 178 overs, suggesting that, having survived the world’s most devastating conflict, batsmen were not too fussed at the prospect of being stranded a yard or two down the wicket having a swing at a cricket ball. Perspective is a wonderful thing.Stat conclusions:
a) Perhaps, T20 has made batsmen more willing to come down the pitch, but not necessarily better at it.b) There have been some silly pitches this year, and even sillier batting, and not just in the recent Indian triumph.c) I love stumpings.STAT 4: 2015 was, comfortably, the best year for ODI batsmen, with record scoring rates (5.51 per over), the highest collective batting average (31.40) (excluding 1974, when only six ODIs were played), the highest strike rate (87.1), and the most centuries (106, smashing the previous bests of 77 in 2013 and 79 in 2014).
The 2013-2015 ODI fielding regulations unsurprisingly resulted in a deluge of run-scoring, such that even England, who began their ODI year apparently trying to bat their way back to the 1980s, found themselves scoring 400 without being unduly surprised or even slightly disappointed. There were six 400-plus scores in total this year; there had been only one between March 2010 and October 2014, and 11 in all ODIs played up to the end of last year. There have been a year-record ten individual scores of 150 or more.Those 106 centuries have been scored at a rate of one every 1.33 ODIs, comfortably a record, and down from 1.55 in 2014 and 1.77 in 2013. From 2000 to 2012, ODI hundreds were scored at one every 2.42 matches; up to 1999, it was one hundred per 3.24 games. Furthermore, in 2015 the conversion rate of ODI fifties into hundreds hit a record high of 24.8%. It was 21.5% in 2013 and 2014 combined; in the 2000-2012 period, it was 16.2%, and in the 20th century, it was 13.5%.Stat conclusions:

a) It is easier to score hundreds when there aren’t so many fielders on the boundary. And when the ball never gets more than 25 overs old.b) Modern batsmen possess many skills that previous generations did not have.c) If things keep progressing at this rate, by the year 2143, every single ODI innings will be a triple-century.

India Under-19s’ ground-fielding and catching ranks among the best in the tournament, a result of clearly defined roles for players and thorough drills

Vishal Dikshit in Mirpur13-Feb-2016Going only by statistics, the fielding of the two finalists of the Under-19 World Cup is poles apart. Both teams have played five matches so far but India are third on the list of most fielding dismissals by a side [behind Pakistan’s 37 and Namibia’s 35, both from six matches]. West Indies, on the other hand, are right at the bottom with 15 fielding dismissals. Both teams have excelled at batting and bowling through the tournament, but India’s fielding could likely end up being the difference on Sunday.India’s work in the field was impressive from their first match. They got rid of the Ireland Under-19s openers by running them out with direct hits from two agile fielders, Ishan Kishan and Armaan Jaffer. The next two dismissals were excellent catches taken at first slip by Ricky Bhui. That was just the beginning. Washington Sundar and Sarfaraz Khan have maintained the slip-catching standards, wicketkeeper Rishabh Pant has completed five catches and two stumpings so far, and there have been a few one-handed catches to top these numbers.”It’s been really good so far, I’ve been pretty happy with it,” India head coach Rahul Dravid told ESPNcricinfo. “Fielding was one of the main things we wanted to work on from the beginning itself and I think the kind of practice they have had back home has really helped. They practised at the NCA and when the team got together for a couple of days we focused a lot on fielding there, too.”We thought, because of the nature of pitches here, the games would be really close, totals like 240-250 would be really competitive. For those situations, it was important for us to work on our close-in fielding. Things such as direct hits, cutting the angles, sharp throws.”As is the case with most senior teams, India’s Under-19s squad has been traveling with a hefty support staff. Apart from Dravid, the staff includes bowling coach Paras Mhambrey and Abhay Sharma, a former wicketkeeper who is the fielding coach. Dravid and Abhay have also worked together with the India A teams recently. Mhambrey, meanwhile, played an instrumental role as Vidarbha’s coach in their quarter-final run during the 2014-15 Ranji Trophy season.”These guys have access to so much nowadays compared to my days of Under-19s,” Dravid said. “There’s a team physio, a trainer, a bowling coach, a fielding coach to help them out from the age of 14-15.”When it comes to the specifics, Abhay has been working on clearly defined fielding drills and roles for the players, and different aspects of fielding. “We have been concentrating on specifics, like direct hits, how to get into position for high catches and parallel catches,” Abhay said. “Getting into the right body position is the key. Modern-day fielding is changing and we are trying to evolve, like diving in a safer way where you don’t get injured and are in a position to straightaway throw at the target.”We are working on improving each boy at his position on the field. Even things like taking caught-and-bowled chances, in the slips, in the circle, outfield.”The impact of India’s sharp fielding can be gauged from the fact that they have saved roughly 20 runs in every match•ICCThe results have shown in nearly every match. The combination of sharp slip-fielding and ground-fielding has helped India save roughly 20 runs per match and has allowed them to break partnerships consistently. India’s average fielding dismissals per innings stand at 0.581, the highest in the tournament so far.”We have worked really hard on catching: short catching, reflexes, how your hands are soft,” Abhay said. “Everybody says having soft hands is important, but how to get it normally and naturally… that is the area we have worked upon.”Dravid said that, in addition to their natural athleticism, lush outfields are also helpful for young fielders. “They are naturally athletic and nowadays grounds are so much better. We push them to put in the extra effort and go for a catch instead of staying back and playing it safe,” he said.India’s slip cordon now comprises Sarfaraz, Washington and Anmolpreet Singh, who took Bhui’s place recently both in the team and in the slips. Except a few minor errors in that area, India’s slip-fielding has been near-flawless. The kind of training they go through with Abhay and Dravid before each match shows how the fielders have reached such levels and quality. One outstanding moment came in their first match when Ireland batsman Adam Dennison edged one behind and the ball popped out of Pant’s gloves but Bhui, at first slip, reacted quickly and took it on the rebound.”We identified slip fielders on the basis of their fielding and positions in the teams they have played for so far,” Dravid said. “There were guys like Sarfaraz, Washington and Anmolpreet who are really good with sharp catches so it was about making them better.”Abhay has also been working with the two wicketkeepers in the team – Pant and Kishan. Pant was named the designated wicketkeeper for the tournament before the side left India and Abhay said he has been using some unusual practice methods with the wicketkeeper and slip fielders in the nets.”I have used some specific tools, like different kind of balls of varying weight which swings a lot, travels and comes quick,” Abhay said. “I went to a special manufacturer to get it specifically for this tournament because I knew I have to work with full intensity right from the start. Nice to see they are responding to the ideas.”It was only in the semi-final against Sri Lanka that India’s fielding showed a few blips. Pant missed a stumping, Avesh Khan dropped a simple catch and Kishan misjudged a catch, too. Against a team like West Indies, who can turn the tide of a match with such small moments, India will hope they can leave their nervousness behind and regain the high standards they have set for themselves

A win for Kolkata Knight Riders will mean they finish in the top four, leaving the final league match to decide the fourth team in the playoffs

Shiva Jayaraman16-May-2016If the first of the double-headers on Sunday in Kolkata is washed out – heavy rain is forecast – Kolkata Knight Riders will go through to the playoffs and Sunrisers will end the league phase at No. 2. Also, Mumbai Indians will be out of the race, and the match between Delhi Daredevils and Royal Challengers Bangalore will be a knockout match.With their win against Mumbai Indians, Gujarat Lions have confirmed a spot in the top two. They will finish as the top team should Sunrisers Hyderabad lose to Knight Riders. Sunrisers Hyderabad are also through to the playoffs since now only two other teams can finish on 16 points.

Sunrisers Hyderabad

Sunrisers will finish as the top team if they win against Kolkata Knight Riders. They could finish as the second team on NRR even if they lose, but only if by a margin of 40 or less while Daredevils beat Royal Challengers but not by a big margin (not more than 71 runs).
Team left to play: Kolkata Knight Riders

Kolkata Knight Riders

They will qualify for the last four if they beat Sunrisers in the last game. Even if they lose to Sunrisers, they could go through with 14 points on NRR if Royal Challengers beat Daredevils. Knight Riders could finish in the top two if they beat Sunrisers by a margin of over 40 runs and Daredevils beat Royal Challengers, but not by a big margin.
Team left to play: Sunrisers Hyderabad

Mumbai Indians

Mumbai can make it to the playoffs only if Sunrisers beat Knight Riders by a margin of 43 or more runs or chase down their target in 15 overs or earlier, and Royal Challengers win against Daredevils by 14 or more runs or complete the chase in 18.2 overs or earlier.

Delhi Daredevils

Delhi Daredevils will make it to the playoffs if they beat Royal Challengers Bangalore. If Knight Riders lose to Sunrisers, even if Daredevils lose they could qualify on NRR ahead of Knight Riders. For that to happen, though, Daredevils first need to finish ahead of Mumbai on NRR – for this, they should not lose by 14 or more runs or with ten or more balls to spare.
Team left to play: Royal Challengers Bangalore

Royal Challengers Bangalore

A win against Daredevils will confirm a spot in the playoffs for Royal Challengers. They could also go through with 14 points if Knight Riders lose to Sunrisers.
Team left to play: Delhi Daredevils

There was enough logic in Alastair Cook’s decision not to enforce the follow-on to make it understandable at worst and reasonable at best

George Dobell at Old Trafford24-Jul-2016It tells you something about the mentality of English cricket that, leading by 489 with two days to go, their assistant coach spent much of the post-play press conference defending his side. Well, perhaps not his side as much as his side’s captain.There had been so much to praise in the England performance on day three. There was the beautifully executed slower-ball cutter from Stuart Broad that fooled Asad Shafiq into slicing a drive to point. There was the pace generated by Ben Stokes in a wonderfully hostile spell on a slow pitch and his athletic fielding that, at one stage, saw him field at vacant mid-on off his own bowling and stop a single.There was the selflessness of James Anderson, who sprinted from mid-off to the extra-cover boundary, dived and turned what appeared to be a certain four into a three off the bowling of Chris Woakes. And there was Woakes displaying such hostility that he was able to strike a batsman of Misbah-ul-Haq’s class on the helmet despite the docility of the pitch.Most of all, there was the fact that England bowled Pakistan out for 198 on a blameless surface. It was one of their better flat-pitch performances in recent years.But Alastair Cook’s decision not to enforce the follow-on appeared to push all that into irrelevance. It wasn’t so much it divided opinion as united it: to judge by the comments in the media or on Twitter – not the most reliable barometer of public opinion, admittedly – it seemed to be pretty much Cook on one side of the debate and the rest of the world on the other.Even Mickey Arthur, the Pakistan coach, admitted he was surprised by the decision and that it probably gave his side “a bit better chance” of escaping with a draw. “We fully expected to be batting again,” he said with a bemused smile. “Yes, it’s probably more likely there will be a draw.”Cook’s decision was surprising, for sure. Only twice in their Test history have England chosen not to enforce the follow-on with a larger lead than the 391 they had here. The last such occasion came in 1930.

“We wanted to keep Pakistan out for as long as we could. We want to make sure they spend as much time bowling possible as there is a knock-on effect of that”Paul Farbrace

Their bowlers (and they have five of them these days) did not appear to have exerted themselves especially hard – none of them had bowled more than 16 overs – and, this being Manchester, the threat of rain can never be totally discounted. The next Test does not start until August 3, so there need have been no concern about retaining energy for a back-to-back match.By the time they reduced Pakistan to 119 for 8, England had every intention of enforcing the follow-on. Anderson and Broad were taken out of the attack with a view to keeping them fresh for the second innings and it looked as if Pakistan could be polished off within 50 overs.But then Misbah and Wahab Riaz added 60. It was not only Pakistan’s third-highest ninth-wicket stand against England in England, but it showed how flat this pitch remained. Stokes and Woakes, clearly England’s faster bowlers these days, were obliged to deliver a few more overs than England might have liked and Cook made the decision that, with the pitch fine for now but likely to deteriorate a little more over the next couple of days, his side should make use of it rather than potentially face a tricky fourth-innings target on a surface helping Yasir Shah. Equally, he hoped that his bowlers would have a slightly easier job once the surface had worn a little more.”The key was wanting to bat while the wicket is still good,” Farbrace said. “We don’t want ourselves under any pressure of having to chase a score in the fourth innings. We still think the pitch will deteriorate over the next couple of days and the bounce will become variable.”We had been hoping to bowl them out a lot quicker. Then Anderson and Broad would have been fresh to take new ball when we enforced the follow-on. But the longer their innings went the more we decided to bat again.”There were a couple of other considerations. England also thought that Pakistan’s bowlers, who have already spent five sessions in the field this match and were now without Wahab, who sustained a knock on the elbow when batting against Woakes, would shudder at the thought of pulling on their bowling boots once more. Pakistan’s first-innings batting clearly suffered for the wearying effects of their hours in the field; England reasoned they had time to inflict a little more pain upon them. Judging by the way Yasir started in the second innings, they may have had a point. If not exhausted, he certainly looks stiff and tired.”Yes, we wanted to keep them out for as long as we could,” Farbrace said. “We want to make sure they spend as much time bowling possible as there is a knock-on effect of that.”Farbrace insisted the decision was not about protecting either Anderson or Stokes, though. Both are making their return from injury in this game but, as Farbrace put it: “at no stage was this decision about protecting them.”England’s decision to bat again was not met with universal approval•Getty ImagesSo, was Cook’s decision negative? Perhaps. It suggests that England were concerned about the potential threat of Yasir in the fourth innings and, arguably, did not send out the most confident statement of support in his bowlers. It suggested, not for the first time, that Cook’s safety-first approach sometimes threatens England’s best chance of victory. It appeared to clash with England’s much-repeated modern mantra to play positive cricket.In the century-and-a-half that people have been playing Test cricket, no team has ever successfully chased more than 418 to win and, excluding the timeless Test of 1939, no team has ever scored more than 451 in the fourth innings of a Test. It does seem abundantly cautious. But we probably shouldn’t have been surprised.Wasn’t this decision entirely typical of the most pragmatic batsman England have ever produced? A man who has denied himself the cover drive for months at a time in a bid to cut out risk and give himself the best chance of accumulating the runs required to help his side into strong positions. A man who has picked a side with Moeen Ali batting at No. 8 and who still utilised a nightwatchman on the first evening with his side 311 for 4. A man who has built a magnificent career on a pull, a nudge and a cut. A man in whom the victory for substance over style is overwhelming.Might it even have been a little brave? Might it have been brave to risk the opprobrium of the media in the knowledge that, should this decision backfire, he will be open to harsh criticism but feeling he was protecting his bowlers and backing them to bowl Pakistan out in five sessions or so over the last day-and-a-half? The weather forecast is not brilliant, but it suggests rain will not play a significant role.We have been here before. In 2013, at Leeds, England beat New Zealand by 247 having declined to enforce the follow-on and taken some fearful criticism in the process. Some players in that side point to it as the moment they lost respect for the media who, they suggest, had forgotten that England had just been fortunate to draw 0-0 in New Zealand (the series in which Matt Prior and Monty Panesar were obliged to bat for a draw in Auckland) or the burden upon their four-man attack. Some players felt the criticism was motivated by the fact some in the media had made plans to play golf on the scheduled final day and were disappointed that the game was still progressing.What Cook’s decision was not is ridiculous. There is enough logic in the decision to make it understandable at worst and reasonable at best. Indeed, bearing in mind England’s record against quality spin bowling, you might even argue it was sensible.England will still have the best part of five sessions to dislodge Pakistan’s batsmen. Batsmen who have only reached 300 once in their three innings so far this series. If they survive, they will have earned their draw. And if England win? Maybe Cook will deserve some plaudits.