What do you do when your side has been on the wrong end of a leathering? You seek solace in the numbers is what

Andy Zaltzman31-Dec-2013The search for positives in the after-wreckage of a crushing defeat has become a recurring theme of this blog. It has, indeed, been a recurring theme of top-level sport as a whole, ever since Sclutus Malvinius, the Roman gladiator, fronted up at a post-match press-conference in the Coliseum media room, claiming to take confidence from the fact that the lion would probably not be quite so hungry come tomorrow’s rematch, before asking if anyone had a set of limbs, a lung, two ventricles and a spare head they could lend him.For England, after a 24-hour masterclass in anticricket at the MCG, the only positive was that at least the agony is nearly over. So too for the poor journalists who have been chronicling the carnage with diminishing reserves of goodwill towards a team and management they have often praised. The hacks have been burning through thesauruses at an alarming rate. Some were even reduced in Melbourne to using German words for “rubbish”, Sanskrit terms for “inexplicable”, and ancient hieroglyphs meaning “What in the name of Anubis was that?” Others could only express themselves by drawing childlike pictures of sad faces, or smearing their tear-stained handkerchiefs all over their laptops, or transliterating a series of low groans and muffled sobs. One seasoned writer was even overheard phoning his mother, begging her to send him a doctor’s note excusing him from having to write about the fifth Test, in Sydney.Amidst all the flagellation, a common refrain is that this is not a great Australian team. This claim would have a high truth rating – perhaps nine out of ten – but a relevance quotient of 0%. They are not a great team. At the start of the series, Australia had one batsman (a) averaging over 37 in Tests, and (b) ranked in the top 30 in the ICC rankings. They had a good but far from all-conquering bowling attack, featuring a returning paceman with a mediocre record over the previous three years. They recently lost six Tests in succession, five of them convincingly.However, in this series they have played unquestionably great cricket. They have been bold, clinical and often brilliant. They have rescued themselves from their few moments of crisis, and exploited their opponents’ fragility like a rhinoceros trampling on a slightly cracked vase. Their play would stand comparison with that of any of the truly great Test teams of the past. Were the England of 2010-11 and 2011 a great team? The evidence of the last two years, and the two years before that garishly purple patch, suggests that they too were also a good team playing great cricket against imploding opposition. In many ways this is more impressive than a great team playing great cricket.I watched some of the final session of the third day’s play with my daughter, who is approaching her seventh birthday (approximately the age at which my cricket-obsessing gene first manifested itself), and, having been born five days after England last slumped to a 5-0 drubbing in Australia, had never previously witnessed England lose an Ashes. She takes some interest in cricket. Also, daddy was sitting on the sofa looking a bit pale and confused, so she joined him. (I should add that we were watching on delay, rather than live; as much as I love the sport, even I would not wake my children up to watch a Test match at 5am. Unless it was really exciting.)England were in a shaky but reasonable position, 220-odd ahead, with four wickets in hand. Pietersen was batting astutely, Bresnan was newly at the crease, short of form but with a decent defensive pedigree. There was a drinks break. I explained to my daughter what Bresnan would try to do. ()”Bresnan will defend for as long as possible, to give support to Pietersen, England’s best attacker. So he won’t try to hit fours and sixes. He will just try not to get out. It doesn’t matter if he doesn’t score any runs, as long as he stays in for a long time. He’s good at that.”Two balls later, Bresnan goes for a wafty pull shot, misses it, and is bowled out. “Daddy, you said a bad word.” “Sorry, dear.” “Why did Bresnan do that, daddy?” “Erm, er… well… erm…” “I thought you said he would just try to defend.” “Er, well, everyone makes mistakes.” “Who is the next batsman?” “Broad.” “What will he do?” “He will also try to defend. After him, the last two aren’t very good at batting, so he just has to stay in as long as he can. He’s done it before.” “Okay, daddy. Are England winning?” “Not entirely.”Three balls later, Broad mistakes himself for Brian Lara on 120 not out and tries to slap Lyon through the covers. He edges and is caught. I looked at my daughter. On her face, there was an expression of confusion and disbelief. Her nascent cricketing brain is probably already sufficiently aware to know that what Bresnan and Broad had done was not the most tactically intelligent cricket she would ever see. But that was a face that, above all, said: “My daddy lied to me. Why?”(I imagine similar conversations were held across India when Ravi Jadeja completed his alleged “innings” in Durban.)Time now for some statistical illustrations of the relative performances of each side.* The only England player whose series average is better than his previous career average, in either discipline, is Stuart Broad, who is averaging 26.8 with the ball, compared to his pre-megadebacle average of 30.5. He has, however, made up for this by averaging 11.8 with the bat, a little under half of his career figure. The rest have not merely fractionally underperformed. They have been vastly inferior knockoff counterfeit copies of themselves, the cricketing equivalent of cheap DVDs with misprints on the covers sold for £2 a pop in a dodgy street market – .* For Australia, the only players with worse averages in this series than they had previously are: Clarke with the bat (49.7, a less than disastrous microslump from 52.0, and featuring two superb series-establishing centuries); Harris with the ball (a hugely influential 26.0, slightly down on his striking career figure of 22.2); Smith with both bat (fractionally) and ball (irrelevantly); and Siddle with the bat (England have restricted the 21st-century Bradman to just 8.5 runs per dismissal, compared to the 15.0 with which he was decimating sides previously).* Australia have only one player averaging under 27 with the bat – Siddle. They have only one bowler averaging over 30, or being hit for more than three runs per over – Smith, in both cases, who has only bowled 11 overs in the series. Even Bailey, the player who has contributed least, made an important first-innings half-century in Adelaide, launched an iconic, last-vestiges-of-morale-shattering assault on Anderson, and has taken seven catches. It has been a superlative collective effort, with the bowling of Johnson and the batting of Haddin raising it to the levels of greatness.* England have no players averaging more than 36 with the bat; all of their top-six batsmen are scoring at under 50 runs per 100 balls (with the exception of Trott, who faced only 28 balls in the series). Only Broad (and, in his one Test, Tremlett) are averaging under 40 with the ball; none of the eight bowlers England has used have been able to keep their economy rate below 3 runs per over. Only one of their players has passed 30 more than once in four first innings (Carberry, who has done so in all four Tests).You could argue that this has been England’s worst series performance of all time. You would not necessarily win that argument, but you would have a fighting chance. You could support your case with a smorgasbord of stats. You could support it with a fully illustrated catalogue of batting bloopers, fielding fluffs, captaincy confusions and bowling bluntness that would have been impressive if culled from a two-year period in England’s depths-plumbing late-1980s phase. You could support it with a printout of the ECB’s expenditure, with the broken timbre of commentators’ voices, with the calculations by travelling fans of exactly what would constitute worse value for money than their current trip to one of the world’s most expensive countries to watch a team of proven quality fold quicker than a surfboard business in Kathmandu. And you could support it with the look of incomprehension in my daughter’s eyes when Stuart Broad edged that swish of final resignation.And finally, some more stats:* Mitchell Johnson needs seven more scalps in Sydney to break Bill Whitty’s 103-year-old record for most wickets by a left-arm bowler in any Test series. The only bowlers to take more than Johnson’s 31 wickets in the first four Tests of an Ashes series have been Rodney Hogg (33, in 1978-79), Jim Laker (39, in 1956) and Alec Bedser (36, in 1953).* Haddin became the first man ever to score four first-innings half-centuries in a series batting at 7 or lower, and the third wicketkeeper ever to reach 50 five times in a series.* If Australia field an unchanged XI in Sydney, they will become only the fourth side ever, and the second since the First World War, to make no personnel changes in a series of five or more matches (the previous unchanged XIs were: West Indies at home against Australia in 1990-91; the South African team that beat England 4-1 in 1905-06; and England’s victorious 1884-85 Ashes tourists). In their first ten Tests this year, they used 23 different players.

Hamstrung by a hand injury, Mahela Jayawardene was forced to guts it out to make his 32nd Test century

Andrew Fidel Fernando in Dubai09-Jan-20140:00

Ramiz Raja: Neutralising Saeed Ajmal was a killer blow

When Dinesh Chandimal fell hooking in the 11th over of the day, Bilawal Bhatti practically begged Misbah-ul-Haq for the ball. In the huddle, passing through at the end of the over, standing at his position at point, Bhatti made himself hard to miss.His last three balls to Mahela Jayawardene had all been nicked or gloved behind the stumps, and now, an injured Jayawardene had arrived one position below his normal haunt. Bold, youthful Bhatti smelled blood.When Misbah acceded a few overs later, Bhatti knew exactly what he would bowl. In the first innings in Abu Dhabi, Jayawardene had nicked a short one, was recalled thanks to a no-ball, then edged behind again immediately, as Bhatti pitched one up on off stump. It was the same yorker Bhatti tried first-up here. Jayawardene jammed his bat down and the ball caught the edge once more. This time it had struck enough willow to stay low to the ground and sped away for four.Hurtling in, Pakistan’s fastest bowler felt the batsman was still a victim in waiting. He was at the body at over 140kph, but Jayawardene defused him securely at first, then when he saw one pitched up, tried to cover drive him. He mistimed the ball so badly, vibrations in his bat handle forced his sore left hand off the bat in a flash. No winces or cries of anguish, but Bhatti knew he had hurt his man.Next over, Bhatti determined, more pain should come. One at the waist first-up, but it was too far down leg and Jayawardene turned it fine with little discomfort. When Jayawardene got back on strike, Bhatti found his target. In the second innings in Abu Dhabi, one that reared off a length took the top of Jayawardene’s right glove and floated to gully. Another lifter struck the same glove here, but the impact absorbed the ball’s venom, and it fell dead, to the pitch. It wasn’t the ailing hand Bhatti would have preferred to hit, but he stomped close to Jayawardene’s grille nonetheless, to hurl a few words and stare.Mahela Jayawardene had several tough periods to overcome•AFPJayawardene may have been the one wearing stitches, but Bhatti was also hamstrung. The ball had zipped off the seam in the first two sessions of the previous day, but there was so little in it now, he sought to blast the batsman out, if he could not outdo him with movement. Bouncers whistled overhead as Jayawardene hunkered down.There were certain shots he had resolved not to play because they hurt too much, but when one of Bhatti’s missiles fired wide, Jayawardene climbed up instantly and slapped it behind point, in the air. There was little control neither in that shot, nor in several other aggressive cross-batted strokes in the day, but he chose the wide open spaces so his top hand would not be taxed by the effort.”Initially I knew that I can’t force anything,” Jayawardene said. “I had to use the pace of the Pakistani bowlers, so I wasn’t really trying to drive the ball. I was just punching gaps and rotating the strike, but anything to cut I was comfortable with using the pace, so I was waiting for those kinds of deliveries. Probably the limitations helped me because I had to change my whole game plan today according to that. Even with Saeed Ajmal I couldn’t sweep him that well, because the wrist would twist. I didn’t sweep him that much in this match.”Bhatti’s onslaught subsided as lunch approached. He would come back close to tea, bringing an even faster, fiercer short barrage with him, but as in their first skirmish, Jayawardene ducked, dived, swerved and wore him down. When the second session ended, he had struck only one boundary in front of square – a calculated slog off Saeed Ajmal into the vacant leg side.Whatever is said about the state of Jayawardene’s reflexes at 36, or about his ability to counter the moving ball, his attritional triumph over Bhatti showcased an enduring head for battle.Short on weapons today, but steeled by stress of his first-Test failures, he finished the day in a different universe of batting confidence from the one in which he had begun. In the 84th over Rahat Ali overpitched the second new ball and in his first truly elegant moment, Jayawardene pushed the ball through mid-on, clinging to the turf from bat to boundary, as only men in form can do.Perhaps many will write off his 32nd hundred as just another ton in Asian conditions, as if Jayawardene should be embarrassed about his aptitude for playing spin and winning matches at home. But in a tour that has been about young players emerging for Sri Lanka, Jayawardene’s thrill for the fight proved he remains as relevant as he has always been.

The 1-0 series win over India embellished South Africa’s strengths and reputation. The team, however, needs to find a lead spinner and adopt a forward-thinking outlook to prepare for life without Jacques Kallis

Firdose Moonda in Durban31-Dec-20130:00

Steyn and de Villiers stand out

If the South African Test team believed in omens, they may have been concerned about the one staring them in face before this India tour. Before the tour, they had been undefeated in 13 series. Fortunately, they don’t need lucky numbers to keep winning.Instead the figures worked in their favour. One is the most important number, because that’s the margin by which they sealed the series victory, but there are many others for them to take heart from as they extended their lead at the top of the Test rankings. They took their count of Test wins in this calendar year to seven with only one defeat, and gained two points in the Test rankings to widen the gap between themselves and their nearest challenger, India, to 16.That distance will come in handy because South Africa have a dearth of Test cricket in the next 12 months. February’s series against Australia is their biggest challenge, followed by matches against Zimbabwe away and West Indies at home. At least they know they are almost fully equipped for those tussles.From this India series, South Africa regained the form of the two batsmen in their batting line-up who were lacking it, reconfirmed the value and skill of their pace trio and reclaimed as their own the one ground in the country that was considered an away venue. Those gains will go some way in offsetting the questions that still exist over who their best spinner is and the loss of their greatest-ever player.Faf du Plessis and Alviro Petersen ended as South Africa’s highest and joint second-highest run-scorers of the series. Du Plessis’ century in Johannesburg illustrated the arts of patience and determination and proved that what he did in Adelaide 13 months ago was not a once-off. Importantly, it came with him batting at No.4, which will be an indication to South Africa that he is the best candidate to step into the gap Jacques Kallis has left. Du Plessis has the technique and temperament to anchor an innings so others can bat around him.Faf du Plessis’ gritty knock in Johannesburg has shown that he has the potential to fill in the No. 4 spot in the Test team•AFPPetersen went into this series with a string of sub-30 scores to his name. In nine innings before the Johannesburg Test, he had failed to cross 30 once. In his first knock at the Wanderers, he scored 21. Under pressure in the second innings, with South Africa in the red, he composed a careful 76 and shared a century stand with Graeme Smith.He followed that up with another hundred-run partnership with the captain in Durban, in which Petersen also raised his bat to a half-century. Although India’s attack did not pose the same challenges as Pakistan – the latter’s variations make them tougher – that he came through the India series unscathed will have bought him time in the team. Du Plessis and Petersen were South Africa’s main worries in their line-up before this series and for both to have proved themselves again sets them up well for 2014.Kingsmead was the other concern. Located in the heartland of the largest Indian expat area in South Africa, it has gained a reputation for favouring opposition. South Africa’s two most recent defeats there were against subcontinental opposition and, with India visiting this time, it seemed the conspiracy would continue.The pitch was not a typical home surface – on appearance and in the way it played. It was slow, sans much pace and carry, offered little for the seamers and was difficult to score freely on. Despite that, South Africa found a way. Dale Steyn helped himself to what he has called one of his best five-fors in the game and notched up his 350th wicket – in the same year he also took his 300th – giving yet another demonstration of why he is the most highly-rated bowler in the world. Vernon Philander showed he has the ability to adapt to surfaces of this nature while Morne Morkel continued to be miserly, quick and extract bounce.

More pressing will be adjusting to life without Kallis. South Africa need only look at India, who played their first series without Sachin Tendulkar, to see that it can be done but they will have to think carefully about how they’re going to go about it.

There are no problems in South Africa’s pace department, with plenty in reserve, which will set up an intriguing battle of the bowlers against Australia, but there is a worry in their spin cupboard. Neither Imran Tahir nor Robin Peterson is the answer. The former’s confidence took a knock on an unhelpful surface at the Wanderers and he returned to bad, old habits of offering full tosses. The latter ended the Durban match with four wickets but that can be considered flattering.Peterson was largely unthreatening – two of his scalps were off terrible shots, another one went to a sterling catch and the fourth was not out. Sometimes that kind of luck is what it takes to spark a run of good form, so he may have that on his side, along with his contributions with that bat, but South Africa still need to keep looking. They have Simon Harmer and Eddie Leie knocking on the door, but may not want to introduce either against Australia, although they could be called on later next year.More pressing will be adjusting to life without Kallis. South Africa need only look at India, who played their first series without Sachin Tendulkar, to see that it can be done but they will have to think carefully about how they’re going to go about it.Kallis’ worth was evident more in his last Test than it had been throughout the year. He scored a typically circumspect century to lay the platform for the win and bowled his share of overs in the first innings. The balance he adds to the team will take some re-strategising to maintain in his absence.Allrounders, especially pace-bowling ones, are hard to come by and while Ryan McLaren is one option, South Africa will have to sift through a few other ideas. Du Plessis should move to No. 4. They could then bring an extra batsman, specialist wicket-keeper or bowler in at No.7.Apart from the changes in personnel that will take place, South Africa will also need a change of mindset. As Smith said, the person who comes is not Kallis’ replacement because there is no such thing. That cricketer will simply be another player trying to fulfill a certain role.That’s the right approach – a positive, forward-thinking mindset, which South Africa were accused of lacking after the Wanderers Test. They came within eight runs of the highest successful chase in Test cricket history and chose to play for the draw because they did not want to lose. Giving up on a chance to make history was seen as too conservative and defensive.It was also seen as a fear of failure. After Durban, South Africa did not have reason to regret not going for broke in Johannesburg. Even though it will not stop people wondering whether a lingering fear of failure still exists in the South Africa change-room, surely after 14 unbeaten series, there is not much to be afraid of.

Azhar Ali suffered a dip in form in 2013 but replacing him with Mohammad Hafeez may not be a solution for Pakistan’s long-term plans

Umar Farooq in Abu Dhabi02-Jan-20140:00

‘Want to end Sri Lanka resurgence’ – Bhatti

Pakistan handed debuts to eight players in 2013, but the batting line-up between No. 3 and No. 6 remained constant, until Azhar Ali was dropped for Mohammad Hafeez in the Abu Dhabi Test. The move raised questions on Pakistan’s long-term planning that aimed to allow youngsters to settle and establish themselves in the Test team in the long run.Azhar made a debut for Pakistan in 2010 and has since been considered an automatic selection. He has brought stability to the top order, scoring 2081 runs at 38.53 and has become integral at the No 3 position in recent years. Though he experienced a dip in form in 2013 – he scored 270 runs in seven matches at an average of 19.28 with two fifties – the performances could be put down to Pakistan’s irregular Test schedule.In Abu Dhabi, Azhar was dropped in favour of Hafeez, who was also axed from the Test team in 2013 for his poor form. In five Tests, before Abu Dhabi, in 2013, Hafeez scored 102 runs at an average of 10.2. After three Tests at the start of the year against South Africa, Hafeez did not play a Test until the Zimbabwe tour in September. He was left out of the Tests against South Africa, and then came back for the match against Sri Lanka in December.Hafeez’s form in limited-overs, though, was much better, as he scored 1301 runs in 33 ODIs at 46.46 with five hundreds and four fifties in the same period. It was this form that sealed his place in the XI for Abu Dhabi, even though his form and technique in the longer format have been under the scanner for a while. On his third comeback to Test cricket, Hafeez scored 11 off 18 balls.Azhar on the other hand, prepared for the Test series with two first-class hundreds. But Hafeez’s selection means that the No. 3 spot in the Pakistan line-up is suddenly uncertain, even as the side tries to find a settled combination for the openers’ slot, which has been in transition since Saeed Anwar and Aamir Sohail retired.A rough patch is an inevitable part of a cricketer’s career. Younis Khan, Pakistan’s former No. 3, also suffered similar losses in form before settling down to become one of Pakistan’s highest run-getters. Similarly, Azhar, who averaged 45 until 2012, also needs to be supported. Among the current crop of Pakistan players, Azhar is also seen as a future captain.”Azhar brought a stability at the No.3 position,” Basit Ali, Azhar’s coach at his domestic team Sui National Gas and Pipelines Ltd, told ESPNcricinfo. “It was really an unfair call to drop him for a batsman who was meant to bat in the opening slot. It’s a very important position, you need to have someone like Azhar – who have been developed to play a role for the specialised position.”I have concerns that he was dropped from a place for which he has been an automatic option. He has become an important player in the last three years and dropping him from the XI doesn’t make sense to me. Playing Hafeez at No. 3 is temporary, but dropping Azhar at this stage might disturb him as he is a future prospect and is here to stay for long.”Before the Test, Hafeez had rued the long gaps between Tests and admitted he had a technique-related issue against swing bowling. “We always have been ruing the lack of Test cricket and the six-month gaps between series are also making it difficult for players to maintain momentum,” Hafeez said. “For me, it was a matter of not scoring runs in the format and, in fact, it’s more than a technique thing for which I have worked so hard. I went on analyzing my videos to found why I have been struggling against swing bowling.”Hafeez’s form may be peaking through the limited-overs run, but his temperament and technique in Tests have been challenged on several occasions. Age is also something he needs to factor in. Hafeez is 33, five years older than Azhar and the latter perhaps has a lot more to offer to Pakistan cricket in the long run.

Angelo Mathews’ innings may have defined the Test match but it also has potential to define his career

Andrew Fidel Fernando at Headingley23-Jun-2014When Dhammika Prasad ramped his first ball into a diving third man’s hands, Angelo Mathews hurled him a furious look. Head down, Prasad would not meet his captain’s eyes, but Mathews was too disgusted to let it lie there. He crossed to the other end and threw his bat a metre, to the ground.Mathews was made captain partly for his stoicism; his calmness, and often courage, under fire. In 17 months at the helm, he has hardly had a go at one of the many bowlers who have missed their lines, or the fielders who let balls slip through their hands and legs. Even comical ineptitude, has drawn no more than a groan from him.But he had been battling as if for his life all morning at Headingley, making his blade wider than a sea wall as waves of England attacks broke upon it, then ruthless counter-strikes when the bowlers strayed. He had watched Mahela Jayawardene nick behind, playing loose drive. He had seen Dinesh Chandimal fold neatly into England’s leg-side trap. With at least 60 runs to get before Sri Lanka’s lead would feel comfortable, Prasad’s foolish stroke just put him over the edge.Mathews was only 55 at that point, playing nicely, putting his fine form to use. But few would have expected the carnage to follow. Enraged by a team-mate, and emboldened by desire, Mathews engaged beast mode. He would hit one of the great Sri Lanka innings before he left the field; a knock so outrageous, yet so clinical, it would unlock even a further dimension to his cricket than he has already managed in a rich past six months.As England set men back on the fence to Mathews, and hoped to force a wicket at the other end, Mathews took up a sledgehammer in one hand and a scalpel in the other. Boundaries down the ground took all forms, from classical on-drives, to mows through the air, only they were all hit hard, and exactly where Mathews wished to dispatch them. The cuts past point and the glances off straight balls seemed almost effortless by comparison. When bowling full proved futile, England kept pitching it short, imagining he would lose control of his pull shot some time. Mathews never did.But his systematic hogging of the strike was even more incredible. England’s ring fielders fenced off the paddock on the off side, but Mathews would move across his stumps and work the ball to the open prairies on leg. Eventually, the bowlers would go too wide even for that, yet somehow, Mathews injected the ball between clots of England fielders and crossed when he required. Sometimes he timed the ball too well. Rarely has a batsman seemed so annoyed to watch the ball cross the rope. Of the 348 balls England would deliver while Mathews was at the crease on Monday, he would face 201.Alastair Cook may reflect he erred in failing to attack Mathews after the first hour, and in delaying Moeen Ali’s introduction, but as abysmal a day as he had, Mathews had a worse one five months ago. Mathews’ tactics defied sense on day five in Sharjah. On the other end of a sapping assault now, his thinking could not have been clearer.He knew in his soul where the fielders were for each bowler, and when they would push in, and sit back. The umpires had trouble keeping track of the number of balls in each over but, in between skipping down the track to England’s fastest bowler, putting the spinner into space, Mathews never lost count. When Rangana Herath pulled Stuart Broad behind square for four, Mathews was down the pitch to embrace his partner, long before the stadium announcer had marked their century stand.Cricket nous has not been Mathews’ strength in time gone by but, until he ran Herath out, his decision-making was nearly flawless. Most times when Sri Lanka’s strategy makes a mockery of the opposition, Jayawardene is involved, but he was instead in the pavilion, breathing it in.”The message to our boys was that we just take whatever singles on offer,” Jayawardene said. “Angelo batted really well in that situation, safeguarding the tail and taking the opportunity to go for those big shots when the field was in. It was the right way for Angie to go. He didn’t have to take too many risks when the field was back, but whenever he needed to take a risk, he did. In that context, that showed that they were on the back foot and we just needed to drive that advantage we had forward. It was one of the best knocks I’ve seen.”Herath’s hand in Sri Lanka’s resurgence cannot be forgotten too. Before this innings, the team had urged the tailenders to show grit, and if the courage in his bowling is anything to go by, it is no surprise Herath responded most emphatically to that request. If he helps seal a victory on day five, Sri Lanka will cap off an extraordinary five months, in which they will have won every trophy they played for.Mathews’ innings may well have defined the Test match, but it also has potential to define his career. Only a handful of Sri Lanka batsmen have ever managed the kind of mastery he showcased. The challenge to him, and his team, is to never settle for just being very good.

Australia’s early exit from the World T20 could be put down to sloppy cricket on the field from a squad that looked old, unbalanced and ill-suited to the challenges of Bangladesh

Daniel Brettig31-Mar-2014It would be logical, and also convenient, to conclude that Australia’s dire World Twenty20 campaign was simply a tournament too far. For a team, a management and a selection panel elated but exhausted by earlier achievements in a long summer, the trip to Bangladesh served mainly to delay a deserved homecoming for the likes of David Warner, Brad Haddin, Shane Watson and Darren Lehmann after their exploits against England and South Africa.But it would also be too easy an out to settle on the explanation of physical and mental fatigue. Plainly, this was Australia’s poorest showing at an ICC event in years, maintaining the side’s longtime weakness in the shortest of the formats and exhuming some former scars inflicted by spin bowlers on subcontinental pitches. Like the 2010-11 Ashes that hurried along the Argus review, these were defeats to be deplored for how and why they occurred, and the source of some introspection about how Australia continue to struggle in T20.A campaign in which the team were eliminated before their final pool match began is an even worse result than that of the 2013 Champions Trophy, the event that ended Mickey Arthur’s tenure as coach following Warner’s misbehaviour off the field and the timid performance of the team on it. There is no question of the Ashes architect Lehmann paying similarly this time around, but he and others would do well to learn from the sharp lessons of three defeats.First among them is that confidence, hubris and brio can help Australia’s players express themselves and perform at their best, but only when allied to a strong sense of hard work and a fastidiousness of preparation. Sloppy was not a word commonly heard when discussing the Test or ODI teams during the summer, but it was on the lips of Lehmann, the captain George Bailey and the national selector John Inverarity following each reverse in Dhaka. As Inverarity surmised:”Our feelings are of disappointment. We were confident we had arrived at a very good squad, and I do recall it was very well received in the press. Also leading into the T20 World Cup in Bangladesh a number of well-informed pundits had Australia highly fancied. In those first two games against Pakistan and West Indies, we thought we could have won those two games, but there was some sloppiness in all three departments of the game, and we missed out on those two. The performance last night was poor. We’re disappointed.”The sloppiness went beyond Australia’s performances while batting, bowling and fielding also. James Faulkner’s overly belligerent choice of words about West Indies in the lead-up to that match, that would ultimately eliminate Bailey’s team, was a reflection not only of overconfidence but also the inability to read how times and circumstances had changed.Shooting from the lip was a part of Australia’s Test match success, and has been a significant factor in Faulkner’s own success, but in Bangladesh it suggested a team less concerned with performing than settling scores. West Indies celebrated wildly in response, but took due care to ensure they only did so after the match had been secured. The lazy presumption of victory is often followed by the forfeiting of it.Australia’s selectors can also look back on the team they chose with some degree of regret, having pulled together a squad that appeared strong but ended up looking old, unbalanced and ill-suited to the challenges of the local conditions. This was most evident in the way the team fielded, quite visibly short of the Olympic standards set in Australia and South Africa, and noticeably missing the skills of numerous talented operators.Partly this was due to time and tide. The national team’s best fielders include the captain and T20 retiree Michael Clarke, the Test-matches-only paceman Ryan Harris, and the unavailable Mitchell Johnson. But others were available yet not called upon – Steven Smith would undoubtedly have excelled in Bangladesh much as he did in the Sheffield Shield final, while the athletic Nathan Coulter-Nile languished behind the decidedly less manoeuvrable Doug Bollinger.The selection of Doug Bollinger, a like-for-like replacement for Mitchell Johnson, did not work•AFP”It’s true that we haven’t fielded well there,” Inverarity said. “A number of our better fielders didn’t have their best nights in the field either of those who were in the squad. I was talking to [selector on duty] Rod Marsh on the phone in Bangladesh two or three days ago, and he said he’d watched the fielding sessions and they were absolutely brilliant. But in the games we weren’t up to our usual standard. Fact.”The deficiencies of Australia’s batting were notable, whether it was in a dunderheaded and one-dimensional attempt to slog to victory over Pakistan from a position of strength, or in an unconditional surrender to India’s spinners in an ultimately meaningless pool fixture on Sunday night. Fatigue can be partly blamed for this, but it will be disconcerting for their IPL owners to have seen Watson and Warner fail so completely to be influential. The sight of Watson standing his ground after being bowled rather summed up the gap between Australian batting’s perception and reality. At least Watson was able to offer a frank assessment in the aftermath.”It’s not the first time the majority of us have played a lot of cricket back-to-back, it’s no excuse whatsoever,” Watson said. “It’s integral to be able to get off to a great start in this tournament or you’re out [early] like we were. It’s absolutely no excuse whatsoever. I know everyone coming here was extremely excited about being involved in this team. We’ve got a lot of match-winners in our team with bat and ball but we just haven’t been able to put it together unfortunately.”As for the bowlers, the tendency to concede runs in clumps was a recurring one, shredding the confidence of Mitchell Starc and leaving plenty to wonder how much Australia do now rely on Johnson. The attempt to replace him “like for like” with Bollinger as another left-arm paceman did not succeed, while Brad Hogg’s inclusion must also be judged a failure. The introduction of James Muirhead was a worthier gamble, but Bailey’s 2012 contention that Australia will have to think about encouraging a generation of doosra bowlers for subcontinental duty has only grown in relevance.For now, the Australians must dress their wounds, finish their tournament neatly and return home for a rest. By the time they next face up to a major challenge – Pakistan in Dubai – it will be beyond any doubt that any staleness from the drawn out exertions of 2013-14 has passed. That tour, with its fixtures covering all three formats, will provide a decent gauge of whether the blind-spots evident in Bangladesh have simply emerged through overwork. If not, they will remain as major obstacles for a team hopeful of rising to far loftier heights than those of two forgettable weeks in Dhaka.

Plays of the day from the third ODI between England and India at Trent Bridge

Sidharth Monga at Trent Bridge30-Aug-2014The déjà vu
Ishant, Rohit, and Mohit have all not had too much luck on the injury front•AFPThe previous international match at Trent Bridge produced an excruciating draw on a slow and low pitch where edges hardly carried to the slip cordon. Those who had been through that were hoping for better when they walked to the ODI. They were to be let down in as early as the fourth over. Mohit Sharma, who bowled a good channel until then, pitched one around off, got it to seam away, drew a healthy outside edge, but it did not carry to the diving Suresh Raina at second slip. A sigh suggesting “here we go again” went around the ground.The tease
Alastair Cook played an odd innings by all account. He survived leading edges, outside edges, inside edges, and in between played some authoritative pulls. At one point, his educated edges just played around with MS Dhoni. By the seventh over, discouraged by the lack of bounce, Dhoni had taken out the second slip and sent him to fine gully. Cook expertly opened the face, it seemed, and edged Bhuvneshwar Kumar through that gap between first slip and gully. It is open to debate if the edge would have carried. In Bhuvneshwar’s next over, when Dhoni brought the gully back to second slip, Cook got a stronger, healthier edge which flew through where that gully would have been. Dhoni could only smile.The curse
If you are a Sharma, you must get injured in England. After fashioning the Lord’s Test win, Ishant Sharma sat out two Tests with a leg injury that the Indian management never specified the nature of. After Rohit Sharma finally got a half-century on the tour, in the Cardiff ODI, he broke his middle finger while fielding in the same game. Three days later, after finishing his third over, Mohit Sharma called the physio, had his calf tended to by the side of the field, and hobbled off after treatment that lasted two overs. He took a pill, had a crepe bandage put on, and went back to the dressing room with his right boot in his hand. Fourteen overs later, though, he was back on the field.The dozy moment
When the Indian spinners applied the choke hold on the England middle order, Ian Bell was the only batsman who looked comfortable. The same cannot be said about his running, though. In the 34th over, with the Powerplay just around the corner, Jos Buttler hit Suresh Raina wide of long-off, and the non-striker Bell called for the second, which looked easy enough. Bell went too easy, veered away from the straight line and almost strolled through, only to find to his horror that Mohit’s throw hit the stumps direct and found him well short. Raina’s reaction was priceless. It looked like he did not entertain any possibility of a run-out, and almost had his back to the action. He suddenly saw that Bell was short and started to celebrate. If Raina did this on purpose, just to lull Bell into thinking this was an easy second, it was sheer genius. It did not look like it, though.

The blow-hot-blow-cold performances by Sri Lanka’s young batsmen must be frustrating the selectors who had invested in them. And Chandimal, worryingly, has yet to sort out his short-ball weakness

Andrew Fidel Fernando in Galle18-Jul-20144:25

Arnold: SL batsmen didn’t maintain discipline

The team needs Lahiru Thirimanne to fight through his awkward adolescent phase and become a consistent wellspring of good scores•AFPShould give ourselves no more than 350 to chase – Tharanga

Upul Tharanga was still positive about his side’s chances in Galle, despite his side being 172 runs behind South Africa, with nine first-innings wickets used up.
“We need to give ourselves no more than 350 to chase in the fourth innings, because we know in Galle that it turns a lot on days four and five. There wasn’t extravagant turn when I was batting – it was mainly out of the rough. But in the last hour, Imran Tahir got the ball to turn a bit more, I thought. We need to bowl really well in the second innings.”
Tharanga made 83 in the first innings in his first Test for Sri Lanka since 2007, but had missed out on a second Test century by walking past a JP Duminy delivery, which had him stumped.
“It was very tough to stage a comeback after seven years. But I felt good from the moment I went out to bat last night. Last evening we were up against it, because they used everything they had, knowing there were only 12 overs left to play.
“But I was disappointed with the way I got out today, because I was batting well, and there wasn’t too much turn.”

When Sri Lanka chose to heavily invest in youth in 2013, they might not have expected for it to become an exercise in parenting. But 18 months down that road, seniors in the team, coaches and selectors, may still be giving lectures, having heart-to-heart talks, and setting down firm boundaries. When it comes to Dinesh Chandimal and Lahiru Thirimanne, they must be close to collectively banging their heads against a brick wall, in frustration.To lump Chandimal and Thirimanne together is expedient, but perhaps a little glib. Chandimal is bubbly and excitable, never lacking for effort or good intent, but at times thoughtless and immature. Take his dismissal on Friday. He was facing the best bowler on the planet, in the midst of a ferocious spell of reverse swing. No one wants to walk in and take guard against a Dale Steyn with hellfire in his eyes, facial veins bulging so big, you could read his pulse from space. But as a No.7, Chandimal’s job is to protect the tail, and support the man at the other end, no matter what is being rained down upon him.As a right-hander, he also had a slight advantage against Steyn, who was largely swinging it in. He dug out six curling yorkers dutifully – even admirably – although he had driven at a full delivery second ball and edged it past the slips. Then the bouncer came. Everyone had expected it.Since Junaid Khan had him caught hooking compulsively twice in the UAE, Chandimal has been tested with the short ball at each subsequent series. As soon as he arrived at the crease in his most recent international innings at Headingley, two men were deployed in the deep, square on the legside, and the bowlers began to pitch it short. With Sri Lanka only 169 runs ahead in the second innings, five wickets down, and a tail known to be comically inept to come, Chandimal folded neatly into England’s leg trap, top-edging Liam Plunkett to deep square leg.Over the past six months his coaches will have hurled hundreds of bouncers at him in the nets. Senior team-mates might have had a word : “Less is more, sometimes Chandi. You can play the hook, but maybe get yourself in first.” But like a teenager whose parents trust with the car, only to have him repeatedly drive it into the lake, Chandimal has hooked on instinct and came back sodden and apologetic.Given the thorough analysis of opposition players that now abounds in the sport, Chandimal must know that the South Africa attack was completely aware of this common mode of dismissal. He may as well have arrived at the crease with a banner above his head reading “Bounce Me”. He has also played enough cricket to know that balls at the throat often follow a series of yorkers. Apart from outswing, outswing, outswing, in, this is the oldest trick in the fast bowlers’ manual.But 11th ball, Steyn pitches it short and Chandimal rocks back to play a full-blooded hook, with no thought to keeping the stroke down. He mistimes it to short midwicket. In the 74th over, on a dry Galle surface, with your side in trouble, it is no time to be getting out playing the hook, even against Steyn. This was not so much driving into the lake, than staying strapped to your seat while someone puts a garden hose through the window and fills the car with water.That he has a yearning to learn, and a terrific attitude towards his cricket is a valid defense, because he has played vital innings for the team in the past. But there are still missing components from his game. All that talent, energy and enthusiasm could be married to better sense.In contrast to Chandimal, Lahiru Thirimanne is even-tempered, reflective and reserved. Those qualities have served him well in patches of his career, but now, the team needs him to fight through his awkward adolescent phase and become a consistent wellspring of good scores. When Mahela Jayawardene leaves the Test side, Thirimanne is the frontrunner to replace him at No.4. Steyn was beastly in his post-tea burst, but when an opponent is in the middle of a searing streak, perhaps the expansive cover drives can be temporarily shelved.It is difficult not to feel sympathy for Chandimal and Thirimanne, and easy to make huge allowances for the vastness of their challenge; that of bridging the chasm between Sri Lanka’s domestic competitions and international cricket. It is also too early to let them go. Almost every Sri Lanka batsman is a slow starter at this level. But like couples who look enviously at the neighbour’s kids, Sri Lanka’s selectors must be, by now, casting an eye at the likes of Cheteshwar Pujara or Quinton de Kock, and wondering what they can do to change things at home. “These are the kids we have,” they might conclude. “We just have to stick by them and hope for the best.”Sri Lanka now fight to save a Test in which they are usually chasing victory, by this stage. That they avoided the follow-on is thanks largely to Angelo Mathews, who has scored runs enough for himself, and the vice-captain, whoever he is on that given tour. He will hope the young men in his batting order make better choices in the second dig.

Plays of the day from the third ODI between New Zealand and South Africa in Hamilton

George Binoy27-Oct-2014The comeback
Matt Henry had made his ODI debut during the home series against India in January, when he took 4 for 38, but then spent nine months on the sidelines of the New Zealand team, until today. The comeback, however, did not start as smoothly as the debut. Henry’s first ball was a half volley on leg stump that Quinton de Kock flicked for four. His second was on the pads as well, and de Kock drove wide of mid-on for another boundary. Henry’s day could only improve, and it did.The Steyn impersonation
Hashim Amla would have played the delivery so many times in the nets. The ball angled into him, pitched on a perfect length around middle stump, and seamed sharply away from the right-hander. It is Dale Steyn’s stock ball, but Tim Southee can also bowl it, though at a marginally slower pace. After being squared up in his crease and beaten, Amla smiled and nodded, having had a taste of what Steyn dishes out to his opponents. The next ball cut in sharply, something Steyn does not do that often, and Amla was hurried and hit on the thigh.McClenaghan v Miller
Mitchell McClenaghan bowled a full delivery to David Miller, searching for movement. The ball swung on to the middle of Miller’s perfectly straight drive and raced past the bowler to the long-off boundary. Three balls later, McClenaghan tested the batsman with a bouncer; Miller met it on the front foot and unleashed a withering pull to the deep midwicket fence. Round three – the next ball – went to the bowler, though. McClenaghan hit a probing length around off stump and seamed the ball into the left-hander, threading the narrow gap between the inside edge and off stump.A batsman’s umpire?
In the first ODI of the series, when Chris Gaffaney called Ryan McLaren’s bouncer to Kyle Mills a wide for height, the bowler turned to the umpire and quipped that he must have been a batsman in his day. Today, when McClenaghan bounced back from a no-ball for knocking over the bails in his delivery stride with an outswinger to Miller, he was dismayed to see Gaffaney call it a wide. The ball was inside the guideline for wides outside off stump, and McLaren’s words rang a little truer.The bouncer barrage
AB de Villiers does not usually want for time to play his shots, but Southee hurried him with two successive bouncers. The first one skidded and bounced from just short of a length and de Villiers was late on the pull. The ball took the top edge and flew over the wicketkeeper for a once-bounce four. He seemed to have lesser time to play the second and wore it on the helmet after missing another pull. De Villiers took a moment to realise the ball had gone to fine leg. Perhaps the constant drizzle had greased the pitch for Southee, and the umpires took the players off soon after.

Stats highlights from the third ODI between Sri Lanka and England in Hambantota

Bishen Jeswant03-Dec-2014474 Number of ODI dismissals made by Kumar Sangakkara, a record. Prior to this game, Sangakkara and Adam Gilchrist were tied on 472 dismissals each.6 Number of ducks registed by Kusal Perera, the most by an ODI opener since 2012. Five of those ducks have come in 2014. The record for the most ducks in a calendar year is eight, by Herschelle Gibbs in 2002.4 Number of batsmen to have collected 13,000 ODI runs. Sangakkara went past this mark when he was batting on 13 during his innings of 63. The other batsmen to have gone past this mark are Sachin Tendulkar (18,426), Ricky Ponting (13,704) and Sanath Jayasuriya (13,430).100 Number of ODIs that Sri Lanka played between Thilina Kandamby’s last ODI appearance, in July 2011, and this game.1 There has been only one previous occasion where two of Sri Lanka’s top-four batsmen have gotten out for ducks against England – at Trent Bridge in 2011. Perera and Kandamby were out for ducks during Sri Lanka’s innings in this ODI.7 England’s run rate during their chase. Excluding reduced ODIs of less than 30 overs, this is the third time that England have scored at seven runs per over in successful chases where the required rate has been six or more. The previous instances were against Sri Lanka (2002) and India (2011).5 Number of sixes that Moeen Ali hit during his innings of 58 off 40 balls, the joint-most by an England opener. Ali himself hit five sixes in the first ODI of this series, and so did Andrew Strauss against Bangladesh in 2010.