Who will our readers pick in their team of IPL 2018? Make your choices now
ESPNcricinfo staff31-May-2018ESPNcricinfo’s team of IPL 2018: KL Rahul, Sunil Narine, Kane Williamson (c), Ambati Rayudu, Rishabh Pant, Dinesh Karthik, MS Dhoni (wk), Rashid Khan, Andrew Tye, Umesh Yadav, Jasprit Bumrah.
Did we miss an obvious choice? Tell us at [email protected].
India have been so obsessed with their off stumps that they are missing out on scoring opportunities with the cut shot
Sidharth Monga17-Aug-2018Five Tests into India’s overseas cycle, their batsmen have thrown up quite a few remarkable statistics. One that you hope hasn’t escaped the attention of the team management is that in three Tests in South Africa at the start of this year, India played only 22 cuts against the quick bowlers, for 46 runs. The number has been whittled down to a third in England: five cuts in two Tests for 16 runs. Now, this doesn’t include the ramp or the steer off the front foot. Just the old-fashioned cut, either along the ground, or over the infield, or even a top edge over the cordon. A high percentage of these cut shots has been played by Bhuvneshwar Kumar and R Ashwin.By comparison, South Africa played the cut shot to the India quicks 38 times for 77 runs, and England played 15 cuts for 36 runs. These statistics tell you two important things. We are getting too excited over the fact that India’s bowlers had taken 80 wickets in their first four overseas Tests. Playing in bowler-friendly conditions, they are bound to take all the wickets on offer, but they have provided more loose balls – cuttable ones being one kind – than their opponents. There has been enough assistance in the pitches for bowlers to keep pitching the ball up, except in Centurion where lengths were pulled back to avoid being driven.ESPNcricinfo LtdThe second and more important cause for this is that India have been so obsessed with their off stumps and cutting the movement that they are making cuttable balls seem fuller and narrower. Former India player and commentator Sanjay Manjrekar has been making this point since 2015. “You are allowed to get on to the back foot, you know?” he keeps saying. “Batting is about both front foot and back foot, and knowing when to play off which one.” As with many things, you can paper over this when winning at home or in home-like conditions. It is when you need all hands on the deck you wonder if this drawback is costing valuable runs.It is almost as if India’s specialist batsmen have trained themselves to forget back-foot play. Most of them stand outside the crease with a wide stance, which is the foundation of a forward press. Then they press forward as their trigger movement, and they get a big stride to get close to the ball. It has its advantages. You can leave alone balls outside your eye line. There is less time for the ball to deviate. The movement of feet is economical: two small ones instead of one big lunge. You are in a good position to drive should you choose to do so. Still the advantages have to be evaluated against the cost of it. A bigger casualty still might be the punch through the covers.ESPNcricinfo LtdAccording to ESPNcricinfo’s logs, India have played only 128 of the 283 balls bowled short or short of a length to them this series off the back foot. England have gone back to 266 of 358 such balls. In the process, India have missed out on scoring opportunities, something that is represented by England making 4.13 runs per six such deliveries to India’s 2.77. You restrict it to just short balls, and you will find India have gone back only on 11 of the 40 possible occasions. England have done so to 48 balls out of 69. What is not represented in these numbers is the overcompensation when you punish these errors ruthlessly.ESPNcricinfo LtdIt is not as if India haven’t been presented with balls short and wide. Look at the pitch maps from all four innings India have played. There is plenty that can be cut away. Now compare it with the pitch maps for their oppositions. A lot of that red real estate is blue, and some of it is yellow. Blues are non-boundary runs, yellows are boundaries, and reds are dots. Is it possible that because India are moving forward to almost everything they are not in a position to take advantage of short balls?ESPNcricinfo LtdJust contrast it with how well India play spinners. They meet spin on the half-volley to not let it turn, but are equally quick to cash in on anything short. The spinner is afraid to pitch it even slightly short. The fast bowlers are not under such pressure. They know they can at times err on the short side without getting cut away. There’s also a risk they are converting short-of-a-length balls into length ones and edging them off the front foot instead of watching them off the back foot and either playing or leaving them after they have seamed.Now not every batsman needs to play every shot, but when almost everybody plays in a similar way, it could be a matter for concern. Among the specialist batsmen, Ajinkya Rahane comes across as the only natural cutter. Virat Kohli has managed to find a way around it, either through a square-drive or just a slap off the front foot, like he did to a Ben Stokes long hop to bring up his hundred at Edgbaston. Others have been leaving these balls alone or sometimes even defending them off the front foot.It is never a great idea to muddle with set techniques in the middle of a series, no matter how bad it is going, but this is something to weigh against the advantages of their current techniques once the series is over. Especially before going to Australia where the bounce is true and batsmen can afford to hang back even to length balls. You don’t want to lose out on scoring off the back foot there unless the payoff is really big.
The South Africa A batsman has had good results personally on his first tour to India, but he’s intent on becoming better
Sreshth Shah in Alur13-Aug-2018The Rondebosch Boys’ High School, in suburban Cape Town, might be the only school in the world to produce cricketers who have played for four different countries. Gary Kirsten (among others) played for South Africa, Jonathan Trott represented England, Ralph Coetzee turned out for Ireland, while Michael Rippon plays for Netherlands.They’re all similar players, full of grit and skill who more often than not punch above their weight, and this seems to be a trademark of the Rondebosch ethos. Take the 23-year-old Zubayr Hamza for example, one of the youngest members of the South Africa A squad currently touring India, their leading run-scorer on the tour, and a recent alumnus of school.Three fifties and two hundreds in his last five first-class games for Cape Cobras helped Hamza earn a maiden A-team call-up, and he hasn’t disappointed. The right-handed top-order batsman smacked 104 in the warm-up game against India’s Board President’s XI, followed it up with a second-innings 63 in the first unofficial Test and then capped the series with a 93 in the second. These returns would satisfy most players on their maiden away tour, but not Hamza. Instead, he’s always thinking about his own game and yearning for ways to refine his skills.”Scoring a hundred in the warm-up game, and then getting a third-ball duck on the first innings of the first Test – it just showed me cricket’s two opposite spectrums,” Hamza said after the penultimate day of the second unofficial Test. “One day may be yours, the other day it may not. In the second innings of the first Test as well, I could’ve converted into a hundred, so it’s the small things mentally, where decisions are made in the moment, that I think I could do better.”One of Hamza’s qualities on this tour has been to play positive cricket: with intent, confidence and a clear mind. His shots, to both spin and pace alike, have displayed a certain clear-headedness, and the extra hours at training have helped him achieve that level of zen.”I worked quite a lot with the batting coaches regarding footwork, playing the ball as late as possible, and kind of respecting the power which a spinner can have in various conditions, Hamza said. “I worked on the simple things – the basics and the strength of my batting. As an individual, you try and learn as much as you can. It’s something all batsmen thrive to do, regardless of conditions – to know how to go about executing their game plan.”For me, it’s more about the mindset. One of the toughest challenges in any match – at any level – is to see if I can try and compete at that level. So It’s a question I keep asking myself, ‘can I compete here?’ Russell [Domingo, the coach] and I worked on some subtle changes in my technique, but a lot goes to the mindset of playing at a higher level than usual.”Despite a successful tour on a personal front, Hamza’s team is destined for a series loss. After losing the first unofficial Test with just seven balls remaining in Bengaluru, a rain-hit second Test in Alur is unlikely to produce a result. But, South Africa A have dominated multiple spells of play over the last four days, and Hamza puts that down to the team’s attitude following the early defeat.”I think we took the loss quite harsh,” Hamza said. “Before coming to India, we were upbeat and positive but getting dominated in the first Test is quite a tough pill to swallow. So, I think for us to have come back, and change our mindset, we had to be positive to come back and try and compete in this game. I think we’ve done well. It was a collective team decision to forget the previous game, besides the learnings we took from it. We had a good momentum shift on the second day, and we’re back in this game, but unfortunately the rains played quite a big part In this fixture.”Next for Hamza, perhaps, is a call-up to the national side – with the senior Test team struggling against spin in subcontinental conditions as seen in their 2-0 loss in Sri Lanka – but the resident of the “Mother City” says he tries to live in the present and prefers working on his own game. As a non-Asian, Hamza understands the importance of batting well in Asia, and knows that acing it abroad holds the key to bigger things in his cricketing career.”I haven’t thought about it at all,” Hamza responded on his hopes for a Test call-up. “As I said before, it’s about proving to myself whether I can play in this level, which is obviously a step above my usual. I’ll take it one step at a time, and I haven’t thought about it yet. The pitches obviously don’t spin as much at home, but if you want to go forward and think progressively in cricket, then you need to be able to play in subcontinental conditions.”
Cheteshwar Pujara had been rock solid, but India were in trouble. And then he showcased a rarely-seen side of his game and batted outstandingly with the tail
Nagraj Gollapudi at the Aegas Bowl31-Aug-2018This is the innings Cheteshwar Pujara believed he could play. An innings of courage, calm, and calculated assault.There are many yardsticks to measure how important Pujara’s unbeaten 132 is in the context of the series. First, without Pujara’s runs, India’s resolve would have been flattened. Their series would have been over, and all the motivation after the Trent Bridge victory might have evaporated. Secondly, and more importantly, he is the only top-order batsman in both teams to hit a half-century in this Test so far.When Pujara walked out to bat on the second morning, his first thought might have been about his previous visit to this venue. In a county championship match in June, he made 0 and 32, with Dale Steyn having sent his off-stump flying in the first innings. Today though, there was no vulnerability in Pujara’s mind and defence.India were in danger of losing the initiative after KL Rahul and Shikhar Dhawan fell, having started confidently. Pujara scored his first run off his 12th delivery – quick by his standards. He is generally happy not to be rushed. His first boundary, a crisp off drive against Sam Curran, came after 36 deliveries.In contrast, Virat Kohli punched his second ball – from Stuart Broad – for four. In the hour before lunch there urgency in India’s batting, an intent to score. Even Pujara was looking for runs. He upper cut Broad for four, and Kohli applauded. When Anderson bowled a loose ball, Pujara did not let it go – he rocked back to unleash a fierce square cut. The pair ran hard, urging each other. India went to lunch on 100 for 2. The partnership was already worth 50 runs, with Pujara matching Kohli’s 25 runs.While an aggressive Kohli is to be expected, England faced a new entity in Pujara. He forced England’s bowlers to think hard. Initially, Curran felt he could bend one from over the wicket into Pujara. But Pujara was waiting, eyes wide open, bat steady, soft hands. He dead-batted Curran many a time.Failing to find movement into Pujara, Curran opted to bowl from around the stumps. This was a minor victory for Pujara, making the bowler change his plan. He also knew Curran would aim to angle the ball in from wide of the crease. That meant he would also bowl fuller. If Curran erred, Pujara could take advantage. A slow over-pitched delivery arrived soon, and Pujara lunged to hit a fluent cover drive that took him two short of his second 50-plus score of the series.1:15
Great mix of caution and aggression in Pujara’s innings – Bangar
There was a minor lapse in focus as soon as he reached his half-century. Facing Ben Stokes’ first ball of the day – fuller length and moving away from off-stump – Pujara got lucky as the outside edge was not taken by the wicketkeeper Jos Buttler.Pujara also faced the challenge of playing Moeen Ali from the rough. This was the first time in the series that batsmen were threatened by spin. It needed a different mindset.Pujara had faced a probing over, a maiden, from Moeen before lunch. The first few deliveries were played from the crease, with short leg coming into play. Pujara understood that the best way to negate the rough was to use his feet. For the rest of the day, he hopped out of the crease on several occasions to dab the ball or loft it over the infield.Pujara’s biggest challenge arrived immediately after lunch. Kohli departed with the deficit just over 100. There were about 50 overs left in the day. England found a second wind, and India’s middle and lower-order batsmen lost their heads. From 161 for 3, India collapsed to 195 for 8.Joe Root spread the field and asked his bowlers to aim for Pujara’s head. Fine leg, long leg, deep square leg were in place. Pujara lined up to play the hook a couple of times, but resisted the urge – consciously one time, beaten by pace and bounce another. The one time he actually attempted the hook, against Stokes who was bowling from around the stumps, the ball smashed into his helmet. There was minor bump on his right temple. Pujara was on 57. Anderson hit the back of his helmet as well, on 78, but Pujara’s focus was not dented.Pujara got up, thanks in no small measure to his two crutches, Ishant Sharma and Jasprit Bumrah. Pujara had valuable partnerships of 32 and 46 with them, and helped India take a lead that had looked impossible at tea.It is easy to be desperate in a scenario when you have only the tail for support. But Pujara wasn’t. He helped India regain their footing, then draw level with England, and eventually take a lead. England bowled 143 balls at the last two wickets, and Pujara faced 92 of those, scoring 54 runs. Not only did he shepherd the tail safely, he also helped India surge.When Pujara jumped out for the umpteenth time to loft Moeen back over his head to get to his century, he ran hard, thinking three runs were on offer. Bumrah sent him back, but two runs were enough to get to the hundred. Pujara removed his helmet and raised both hands to celebrate his 15 Test century, his first outside Asia since the 153 in Johannesburg in 2013.By the time India’s innings ended, Pujara had turned a dire situation into one of hope in the dressing room. Levelling this series was still a realistic possibility. Pujara performed the role Kohli had at Edgbaston in the India’s first innings of this series. Both were heroic knocks, but Pujara went one step ahead of Kohli – he helped India take a small, but vital, lead.Gratitude also was not forgotten. On his way up to the dressing room, as the crowd gave him a standing ovation, Pujara stopped to thank one man in particular. A man who would be proud of Pujara’s focus, courage and presence of mind. The man was Sanjay Bangar, India’s batting coach who has spent hours working in the nets with Pujara.The most striking aspect of Pujara’s innings was that – after a typically watchful start – he looked to score at all times. It did not matter whether it was the early spells from Anderson, Broad and Curran, or the cunning of Moeen. Discipline and bloody-mindedness have always been Pujara’s friends. Today he combined those with guts and the intent to score, and the result was glorious.After 355 minutes of toil and satisfaction, Pujara returned undefeated, having played a great innings.
And which batsman made 50 in his first Test with a dozen fours?
Steven Lynch30-Oct-2018I know that Virat Kohli reached 10,000 runs in ODIs quicker than anyone else. Who was the next fastest? asked Ghulam Karmarkar from India
Virat Kohli scorched past 10,000 runs in one-day internationals during his unbeaten 157 in the tied match against West Indies in Visakhapatnam last week. That was his 205th innings, in his 213th ODI. The next fastest to 10,000 was Sachin Tendulkar, who got there in his 259th innings (266th match). That means that Kohli could make ducks in his next 50 innings, and still have the most runs at that stage of an ODI career.Of the others in the select band of batsmen who have scored 10,000 ODI runs, Sourav Ganguly needed 263 innings (272 matches) to get there, Ricky Ponting 266 (272), Jacques Kallis 272 (286), MS Dhoni 273 (320), Brian Lara 278 (287), Rahul Dravid 287 (309), Tillakaratne Dilshan 293 (319), Kumar Sangakkara 296 (315), Inzamam-ul-Haq 299 (322), Sanath Jayasuriya 328 (337) and Mahela Jayawardene 333 (355).Among current players, the only one threatening Kohli’s marks is Hashim Amla, who has so far scored 7696 runs in 166 innings (169 matches); at the same point, Kohli had 7460 runs. Since then Kohli has increased his average from 52.90 to a giddying 59.90, so Amla – who is more than five years older – will do well to keep up.Tom and Sam Curran both played for England in one of the ODIs in Sri Lanka. When was the last time England fielded brothers in the same team? asked Kenneth Day from England
I suppose it was only a matter of time before Tom and Sam Curran played in the same England team – they had racked up 24 international appearances between them before finally doing so, in the fifth ODI against Sri Lanka in Colombo last week. The last pair of brothers to appear in the same ODI for England were Adam and Ben Hollioake, against Sri Lanka in Sydney in 1998-99.The Hollioakes also played a Test together – their joint debut, against Australia at Trent Bridge in 1997. That was the first time England had fielded brothers in the same Test team for 40 years, since Peter and Dick Richardson both played against West Indies, also at Trent Bridge, in 1957.Aaron Finch scored nine centuries in ODIs before making his Test debut. Has anyone made more than this? asked Kade McNamara from Australia
Aaron Finch and Ireland’s William Porterfield made 11* one-day international hundreds before making their Test debuts; Paul Stirling made seven and Ed Joyce six. Virat Kohli made five, while Ahmed Shehzad of Pakistan, South Africa’s Quinton de Kock and Rohit Sharma all made four.But Porterfield leads the way for ODI runs before Test debut – he piled up 3692, in 119 matches. Finch is second with 3361 from 93. Stirling made 3295, Kevin O’Brien 3126 and Rohit 3049. The current player with the most runs in ODIs without having appeared in a Test is South Africa’s David Miller with 2588, just ahead of England’s Jason Roy (2536). Among non-Test players, Calum Macleod has made seven ODI centuries, Roy six, Ryan ten Doeschate five, Miller and Kyle Coetzer four.Aaron Finch made nine ODI hundreds before getting his Test debut•Getty ImagesWe had this question in a recent quiz, and it floored everyone – what’s the answer please! What do Gerry Alexander, Chandrakant Pandit, Wally Grout and Tim Zoehrer uniquely have in common? asked M Rajneesh from India
Well, all four of them are wicketkeepers – but they do share something more specific than that. Alexander and Grout were keepers in the first tied Test, between Australia and West Indies in Brisbane in 1960-61, and Pandit and Zoehrer featured** in the second tied Test, between India and Australia in Madras (now Chennai) in 1986-87.Who reached 50 in his first Test innings by hitting 12 fours? asked Mukul Ahmed from India
I think the answer here is Shikhar Dhawan, who raced to 50 on debut, with a dozen fours for India against Australia in Mohali in 2012-13. His eventual 187 – from just 174 balls – contained 33 fours and two sixes.When New Zealand’s Tim Southee walloped an unbeaten 77 in the second innings of his first Test, against England in Napier in 2007-08, his half-century included 50 in boundaries. He hurtled to 53 (from 29 balls) with his seventh six, and also hit two fours. Southee ended up with four fours and nine sixes – and hasn’t yet bettered that debut score in 59 further Tests.*Oct 31: This answer was revised completely. It previously had out-of-date informationUse our feedback form or the Ask Steven Facebook page to ask your stats and trivia questions
The game’s lawmakers explain to ESPNcricinfo why they reviewed their decision on the controversial IPL run-out
Nagraj Gollapudi27-Mar-20198:57
Ashwin planned mankading Buttler: Hodge
When you saw the Buttler run-out on Monday, did you agree Ashwin was correct in his actions?It was certainly one that has divided public opinion. We now have had a chance to review it in more detail and we think that Buttler was in his ground as Ashwin got into a position when the non-striker could reasonably have expected the ball to have been delivered. Ashwin seemed to pause to allow Buttler to go out of his ground and then obviously he put the wicket down; Buttler did not really make much of an effort to get back into his ground. It is one where we just felt the pause was just too long and therefore not within the spirit of cricket.But that is an interpretation, right?The spirit of cricket is an interpretation. We tried to make it as clear as possible in the law (41.16), but it is not like a run-out call where you have got a very clear in and out. We looked at the footage. We looked the way the ICC interprets the law. We can see why the (TV) umpire made the decision he did. The ICC’s , which gives guidance or interpretations on Laws for the Elite Umpires, talks about the arm reaching its highest point and anytime until the arm reaches the vertical, the run-out can be affected.These days, many non-strikers are looking at the batsman because the balls are smashed back so hard that they do not want to switch their focus from one thing to another. So Buttler was looking straight down the pitch. Had he been looking at Ashwin he would have probably seen what was going on and would have stayed within his ground.The key moment was when the ball would normally have been delivered, and we think Buttler was just within his ground at that point. It was only then he carried on with his wander out and the release was delayed then the wicket was put down. But Ashwin says it was instinctive? We think on this particular delivery, Buttler was within his ground until the right moment.The ICC’s interpretation of the law defines the point of release as when the arm is at the highest point. Was that case on Monday? His [Ashwin] arm didn’t go up at all. And that’s why under their advice, the umpire gave the decision he did. There was no delivery swing. Therefore Buttler left his ground too early. Whereas, if you look at perhaps Ashwin’s whole body rather than just the movement of the arm, it gets a bit more difficult. That is the reason the ICC has that interpretation (in the ICC ) because it is easier for the umpires to decipher, rather than judging where the whole body is in the process of delivery.Ashwin told Buttler that he was only defending his half of the crease. So is he not right?It’s not really about defending any part of the crease. It all depends on when the non-striker leaves the crease. In 2014, when Buttler was run out in similar circumstances, he was way out of the crease. In this particular instance, we think Buttler had not left too early.R Ashwin mankads Jos Buttler•BCCIWas Buttler in the wrong by straying out of the crease?He was probably foolish particularly having been out like that before. I have not verified the footage (entire over) of Buttler allegedly drifting out too far a couple of balls earlier. So maybe Ashwin was aware of what he was doing. So the message to non-strikers is, as it has always been, stay in your ground until you know the ball has been released because then none of this will happen. We don’t want this form of dismissal, so it is for the non-striker to stay in his ground for long as the law requires. But also, as far as the bowlers are concerned, they cannot unduly pause too long to get the non-striker out of his ground.The new variation to some of the laws – including law 41.16 – will come into effect from April 1. Yet, the wordings remain virtually the same. Do you agree the wording is vague?I wouldn’t say the law is vague. It is probably more prescriptive now than it has ever been. The game evolves and at MCC, we always keep these things under the microscope and we will always make sure the laws are fit for purpose. If we think the laws can be made better then we can do something about it, but we think the law is robust.
The spirit of cricket is an interpretation. We tried to make it as clear as possible in the law (41.16), but it is not like a run-out call where you have got a very clear in and out
Why not remove expected and make it plain point of release?Because that was the old law before 2000, when bowlers literally were going right through their action and then carrying on and breaking the stumps behind them, which didn’t seem fair.Are you looking at amending the wording of the laws and aligning it with the ICC playing conditions?The ICC’s Laws and Playing Conditions are now aligned – they weren’t between 2011 and 2017. We certainly want a uniform interpretation of this law. Obviously at the international level, matches are televised, but on a Saturday afternoon in club or village cricket, an umpire has got to make his or her decision based just on what he or she sees in a split second. So we need to ensure whatever laws we write are able to be carried out by an umpire without any recourse to technology.R Ashwin and Jos Buttler exchange words•BCCISo the ICC Cricket Committee has been okay with the existing version of the law?This version of the law, referencing the expected moment of release, has been in the ICC Playing Conditions since 2011. In 2000, the MCC changed the law to one where the non-striker is safe to leave once the bowler enters into his delivery stride, which is the landing of the back foot.The ICC felt non-strikers were getting too much of an advantage. So from 2011 to October 2017, the ICC regulation and the MCC’s law were different. Under the laws, it was the back foot, but under the ICC regulation, it was the expected moment of release. Then in October 2017, the MCC changed the law to align it with the ICC Playing Regulations.On April 1, the law will be tweaked slightly to cater to situations where the wicket is accidentally put down by the bowler, with the ball in hand, while still delivering the ball. In these circumstances, play will continue and it will be a no-ball under law 21.6. If there is an appeal for run-out, however, the umpire would need to adjudicate on that, with the ball becoming dead if the non-striker is dismissed.
The name of the former Australia batsman – “an important political figure for cricket” – adorns the manual scoreboard at Manuka Oval
Daniel Brettig30-Jan-2019As a former resident of Canberra, sometime local club cricketer, and ex-member of the ground staff, Nathan Lyon is something of a Manuka Oval expert.Yet, ask him about Jack Fingleton, the name emblazoned on the manually operated scoreboard that will see its first Test match since its facade was moved from the MCG to Canberra in 1983, and Lyon puzzles: “You’ve stumped me here. I know it has come up from Melbourne and there is a lot of history. I’ve worked in it for a lot of hours, so I’ll get back to you.”Thousands of spectators at Manuka’s inaugural Test and the many more set to watch and listen to the broadcasts would do well to learn about Fingleton, whose life and links to Canberra make him one of the more significant figures in the history of the national capital.As a determined batsman, Fingleton was a key part of many Australian Test teams during the Bradman era, not least during the Bodyline series in 1932-33, when both he and Don Bradman were accused of leaking their captain Bill Woodfull’s dressing-room line to the England team manager Sir Pelham Warner: “There are two teams out there, one is playing cricket, the other is not.”But there was far more to Fingleton’s life than the rumours and claims about how that line got out to the press, and the battles he was to have with Bradman in the years to follow. Having taken part in the very first serious cricket match played at Manuka during an Easter carnival in 1930, Fingleton’s life was to become richly entwined with Canberra, as a journalist, a confidante of prime ministers, and a vital ally to the nascent Australian Capital Territory Cricket Association.ALSO READ: Which are the finest cricket books?In choosing journalism as his profession, Fingleton was to be taken from Sydney to Canberra, where he set up as a foreign correspondent for numerous overseas newspapers in Britain, South Africa and India. Rather than chasing big stories to break, his insightful and analytical pieces projected the happenings of Australian politics to the rest of the world, interspersed with his despatches from the cricket during many a summer.This role also helped endear Fingleton to the leading political figures of the day, both for the types of pieces wrote and also the fact that they would be seen in London’s corridors of power, via the , the and the . “Most of his life he didn’t write for Australian newspapers. He did a lot of his work for South African, Indian and British newspapers, almost like a foreign correspondent here,” says his biographer, the ESPN writer Greg Growden.”It’s hard to say what his big, breaking stories were, because he would do overview pieces and didn’t have to be that heavy newshound. A bit like his cricket writing, he was more analysis and overviews of what was happening in Australian politics.”When I spoke to his family, they said the reason why he wrote primarily for overseas papers was that they were more reliable payers, they paid on time, and you knew exactly where you stood. He was pretty fastidious with money, and he always thought the Australian newspaper publishers were cheapskates, not paying their journalists enough. He felt the overseas money was better, also being paid in British pounds, and also at a time when the South African Rand was very strong, basically at parity with Australia.”In this role, Fingleton grew close to three of Australia’s most influential prime ministers: the sterling wartime leader John Curtin, his Labor successor Ben Chifley, and then the longtime Liberal prime minister Robert Menzies. “He basically had a direct line to Robert Menzies, and to Ben Chifley, as well as a cricket fan, very close to John Curtin who was a cricket fan,” Growden says. “At the time he was there, you had politicians who were serious cricket followers.
He was such an important political figure for cricket, because if something was needed, he could rock up to the house, get in politicians’ ears and make certain they would do something about it, and that was crucialJACK FINGLETON’S BIOGRAPHER GREG GROWDEN
“He was a big admirer of Curtin and Chifley, so he got close to those two, and Menzies’ love of cricket is widely known. He was shrewd as well – as a newspaperman he knew he could use his cricketing background as a way to get in there. He became a confidante of those guys. He got Chifley to help get Harold Larwood out to Australia. He and Curtin used to talk about cricket a lot, and he even asked Curtin’s advice about something he wanted to include in [Fingleton’s account of the Bodyline series] and Curtin told him to take it out.”For a time during the war, Fingleton was called upon to act as something of a buffer between the irascible former prime minister and MP Billy Hughes, whose consistent agitation against the presence of American military power in Australia, personified by the leadership of General Douglas MacArthur, was making life difficult for Curtin as he tried to stave off Japanese expansionist threats to the region following the fall of Singapore.”He got seconded to be the press secretary of Billy Hughes,” Growden says. “Now Billy Hughes was Douglas MacArthur’s biggest opponent, he kept sledging MacArthur in speeches and on the floor of parliament, and Fingleton’s job was to try to calm him down, because Curtin and MacArthur had become very close.”Curtin had realised he couldn’t rely on [Winston] Churchill, and when he brought troops home from the Middle East around the fall of Singapore, there were all sorts of ructions going on. So Curtin looked towards the United States to provide defence to Australia, and Fingleton was heavily involved in dealing with these guys.”Fingleton’s role with Hughes did not last long, as the pair struggled to find rapport. Not even a request to his former team-mate Bill O’Reilly to travel down to Canberra and aid Fingleton helped, so he resigned. Nevertheless, Fingleton’s ability to establish relationships on both sides of the House meant that throughout his long stay in the press gallery, it was difficult to discern exactly where his political allegiances lay – the litmus test of an impartial correspondent.”I honestly don’t know whether he was a Liberal or Labor supporter. My feeling was he was probably a Labor supporter but I’ve never had that confirmed, and he didn’t make it that well known. Later, during the Vietnam War, he was prepared to go to jail if his son had been conscripted. So I’d suspect strong Labor allegiances, but he became such a good journalist that he grew very close to Menzies,” says Growden.Fingleton played 18 Test matches between 1932 and 1938•Getty Images”Menzies’ friendship with Fingleton was genuine. I know they used each other, but they had a strong relationship. Fingleton was a bit sceptical of Menzies’ cricketing knowledge, but admired his love of the game. The Keith Miller photo and the Tom Roberts landscape were the only two images in Menzies’ office. There are a lot of Fingleton letters in the Menzies collection, and they’re very sincere letters where they have helped each other.”This partnership was to lead, in 1951, to the start of the annual Prime Minister’s XI match, as a way of ensuring that Canberra invariably played host to at least one high-quality cricket fixture every summer.”The Prime Minister’s XI came about through Fingleton badgering Menzies to do it. In 1951 Menzies had bumped into the president of the ACTCA, Ian Emerton, and he was upset that Canberra had been overlooked for a game featuring the touring West Indian team,” Growden says.”Menzies said ‘I’ll see what I can find out about it’, and a short time later, Emerton saw Fingleton in the parliamentary library and asked if he could pressure Menzies to follow up that PM’s XI idea, so Fingleton started working on it. That’s where it came from, Fingleton putting Menzies on the spot, saying ‘we’ve got to do this’ and Fingleton picked the first team with Menzies, who was to come to realise what great promotion it was for him as prime minister, and so on it went.”In later years, Fingleton became a senior figure known for his assistance to younger press gallery colleagues, and his consistent ability to help assist the ACTCA through his political connections. He lived within walking distance of Manuka Oval itself, slightly up the hill behind the ground and near historian Manning Clark. Had Fingleton been alive today, the tops of the oval’s light towers would have been visible from his front garden.So, at the time of his death in 1981, it was a natural choice for the association to name the scoreboard, formerly part of the MCG, after him. The scoreboard’s donation from the Melbourne Cricket Club came with one hitch – postage and handling.”It was an absolute nightmare getting it transported from Melbourne to Canberra. They had to transport it by some enormous truck, and it cost a bomb [A$ 110,000], problems logistically getting it from Melbourne to Canberra along the Sturt Highway. The cost nearly sent the association broke, and they realised halfway through that building a new scoreboard would have been cheaper.”But he was such an important political figure for cricket, because if something was needed, he could rock up to the house, get in politicians’ ears and make certain they would do something about it, and that was crucial. It would have been at his death that the ACTCA said ‘we’ll connect the two’.”This connection was marked with some mirth by Fingleton’s former teammate Lindsay Hassett, who attended the scoreboard’s opening ceremony and shared the experience afterwards to O’Reilly, remarking: “Fancy being named after a bit of second-hand Victorian furniture!”Thirty-five years on from the scoreboard’s unveiling, and Manuka is about to outstrip even Fingleton’s dreams for the ground, in hosting a Test match for the very first time. As Growden puts it, “He wouldn’t have pushed for a Canberra Test, because he would have realised the power of NSW [New South Wales] and Victoria. There would have been great opposition, because they still looked upon Canberra as a country town, a back block.”Fingleton, though, did a great deal to help Canberra grow from such notions of a ‘back block’ into the capital it is today. By his residence, by his work, and by his support of cricket in the city. After all, as then governor-general Sir Ninian Stephen said when the name was revealed: “Fingleton was much more than a Test cricketer and a journalist; he was an institution.”
Delhi Capitals have lost three out of their four games so far at the Feroz Shah Kotla, only managing to tie the fourth and win in the Super Over
Srinath Sripath18-Apr-2019Capitals at the Kotla: P4 L3 T1
Delhi Capitals were second on the IPL 2019 points table before Thursday night, and that’s despite their record at home, which now reads: Played 4, Lost 3, Tied 1. It is the tournament’s worst win-loss ratio at home after the bottom-placed Royal Challengers’ Bangalore, who have lost all their games.The Kotla pitch has been a mystery over the years, and Capitals’ coach Ricky Ponting has admitted how visiting sides like Sunrisers Hyderabad and Chennai Super Kings have made use of the conditions much better than they could.Once again, Capitals were out-thought by the visiting side, who seemed to read conditions better from the get-go. Rohit Sharma won the toss, opted to bat first for the first time this season (and only the second time since 2018), a “good move” which left home captain Shreyas Iyer “surprised”.Rohit mentioned how their “struggle to chase 160 [175]” last time as the reason for his decision to set a target. They also picked a fingerspinner in Jayant Yadav to take on Capitals’ left-hander-laden batting order.Delhi Capitals’ poor record at home•ESPNcricinfo LtdMumbai, though, had thought through their plans down to the last detail. Mahela Jayawardene, their coach, said in a chat with , the host broadcaster, that “conditions dictate” plans and selections, and “we use different guys in different scenarios”. They shuffled their batting and bowling line-ups, throwing in Ben Cutting at No.3, Hardik and Rahul Chahar to open the bowling, and at one point, made five bowling changes in five overs to turn the game on its head. Some of them failed, but they always had back-up plans, adapting on the go and eventually sealing a convincing win.What’s the deal with Mumbai holding Pollard back?On what looked like a tricky Kotla pitch, Mumbai Indians got to 168 for 5, thanks to Hardik Pandya’s manic acceleration in the final overs once again. A look down their scorecard, though, and you’ll spot an odd stat at the bottom.Kieron Pollard 0* (0 balls)For the second consecutive game, Pollard finished unbeaten, without facing a ball, having walked into bat with three balls remaining. Why one of T20 cricket’s most prolific strikers has gotten to bat so few balls for Mumbai, has been a question for a while now.This season, though, Hardik’s brilliance has put Mumbai at the top of the run-scoring charts in the final overs. They’ve scored at 12.66 runs an over in the last four overs, powered in large part by Hardik’s astounding rate of 15.12, only behind Andre Russell among batsmen who’ve faced 50-plus balls. Hardik’s consistency and Pollard’s night out against Kings XI Punjab – the one time Hardik failed – have meant Mumbai haven’t borne the brunt of holding their biggest hitter back.Getty ImagesAnd more often than not, their long-standing belief in left hand-right hand combinations has meant Krunal Pandya has batted ahead of Pollard. Krunal has blown hot and cold with the bat so far, but on Thursday night, his 37 off 26 balls did the job on this track: play out the spinners, consolidate and max out in the final overs.Jayawardene admitted as much in a chat with the host broadcaster. Having sent Ben Cutting, their third big hitter apart from Pollard and Hardik, up the order with a view to accelerating early, they switched to their back-up plan of rotating the strike and going big at the death after Cutting fell for 2.Amit Mishra bosses the middle overs but why didn’t he complete his quota?Amit Mishra struck with his first ball – a slow legbreak – to rattle Rohit Sharma’s stumps. It was his 150th IPL wicket, and a reminder of his years bowling for the erstwhile Daredevils at the Kotla, which has always had something in it for the slower bowlers.Mishra was acing the middle overs against Quinton de Kock and Suryakumar Yadav, conceding just two boundaries in his first three overs. With the run rate under control and a new batsman in Krunal Pandya at the crease, Delhi Capitals’ captain Shreyas Iyer took Mishra off and brought seamer Keemo Paul back into the attack.If that was done to hold him back for Kieron Pollard’s arrival, it didn’t come to pass. Mishra finished with figures of 3-0-18-1, not coming back to bowl his final over. Iyer’s use of Mishra has been puzzling at times: against Sunrisers Hyderabad in their last game, he didn’t come on to bowl till the 11th over, after the fall of Jonny Bairstow, who has struggled against wristspin this season.Mishra wasn’t the only one to go with an over unbowled – Ishant Sharma didn’t came back to bowl his final over, after having gone for 17 off his first three.
He may not be the first-choice allrounder, but his experience could yet give India an edge
Nagraj Gollapudi at The Oval25-May-20194:21
Manjrekar: Jadeja a big revelation with the bat
There have been doubts over Ravindra Jadeja’s spot in India’s XI, with Kedar Jadhav being the preferred choice as the second allrounder behind Hardik Pandya. With Vijay Shankar, also an allrounder the likely favourite to bat at No. 4 as per the selectors, it was hard to see how Jadeja could fit in.However, on Saturday, Jadeja added a fresh twist to the debate with a compelling performance, single-handedly sweeping past a top order collapse to top score with a 50-ball 54. More than composure, the beauty of Jadeja’s batting lay in his strike rotation and how he dominated the spinners.This will be Jadeja’s second World Cup, a prospect that didn’t seem likely when he spent little more than a year away before being recalled as an injury replacement for the Asia Cup in September 2018. He’s a decade old in international cricket, and has enough experience. It’s just that he isn’t looked upon as a senior statesman like Rohit Sharma, Shikhar Dhawan, MS Dhoni or Virat Kohli. Yet, when he is in his elements, like he was on Saturday, he can be amazing.Against New Zealand in India’s first warm-up, he showed the ability to marshall the lower order. It’s not often that you see Jadeja playing with such confidence. He picked the right moments, balls and bowlers to stamp his authority The key for India, after the collapse, was to take the match deep and Jadeja nearly succeeded.As a fielder, he is inarguably the best India have. That is why he has been preferred over R Ashwin, a more skillful fingerspinner. On Saturday, Jadeja nearly ran out New Zealand captain Kane Williamson with a superb stop at backward point by intercepting a dab. Williamson gave up his dash back to the crease and was fortunate that there was no direct hit.Ravindra Jadeja top scored for India•Getty ImagesAs a spinner, some pundits feel, Jadeja has better ability to finish his quota of 10 overs as opposed to Jadhav, who is mainly utilised as a part-time spinner, although he has been a wicket-taker with his unorthodox low-arm action. As a fielder Jadhav is getting better. As a batsman Jadhav has been lucky to bat in the middle order as opposed to Jadeja who usually bats at No. 8 , leaving him not much time or able partners on most occasions.One reason Jadhav has scored over his competitors is because has shown he can hold his nerve and he has the street smartness to finish things when it matters. He showed that on Saturday too. All that remains to be seen is if he can do it consistently.As a left-hander in the lower order he can be a valuable asset since India have only one-other left-hander in Shikhar Dhawan. With teams fielding at least one wrist spinner, having a left-hand batsman can negated that opposition’s advantage. Jadeja attacked both Mitchell Santner and Ish Sodhi as soon as they were brought in.After the match, Jadeja said the message to himself was to utilise the opportunity of batting out the remaining overs (he walked in to bat in the 20th). “I was telling myself that my shot selection should not be faulty. There was no rush,” he said. “There were many over left. So I was taking my time.”I knew that if I could play out the initial overs then it would become easy gradually. I kept my shot selection very limited in that initial phase. That proved beneficial. I played out the good overs they bowled me early on and then it became easy.”The Indian think tank have one more warm-up fixture against Bangladesh to answer the Jadeja question, and the answer could be key to their World Cup hopes.
Twice he broke Bangladesh’s back in the Test. It was the Rashid factor that really got to the hosts
Mohammad Isam09-Sep-2019A set of six balls from Rashid Khan can be over in a flash. He runs in like a medium-pacer with a short run-up, and swings his shoulder around fast with his wrist and fingers sending down the ball. He walks back quickly too. But, when he has your number, when you cannot tackle him, his overs don’t seem to end. It can even happen in a T20, in which everything whizzes by so quickly. But in a Test match, when you are trying to rebuild an innings or block out everything for survival, a Rashid over can seem like forever.Twice he broke Bangladesh’s back in the one-off Test in Chattogram. On both occasions, the batsmen had been on the way to recovery, and if they had survived Rashid’s spell, they could have been more secure and confident. Had they played him out in the second innings, it would have lifted a huge mental barrier.But there were a few of those long overs from Rapid Rashid. On the second afternoon, with Bangladesh on 86 for 3, he struck Shakib Al Hasan’s front pad in front of the stumps, and had Mushfiqur Rahim caught at short leg in the space of three deliveries. For a side already without Tamim Iqbal, removing one of these two batsmen makes a huge difference to the game. Rashid delivered two knockout punches in one go. Bangladesh would have wanted that forget that over before tea quickly, but it turned out to be the decisive over in the first innings.For good measure, Rashid knocked over Mahmudullah too, with one that skidded through in his third over after tea. It was all rather quick, but for the Bangladesh dressing room, it must have seemed like an eternity.Bangladesh were once again in a reasonable position when he came on for his first proper spell in the second innings. And he removed Mushfiqur for the second time in the game, and sixth time in nine innings across formats. It was a googly that had Mushfiqur’s number this time, and in the next over, he spun back one sharply at the left-handed Mominul Haque. Wasn’t there time to bring the bat down to a legspinner? Shakib, Mushfiqur (twice) and Mominul didn’t seem to have enough of it. Rashid isn’t always pacy, but he is deceptive. He changes the whirl of his shoulder and wrist so subtly, that batsmen end up reacting like they are playing a fast bowler.Towards the end of the fourth day, he set up Mahmudullah by forcing him to go back and come forward several times, finally using a wrong’un to strike his inside edge, easily caught at short leg.Rashid Khan appeals for Mehidy Hasan Miraz’s wicket•BCBWhen Afghanistan really needed wickets, with very little time left in the game on the fifth evening, Rashid knew that he would have to make the difference. After a bit of resistance, Rashid burst through Mehidy Hasan and Taijul Islam and, with the overs running out, he again set up a batsman with his mix of fast and slow turners.He went through his usual motions, but he bowled the 60th and 62nd overs ever so slowly. Soumya Sarkar, knowing that he couldn’t attack with one wicket left, was set on defending every ball. Some squirted off his edge and fell short of the fielder, while others spun past his bat. The ones he defended struck the middle of his bat, but in that sort of situation, even a perfect defensive shot can’t make a batsman feel too confident.Soumya defended the first three balls of the 62nd over, but when Rashid spun one back into his pads with a hint of flight, he stepped out and tried to smother the spin. It took an edge and popped to short leg. The game was over.Rashid sprinted off with his team-mates, celebrating a memorable win. He was gone before Soumya could look up. The Afghanistan captain finished with 11 for 104 for the match.Rashid had also scored a fifty in the game, and the last man to take ten wickets and score a half-century in the same Test was Shakib, his opposite number here. “He has been a world-class bowler in T20s for a while now, although he is new to Test cricket,” Shakib said. “He has shown his ability against us that he can apply his skills to Tests too. He was a factor for us, he took 11 wickets. He was handy with the bat in the first innings. His half-century took his side forward at that stage.”Indeed, it was the Rashid factor that really got to Bangladesh, quickly and slowly, in turn.