He may lack the appeal but he has the numbers. Is it so sacrilegious to wonder if he’s greater even than Sir Garry?

Rob Steen27-Feb-2009

Being Jacques Kallis can’t be bad. Only the saintly would not envy his skill, his versatility, his discipline, his focus, his bank account. Many of us simply wish we shared that ability to run for five consecutive minutes without falling over, seizing up or throwing up. However, among those for whom the game is about the revelling rather than the living, who value style as much as – if not more than – substance, being Jacques Kallis also means personifying achievement at its driest, most colourless, most soulless. Or so runs accepted wisdom.It was Derrida, the philosopher Jacques, who made the following observation, one that should have the cricketing Jacques nodding his head in sombre, knowing assent: “No one gets angry at a mathematician or a physicist whom he or she doesn’t understand, or at someone who speaks a foreign language, but rather at someone who tampers with your own language.” Kallis’ most grievous sin has been to tamper with his own language, the language of sport, and in particular its definition of a hero.Until the past year, his 13th in senior South African colours, he had been the hero as a non-perspiring non-inspiration. As recently as last July, the main collective goals at the start of his career – a first Test series win in Australia, a first in England since isolation, a World Cup final, membership of the planet’s finest five-day XI – all remained stubbornly present and robustly correct. Moreover, there had always been a hint of selfishness, embodied by the resistance to changes of gear, especially in ODIs, a refusal to adapt that immaculately grooved, almost robotic, technique from the lure of statistical posterity to the needs of the we and the now. Hell, he hadn’t even hit a double-century. Even Jason Gillespie had managed that.Yet in terms of the barest essentials (net average, i.e. batting average minus bowling average), his Test figures as an allrounder were even better than Garry Sobers’. Which made him, by popular definition, if not recognition, the greatest professional cricketer there has ever been. And that was the greatest heresy of all. How could the Great Garfield possibly be trumped by a character so… characterless? More to the point, how could anyone tamper so fearlessly with received wisdom?Then came 2008, an annus mirabilis that saw South Africa achieve three of those four elusive goals, a burst of fulfilment to which, improbably, Kallis the bowler contributed more than Kallis the batsman. Hashim Amla and AB de Villiers had come of age, Dale Steyn was leading a pacy brat pack: now Kallis was wanted rather than needed. The king was now a knight.That he remained a batsman to reckon with, nonetheless, was emphasised in Perth, where he played a critical if largely unsung role in South Africa’s massive chase. Taking guard at 172 for 2, following Graeme Smith’s departure for 108, he saw Amla depart three overs later. True, he’d made a steadying, invaluable 63 in the first dig, only his fifth 50-plus score in Australia, but was that kangaroo hoodoo, the one that had haunted and circumscribed his entire career, preventing it from being given its due, about to reassert itself? Not now. Not this time. Certainly not against this attack. By the time he was next to go, for 57, a historic victory was barely 100 away.

The only other time he had reached 50 in each innings against chaps in baggy green caps, at the SCG in January 2006, South Africa had been walloped by eight wickets. Here was sweet revenge. Here too, at last, was self-affirmation, a counter-punch to those who pigeonholed him – whenever the going got roughest – as brittle, a bottler. How apt that today’s imperishable first should also have been at the expense of the opponents who have done most to keep him mortal.IF EVER A SPORTING CAREER has been defined by substance rather than style, Kallis’ has. The first man to emulate Don Bradman’s streak of hundreds in five successive Tests (and he came within 15 runs of doing it again), no international cricketer has ever attained such a consistent level of productivity with bat and ball, let alone across two such contrasting disciplines as one- and five-day cricket, let alone while remaining so resolutely unhuggable and, yes, anonymous.Great batsmanship is measured not by the weight of runs but by the indelibility of the impression those numbers leave, the instant internal replays they ignite, numbers inextricably linked to their author’s name. Bradman and Sobers both had their 254, but otherwise the links are clear. Bradman also had his 309, his 334 and his 452; Sobers his 365 not out; Tendulkar now has his 103 not out as well as his 136; Lara owns patents on 153 not out, 277, 400 not out and 501 not out. But what of Kallis? You might make a case for 2007’s masterly double of 155 and 100 not out in Karachi. Or the couple of six-hour hundreds against Australia in 2006, a precociously stoical maiden ton in Melbourne, and another exemplary lone hand in Kolkata in 2004. That only the Karachi effort resulted in victory, is only part of the problem; as worthy as those feats were, none of those numbers conjure up the name “Kallis”.What do we know about him? Not much. He’s very pally with the gregarious Mark Boucher, but private and unassuming is both the public image and party line. Maybe that’s why you can’t find an autobiography out there in Amazonland? Has any modern sporting colossus ever reached the latter stages of his career without such a dubious distinction?His website (www.kallis.co.za, note, not jacquesthelad.com or even jacqueskallis.com) informs us that he runs the Jacques Kallis Scholarship Foundation, whose stated aim is “to provide talented young cricketers from various backgrounds with the opportunity to reach their full sporting and academic potential”. It also reveals that he adores chicken pasta and Jack Daniel’s, is partial to driving Opels and on fairways, wears Armani and Adidas, denies reading newspapers, and admires Lance Armstrong (albeit probably not quite as much as he does the actress Neve Campbell).His perfect dinner guests? That would be Nelson Mandela, Bill Clinton, Ms Campbell and another fetching thespian, Denise Richards. Considerably more revealing is his “most valuable contribution to a team cause”, namely the match-saving century at the MCG in 1997, his very first Test ton. Even now. And then there are the “Morals that I live by”, namely “Control, Focus, Implement and Honesty”. Of which only the last can be considered a moral. But maybe he has the balance just right. Save yourself for the crease then walk away, as far and fast as you can.So let’s forget philosophies and aesthetics and artistic impressions. Let’s do it his way, the Kallis Way. Let’s crunch all those numbers and boil them all down to one definitive, inarguable stat, devoid of ifs, buts or context.Try this for starters. Of the other 46 batsmen who, up to January’s end, had amassed 10,000 runs in internationals, none could match his average of 49.11. Not Brian, not Ricky, not Viv. And no, not even Sachin. Never mind that Kallis averages 45% less in defeat in Tests than he does in victory (34.10 to 62.46): that’s only a shade worse than Tendulkar, and Bradman himself swooned by 67%. And don’t bother either, please, with all that rot about making such hay at the kindly expense of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe: they’ve only conceded four of his 46 hundreds.Now try this one. No bowler who has laboured through 4000 overs in internationals, nor taken as many as 450 wickets, has also racked up 10,000 runs, much less 20,000. And if you’re still not convinced, you’re probably the type who insists there’s no difference between LPs and CDs.

AND SO TO THAT KNOTTY SOBERS PROBLEM. That there is one at all may strike most as preposterous. There’s only one Garfield St Aubyn Sobers, right? Kallis shouldn’t be mentioned in the same breath, right? Nobody should. Kallis doesn’t bowl orthodox spin at Test level, much less chinamen, right? (True, he did put in two overs worth of leggies against New Zealand in 1999, on a glued pitch at Eden Park, but then, as Neil Manthorp reported, this did include “one delivery that bounced twice before reaching the batsman and another that bounced onto the upper tier of the main grandstand”.)Cheese and chalk, right? Black adventurer blessed with impossibly supple wrists versus white pragmatist with biceps on his insteps – no contest, right? Yet by any objective measure of achievement, this pair, as allrounders, as masters of all the essential cricketing crafts bar minding stumps, stand shoulder to shoulder on the sport’s Mount Olympus. In fact, they have done for quite some time, much as we might like to pretend otherwise.Quite simply, in terms of measurable achievement, the only two men to collect 6000 runs and 200 wickets in Tests, in the categories wherein they can be appropriately and gainfully compared, are too close to separate (Sobers, remember, played in but a single ODI). Indeed, their similarities and mutualities are far more numerous than a superficial pigeonholing might stipulate.Both took time to adjust from teenage over-achievement (both, eerily, reached 50 twice in their first 18 Test innings), failed to convince as leaders or strategists, reigned long as their team’s go-to batsman, then suffered gnawing declines (over his final 28 Tests, Sobers’ batting average drifted from 63.77 to 57.78; in his last 18 prior to proceedings in Johannesburg, Kallis’ had ebbed from 58.20 to 54.57, and he’d gone 16 innings since his last century, his worst trot since 2002). Both, furthermore, kept their bowling average pretty much constant, with Kallis’ 2.91 runs better (31.12 to 34.03). The net difference? Precisely 0.32 of a run, in Sobers’ favour. You’d have trouble getting a wafer-thin mint into that gap.On a broader level, moreover, both failed to meet the needs of the collective quite as regularly as they might. As Manthorp mused: “Just as South African fans long to see a more ruthless Kallis with a deadlier, match-winning instinct, there were times (though not as many) when West Indian fans would have enjoyed a shade more solid, dependable reliability.”So, who the more rounded allrounder? Let’s dig deeper. Let’s examine match- and series-winning capabilities. Both have combined a century and a five-for twice (Ian Botham, the leader in this category, did so five times). Sobers plundered 250 runs and 20 wickets in a series three times (equal top with Botham) to Kallis’ one, but then five-Test rubbers, a decided scarcity now, were the norm in the sixties and common in the eighties: Sobers played in 16, Botham 13, plus four that ran to six chapters; with next winter’s encounter with England now trimmed to four, Kallis may well not add to his seven.No universally accepted means of ranking allrounders has ever been nailed down, a curious void for a game so in thrall to statistical convention. Net average still seems the most valid and easily comprehensible method, and on that score, Sobers (23.75 to Kallis’ 23.45 at the outset of this match) gets the nod by a nose hair; six months ago, though, Kallis had a near-10% lead. On the other hand, if we alter the parameters to suit the times, the contrast is starker. Why not subtract bowling from batting average and call it Productivity Rate? Too many minuses. Even so, those numbers do say something. While none of the 51 men to have completed the 1000 runs-100 wickets double in Tests boasts a negative difference of under 20, Kallis (less than -12 to Imran Khan’s -16-and-a-bit) is much the closest to parity.On balance, net average remains the least contentious formula, and Kallis may yet have the final word. Whatever else, it is certainly a measure of his and Sobers’s overwhelming superiority as a duopoly that only 12 of the other 49 players who have gathered 1000 runs and 100 wickets have recorded positive net averages, among whom Imran (14.88) and Keith Miller (14) are alone in attaining double figures. That top four about right, too.

But distinguish we must, and the chief non-aesthetic, non-spiritual difference between Sobers and Kallis is that the latter’s load has been far heavier. Sobers averaged just over four-and-a-half Tests per year, Kallis almost 10. He also averages more than 20 ODIs per annum. Throw in the greater proliferation of tours, the interminable air miles and those constant flits between time-cricket and overs-cricket, and between daylight and floodlight, and it does not seem unreasonable to propose that, even though you might as well compare Dylan and McCartney, Kallis’ consistency has been even more admirable.THE NEXT TARGET is an eyelid away – two more wickets and he will be the first to couple 20,000 runs and 500 wickets in internationals. And now, helpfully, another gauntlet is lying at his feet. Fresh challenges don’t come too thickly for those in the closing furlongs of a sporting career, but Kallis has a couple of unfamiliar battles on his hands. One is to persuade the selectors that his right to Test selection remains automatic and divine; that they cannot live without him. Even more helpfully, being overlooked for Twenty20 duty irks far more than you might imagine. If he can somehow muster the wherewithal to meet those challenges, who knows what he might yet be capable of?Some, though, will still cling, come what may, to the view that, no matter how staggering the stats, they could never be enough for him to make the leap from admiree to affectionee. Ever.Jimmy Connors is the only practitioner of the competitive arts I can think of who pulled off that particular stroke of sorcery, and that was only because tennis crowds forgave his brattish, strutting arrogance as he faded, warming to the fallibility and the humanity rather than the invincibility. He may not have been much cop, but at least he kept turning up, kept grunting, kept trying. Even as canny a manipulator as Steve Waugh failed to make that leap. Yes, he possessed both the sense to quit while he was ahead and the steeliness to ensure he went out with a bang, but in so doing he denied himself the opportunity for redemption reserved solely for the visibly vulnerable. Outside Australia, he remains a subject of awe, not amour.Yet Kallis, because he’s still only 33, has a chance. As with Connors, this is partly because we have grown accustomed to his failures, have finally glimpsed the vulnerability, the humanity. But also because, like Connors, the only thing he has left to prove is that he is worthy of his audience’s affections, that he can touch hearts.Now Kallis is no longer the first name on the teamsheet, nor even the first batsman, will he – can he – finally shed those chains of responsibility? Can he give us, not the real Jacques (one suspects we know that one only too well), but a spanking new one? One freed and willing, at last, to let hair and guard down. One to whom surviving comes second, however marginally, to living. And, who knows, perhaps even revelling. Encouragingly, he has one more art to master, namely the game’s newest form. It could yet do the trick.

Stats highlights from the fourth Test between West Indies and England, which ended in a dull draw in Barbados

S Rajesh03-Mar-2009
Alastair Cook finally got a century after 15 Tests, but there was little in the contest by then © Getty Images
On a pitch which had little in it for the bowlers, 1628 runs were scored for the loss of 17 wickets, an average of 95.76 runs per wicket. It’s the second-highest in all Tests in the West Indies, next only to a Test between West Indies and New Zealand in Guyana in 1972, which averaged 99.40 per wicket. It’s also the fifth-highest among all Tests played anywhere; the highest average is 136.12, when India played Pakistan in Lahore in 2006. The top ten contains two matches which happened over the last ten days: the Pakistan-Sri Lanka game in Karachi, which averaged 86.27, is at eighth slot. This was easily the most batsman-dominated Test in Barbados – the previous highest runs per wicket here was 68.33, way back in 1965. The result is all the more discouraging as Barbados used to be the one venue in the West Indies which consistently prepared result-oriented pitches: 24 of the last 28 Tests here have produced a decisive result. Alastair Cook’s unbeaten 139 was the fifth hundred of the Test, which equals the record for a match between these two teams. It’s also the fifth time five centuries have been scored in a Test between West Indies and England – three of these matches have been in the last five years. Cook’s knock is his first century in more than a year – before this game he had gone 15 Tests without a century, though he’d scored ten fifties during this period. Daren Powell bowled a couple of good spells, but ended the game with match figures of 1 for 142 from 36 overs. It continued a barren run for him, which has lasted more than a year: since 2008, he has taken just 24 wickets in 13 Tests, at an average of 60.04, and a strike rate of 102 deliveries per wicket. During this period, Jerome Taylor and Fidel Edwards have been far more successful.

Sri Lanka are getting used to life without their legends and under a new captain; Pakistan are getting used to Test cricket again. An audio-visual look at the just-concluded Test series in Sri Lanka

27-Jul-2009

Chris Gayle has said that he wasn’t looking to remain the West Indies captain for a long period of time and would be “giving it up shortly” because of the pressure the job entailed

Andrew McGlashan at Chester-le-Street13-May-2009Although ticket sales for the opening day of the second Test have improved since yesterday’s figure of 3000, Chester-le-Street won’t be bursting at the seams when the action starts on Thursday. The punters are clearly beginning to pick and choose which matches they attend and, if Chris Gayle’s comments are anything to go by, some players will soon be following a similar path.His interview with a UK national newspaper has set another warning light flashing about the future and primacy of Test cricket. Although he attempted to downgrade his view that he “wouldn’t be so sad” if Tests vanished in favour of Twenty20s, by saying his comments were meant from his personal point of view, it is another damaging blow for a sport that is battling to maintain a relevance.The fact that Gayle has had to leave his IPL deal to play in cold, early-season English conditions, in a Test series shoe-horned into the calender, has clearly not gone down well, despite his latest effort to convince otherwise. “I’m happy to be here right now to try and retain the trophy,” a rather weary-looking Gayle said as he responded to his comments.He claimed the interview in The Guardian had been “misquoted and misinterpreted” which is the usual response from a sportsman who wants to back himself out of a corner. However, he didn’t try to alter his comments, rather just clarify that he was talking about himself and not Test cricket as a whole.”I don’t see myself playing Tests for any long period of time, but I think Test cricket will always be there. Twenty20 has come on board and it’s made a huge impact on the world, it’s brilliant, games have been sold out and it has taken the place by storm. I look at Test cricket differently, I don’t see it as long term for me, just for me, I’m just speaking about myself.”What should come as a concern for those running the game and trying to cram in endless international fixtures to justify television deals is Gayle’s reasoning. “There’s a lot of cricket being played and I’ve started to develop a lot of injuries,” he said. “It takes a toll on your body and your mental strength so at some stage you aren’t going to go on forever. You have to choose what you are going to do as a person.”It’s something I’ve discussed before, maybe not in the media, but I’ve talked to friends and players about it. It’s not like I’ve just thought about it overnight.”However, as one of nine current Test captains in the world game, Gayle needs to remember that his role goes beyond the personal. It shouldn’t just be about the here and now for him, but also the bigger picture. Not everyone is going to make it as a millionaire Twenty20 star and Gayle, as one of the most flamboyant batsman of his generation, should be able to play a role in promoting the five-day game.Andrew Strauss is one such player who is likely to miss the Twenty20 revolution and made comments before the Lord’s Test that he wouldn’t allow an England player to arrive 48 hours before a match. Gayle hit back in the newspaper interview, but tried to ease any potential tensions by saying no disrespect was meant.

“There’s a lot of cricket being played and I’ve started to develop a lot of injuries. It takes a toll on your body and your mental strength so at some stage you aren’t going to go on forever. You have to choose what you are going to do as a person.”Chris Gayle ponders his Test future

“It wasn’t his concern,” Gayle said. “I respect Strauss, I would never have any conflict with him. I just find it a bit strange that he touched on that sort of point and he should leave it alone. “Maybe he’s under a lot of pressure. The Ashes series is huge.”Maybe he tried to put the pressure on me to try to take a bit of pressure off him. I have respect for Strauss it’s not like I’m trying to degrade him, I would never do that. Sometimes you just have to stand up for your rights.”Strauss maintained there were no tensions and suggested that any problems the West Indies captain had were not his problem, but admitted he had concerns about the health of Test cricket. “We haven’t been sitting in the bar telling tales of our lives but our relationship has been pretty good. I’ve had no problems with him up until now. If he is uncomfortable with what’s gone on in the last couple of weeks that’s an issue for him rather than myself.”It [Test cricket] is under pressure,” he added. “I think it is important we play good Test cricket to make people aware of what a good format it is and how entertaining it can be. It’s the only game that really tests out your temperament, your technique, your hunger, your bravery, all those aspects of the game.”That seems an opportune moment to bring this back to the actual game; a Test match, the ultimate format. West Indies’ game fell away so rapidly at Lord’s that it was difficult to recognise the team that fought so hard in the Caribbean. Now with Gayle’s comments ringing in their ears it’s hardly the motivational stand they needed from their captain. “The guys know the situation. It won’t affect us, we are all big men,” he said.Strauss, however, was hoping the furore will take Gayle’s mind off the serious matter in hand. “He is always dangerous. He always plays the same way, hopefully he’ll be slightly distracted tomorrow.”Gayle clearly won’t be playing Test cricket much longer, although he laughed off the idea that this would be his final game. He said he still had a job to do in rebuilding this West Indies side and now would be a good time to show he really means it. At the moment Gayle’s opinions appear the minority view, but the game needs to work out what it wants to be in the future. If players don’t want to play, and people don’t want to watch, then there really is trouble ahead.

Four years on from his greatest moments, Andrew Flintoff was at it again with a match-winning performance

Peter English at Lord's20-Jul-2009Bloody Andrew Flintoff. Bruised, battered, triumphant Andrew Flintoff. One bad leg, another great home Test against Australia. There he is, raising his arms again in his parting-the-waters pose, leading England closer to the Ashes promised land.Minutes after the match Princess Anne was at the back of the pavilion, policemen clearing her way through the fans, but only a handful stopped to watch her pass. England cricket’s royal was on the field, spectators shouting and bouncing at his latest effort to prevent an uprising from the Dominions.He’s a man who, given the condition of his right knee, should be kept to five-over spells. Not interested, his mind says. After his fourth-ball removal of Brad Haddin, who was caught at second slip, he spoke at Andrew Strauss. “Just to let you know I’ll keep bowling until all the wickets are gone.” He did, taking 3 for 43 in ten overs and toasting himself by lunch. No weak link or cartilage here, just more tormenting of Australia.Everyone in England has 2005 tattooed on the brain, when England rode on Flintoff’s back and the visiting batsmen’s feet turned to concrete. The calendar says 2009 but perhaps time has frozen. Once again the Australians are trying to talk like they are still capable of dominating the contest; Flintoff is sitting back, lounging like he’s puffing on a cigar. He would be fun to be out with tonight.No wonder the home supporters don’t mention the excessive drinking and disappointment of 2006-07. Why stain his contribution by looking at his failures? Always look on the bright side of life, without the irony.He started with a fruity Sunday morning sermon to Phillip Hughes and finished with 5 for 92 the following day. Not the worst time for his third five-wicket haul in Tests. Despite the emotion and a twinging, throbbing knee, he is determined to make it to The Oval, bowing out with more industrial-strength noise.”I’d do anything to get out on the field and finish the series,” he said. “I bowled all my overs, I might have been in a bit of discomfort but I’ve been in discomfort most of my career. It’s encouraging I can come in and bowl as many overs as I have done, it bodes well for the last three Tests.”Strauss rated Flintoff in the top three bowlers that opposition batsmen hate to face, due to his “consistent hostility”. Ricky Ponting compared the potency of his top-class spells to those from Ambrose, Walsh and Akram, bowlers from an era few modern players can remember. Talk of Flintoff’s injury and the possibility of him not making it through the series are not being listened to by the Australians.”I think it’s rubbish,” Ponting said. “If Flintoff can bowl like that today I don’t think he’s in any danger of missing the next Test.”After taking care of both openers on the fourth day, Flintoff ended England’s fears of an Australian world record with Haddin’s edge. He followed up by bowling Nathan Hauritz and when an inswinger broke Peter Siddle’s stumps Flintoff dropped to his knee. Accepting the applause – “I milked the crowd a little bit” – he was swamped by his team-mates who hugged the air from him.On the Australian balcony there were glum, stubbled faces caused by a familiar foe. “We’ve always said that when he’s up and running and bowling as well as he can he’s as good as anyone probably going around,” Ponting said. “He gives his all. His spells have not got shorter through the game.”And Flintoff thinks he is becoming faster and smarter, the only thing hampering him being the trailing of strapping tape and pain-killers. “It’s quite sad in some ways that I feel I’m getting better as a bowler,” he said. “It’s just unfortunate I’m having to do what I’m doing with where the body’s standing up. I’m learning a bit more about bowling and how to bowl.”My length is naturally probably a little bit shorter and aggressive. Once you get the batters back, probably the full-length ball is a little bit more threatening. I’ve got an understanding of what to do, I’m going to have to apply that in the next three games.”He was talking less than an hour after the match but already his name was taped to the bowling honour board, his five wickets earning a spot six years after he made it on the batting list for a century against South Africa. That was “nice”, he said, but winning the Ashes means much more. A second grabbing of the tiny urn will be worth a retirement full of limping.

Peter Siddle collected five wickets to put Australia well on top, thanks to some advice from a recent England bowler

Peter English at Headingley07-Aug-2009It took three Tests but Peter Siddle remembered the lessons given to him by Darren Pattinson, his Melbourne club-mate and the former England bowler, as he captured career-best figures to put Australia on track to level the series. Siddle rammed into England’s tail to collect 5 for 21 off 9.5 overs, finishing with four wickets in 14 deliveries, and after play told of his chats with Pattinson, who appeared in a Test at this ground last year.Dandenong is the Australian summer home for both players and Siddle chased up his friend of a decade for some advice. “We’re very close and I’ve spent a lot of time with him,” Siddle said. “We had a few chats about the conditions and the way you go about stuff over here. It’s been handy. He gave me some good insight into how to handle the conditions.”This was the performance the Australians have waited for as Siddle finally lived up to his Sid Vicious nickname in England. In the opening three games he hadn’t been tame, but was inconsistent and unreliable, a shadow of the 24-year-old who grew up during the home and away series against South Africa.Mixing short balls to ruffle the batsmen and fuller ones to dismiss two of them, Siddle shook the hosts after lunch to back up the impressive return of Stuart Clark, whose three wickets before the break made everyone wonder why it had taken four Tests to call for him. Until Nathan Hauritz was removed from the line-up this morning it was Siddle who thought he was in danger.Brett Lee was also chasing Siddle’s spot but the selectors held firm and the Victorian stayed. Merv Hughes, one of the panel members at the ground, is a huge admirer of Siddle’s intimidating style and the group retained their unswerving belief in a player in his 12th Test.”Coming into this match I didn’t know what would happen,” Siddle said. “There was talk that I’d miss out or Hauritz would miss out. I was lucky enough to get the nod, went about my business, and in the end it paid off and I had a bit of success.” With 15 victims, he is now the series’ leading wicket-taker and was the muscular presence required at the opposite end from Clark and Ben Hilfenhaus.Siddle started by removing Andrew Strauss with serious help from Marcus North, who flung out his right hand at third slip, but the real damage came when the tailenders arrived full of padding. Suddenly Siddle was an intimidator and after England chose an extra bowler in Steve Harmison, he had extra targets.Graeme Swann was pushed back by some short deliveries before a fuller one clipped the edge on the way to Michael Clarke at first slip. The second ball to Harmison rattled his helmet, which is a serious bouncer to a guy standing at 6ft 4in, and in the following over Siddle brushed the side of his bat with another lifter.Anderson was forced to fend to Brad Haddin before the innings ended when Graham Onions popped an uncomfortable rising effort to Simon Katich, the short leg. It struck his armguard instead of his bat but he was probably happy to escape further damage.As the players stepped from the field in the second session a couple of fans wearing Aussie rules jumpers ran over to congratulate Siddle. This was his second five-wicket haul and came at an incredibly valuable time for Australia, who must win here to retain a chance of claiming the series.By the end of the day they owned a 94-run lead and had Siddle and his bowling mates to toast for the strength of their position. “We knew how we’d gone over the first three Tests and we knew we had to change something,” he said. “We just relaxed a bit. It was good having Sarfy [Clark] at one end bowling so tight and consistent, it frees up that other end. I got my goodies at the end.”

England’s hopes in this Test melted away under the scorching Cape Town sun

Andrew McGlashan in Cape Town05-Jan-2010England’s hopes in this Test melted away under the scorching Cape Town sun. They say that temperatures of this severity – it was 35 degrees in the shade – happen maybe once a year, so the visitors will rue their luck that it happened on a day that they had to field, but the upshot was a position largely of their own making. Slightly more judicious shot-selection yesterday would have meant they could have spent most of Tuesday making South Africa suffer.There haven’t been many completely one-sided days during the first three matches, but South Africa’s domination here makes it 1-1 on that count after England’s performance on the fourth day in Durban. However, England shouldn’t be castigated for this effort, which it would be easy to do when looking at the scorecard.Before the tour started many were predicting that this would have been the status quo throughout, so it’s a mark of England’s resilience that this was the first time the wheels were severely loosened. South Africa, too, were always likely to respond to their demise in Durban. They are a proud side with a strong captain on a ground that, except when playing Australia, has only happy memories.However, what this match has proved yet again is that you can’t allow a strong Test side – and South Africa are still that despite some current problems – a chance to fight back. England were so impressive at Kingsmead that they set a very high bar, but they have slipped way below that in this match.That was especially true in the batting effort. The first innings of a Test match is the time to make runs and, as well as South Africa bowled, England’s top order aided their dismissals. It’s a tough assessment, but Test cricket is a tough arena. “Of course there were soft dismissals in our first innings, there’s no getting away from that, and the guys know that,” England coach Andy Flower said. “When we bat second-time round we’ll have to restrict those.”It was left to the bowlers to try and keep England in the Test, but they were always up against it with temperatures soaring in the middle. Although Ashwell Prince fell to his nemesis, Graeme Swann, for the third time in the five balls he has faced from him this series, South Africa largely weathered the crucial new-ball period.This was a day when the problems of a four-man attack were exposed. England were spot-on in their selection for this game – when you’re ahead in a series in South Africa you don’t weaken the batting, especially after a performance like Durban – but it doesn’t leave much room for manoeuvre. With Swann being expertly countered by Graeme Smith and Hashim Amla, England couldn’t find a bowler to make something happen.That is one of the obstacles that will make the next step towards being a major world force hard work. England don’t currently have anyone to race in for that spell of express pace, and neither is there anyone on the horizon. South Africa showed the value of such a weapon, albeit in less oppressive conditions, with Morne Morkel and Dale Steyn both outstanding.England would have hoped for reverse-swing, but the quicks struggled to move the ball off the straight which was ironic given the fuss made over Stuart Broad standing on the ball in his followthrough. “This amazing amount of reverse-swing obtained by Stuart Broad standing on the ball obviously hasn’t worked,” Flower said. “The guys worked very honestly, they toiled hard, the South Africans played very well. Conditions for batting seemed to improve and know we are behind the black ball.”In many ways this was a good dress rehearsal for the Ashes in Australia at the end of this year. England are likely to encounter a few hot days and unresponsive surfaces in places such as Adelaide, and they’ll need to find ways of taking wickets. Swann has added an attacking element, but the fast bowlers still need conditions in their favour to be a constant threat.This is now a match-saving scenario for England if they want to keep their series lead intact heading into the final Test at the Wanderers. “We can attack with the new ball and look for early wickets, which is the trend of the game so far,” Flower said. “If we don’t get those early wickets we will have to bat superbly well.”There’s still hope for us. You’ve seen over the last 12 months our guys fight hard and they’ll fight hard over the next two days. The pitches over all three Tests have surprised people, both locals and us, so we’ll see how this one pans out.”

Muttiah Muralitharan talks about his future, Sri Lanka’s World Cup chances, Kumar Sangakkara’s captaincy, and more

Sa'adi Thawfeeq02-Jan-2010Why is it difficult to beat India in India?
It has never been an easy ride for any team in India. In the 1997 Test series in India, we drew all three. At the time we were at our peak but India managed to hold us. It has always been tough to play in India because the conditions are different and their players know how to play in their own conditions. Therefore for any team to go and succeed in India is very hard. At home, we are a powerful side, like India.Where did Sri Lanka go wrong in the Test series?
We had a good chance to win the first Test, but the wicket was so flat that scoring was made easy. We couldn’t take 10 wickets in the last one-and-a-half days of play and that affected us.In the second Test, [Virender] Sehwag was the biggest factor. We lost a crucial toss. It was crucial because the wicket was up and down. We lost the Test mainly because they scored 400 runs on the first day. The wicket was still good but we played some poor shots and there were a few unfortunate dismissals like [Kumar] Sangakkara and [Thilan] Samaraweera playing the ball onto the stumps.Our confidence was also dented because Dammika Prasad was injured. We thought we would play three spinners after we saw the wicket. We thought it was going to take spin, but unfortunately it didn’t, and the captain got the blame, which is wrong. Decisions are made by the coach, captain and senior players.The other thing that affected us was that the referral system was not used in the series. The Sehwag factor was there. We missed chances off him so many times. There were unfortunate decisions that went against us when actually he was out.So many things worked against us, but India did play well. They played better cricket than us. The 2-0 result does not show how good an effort we put in, but we were not good enough. Unfortunately I was not in good form, neither was [Rangana] Herath. He was not in the form he showed at home. None of the other bowlers got many wickets in the series. Harbhajan [Singh] had about 13 wickets from three Tests. For the leading wicket-taker of the series to take 13 wickets means the wickets favoured the batsmen more than the bowlers. Sri Lanka’s ODI performances since the 2007 World Cup haven’t been very encouraging. Why?
This is a transitional period. After 2003 World Cup, we had senior and capable players who stayed till the 2007 World Cup. Now the transitional period has come. I am not young, neither is Sanath [Jayasuriya]. [Chaminda] Vaasy is gone.I didn’t have a great 2009 because I had so many injuries. I played 16 ODI matches and took 22 wickets at an economy of 4.77 and according to international standards it is a good effort. But in Test cricket I played eight and got 26 wickets. My career average is 22 and it has gone up because I played on so many flat tracks.

“We are not going to be a brilliant fielding side by 2011. If someone is saying we will be, they are not being honest to themselves. Today you cannot find a brilliant fielder who is a brilliant batsman or bowler. It will take generations to find one”

Secondly, Sanath is not the same batsman he was, and is not scoring as he should be. Vaas climbed down a bit. From 2003 to 2007 these three players had major contributions to the team. With Mahela [Jayawardene] and Sanga, there were five key players in the side. Now somebody has to fill in our shoes and it takes time. You have to wait patiently. The main thing is we are not patient enough.Do you think there are replacements for the “big three” for the 2011 World Cup?
In 2005, when we went to India under Marvan [Atapattu]’s captaincy, we got thrashed 2-0 in the Tests and 6-1 in the ODIs. We went to Australia and New Zealand and we didn’t do well. We started performing well in the VB Series, and in 2007 we built a strong team. The same thing can happen again if everyone is patient. If you try to make drastic changes to the team it won’t happen.We are playing the World Cup at home. The last time we played at home, we won. All encouragement should be given to the players within this one year and we will be able to find the right combination. Why have the fielding standards dropped so drastically in the last few years?
In the 2007 World Cup team we had good fielders like Upul Tharanga, Sanath, Mahela, Sanga as wicketkeeper, Chamara Silva and Russel Arnold. In the bowling department me, Vaasy and [Lasith] Malinga were safe fielders. We had a good fielding unit. Now if you take the team, it is the other way around. Thilan and [Thilina] Kandamby are safe fielders but not brilliant. But they are very good batsmen and you can’t keep them out because of the fielding. Likewise, a few bowlers are not natural athletes. That’s what’s happened to our fielding. They train, but speed is something you cannot create. You have to be born with it. We are not going to be a brilliant fielding side by 2011. If someone is saying we will be, they are not being honest to themselves. Today you cannot find a brilliant fielder who is a brilliant batsman or bowler. It will take generations to find one.Your thoughts on Sangakkara as captain
Unreasonable criticism has been made of his captaincy. Fair criticism is accepted. When Mahela captained against India and Pakistan and we lost and he was not scoring runs, the media put too much pressure on him. He was a wonderful captain for the two years he led the country. At the end of the day what happened? He said thank you and quit the captaincy. Luckily we had Sangakkara. Now the same criticism has started against him, saying his decisions are not good. That’s very unfair. As soon as he took over, he led a young side to the final of the World Twenty20, won the one-day series in Pakistan, the Idea Cup final, won the Test series against Pakistan and New Zealand, and then we lost to India. It is too early for anyone to start criticising his captaincy. He is a capable person but is now being put under pressure. Once you put a lot of pressure on someone, however strong he may be, he will start thinking, “Why should I take all this criticism? I can be in the team as a player.” If Sanga goes, who is going to captain? At the end of the day, players need to perform. The captain alone can’t win a match.”If Sanga goes, who is going to captain?”•AFPHave you enjoyed your role as vice-captain?
I took the job because at the time there wasn’t anybody to do it. Nobody was certain of a place, so I agreed to take it. If somebody is there to take over the vice-captaincy, I am glad to hand it over to him. I just want to be a player, support the team and win. Even before the 2011 World Cup, if there is someone better than me, I don’t mind giving my place to him. I enjoy cricket as a player. Vice-captaincy is not something that I have given much thought to.Is ODI cricket going forwards or backwards?
ODI cricket has changed a lot because of the Powerplay. Our bowlers have not adjusted to it properly. They have to work out how to contain, especially in the Powerplay. Because the wickets are so good in India, the bowlers suffered more than in any other part of the world. Teams keep the batting Powerplay till the end to maximise it and sometimes it backfires.What chances have Sri Lanka of winning the 2011 World Cup?
We have a very good chance. We have to get into the quarter-finals. The best way of qualifying is to not clash with India. Then all the quarters and semis will be played in Sri Lanka. The only thing is the officials have to prepare wickets that are drier and suitable for spin and batting.We don’t know who is going to play in the World Cup. There are opportunities for a player like Silva, who is a brilliant fielder, but he has to get runs. We have to wait and see and pick the right combination. We should not panic. At the last World Cup, India panicked and kept changing their team. They couldn’t even qualify for the next stage. We shouldn’t do the same thing.What happened to Ajantha Mendis? He is no longer the potent force in world cricket
You can’t judge a bowler in one or two years. You have to give him a span of four to five years and allow him to mature. Nobody picked Ajantha at the beginning and he bamboozled everyone. He came into the limelight very early.When I came on the scene, no one knew me. It was only after six years of international cricket that people started talking about me. During my time there wasn’t so much exposure to the media. So I was able to learn quietly.

“Whenever Mendis comes to bowl, they expect him to take wickets. It is affecting him. You have to treat him as a normal bowler, one who takes wickets on and off. On his day, he will take big wickets”

For Ajantha, the learning curve is going to be difficult because the pressure on him is high. He has done so much in so little time that expectations are very high. When that happens, it is too much pressure to take and it is difficult to perform. That’s what’s happened to him. Whenever he comes to bowl, they expect him to take wickets. It is affecting him. You have to treat him as a normal bowler, one who takes wickets on and off. On his day, he will take big wickets.Technically, you can’t teach him anything because he bowls in so many different ways. He can get advice from many people but at the end of the day he has to realise what went wrong and how to get better. He is not a bad bowler but has dropped his form. He is only 24 and will come good if we handle him carefully.What are you future plans?
My plan is to play the two Tests against West Indies [at home] and finish with 800 wickets. I want to play ODIs till the 2011 World Cup, but I must see how things go, how important I am going to be to the team. I don’t want to be selfish. If they think I can still deliver, I will play. Otherwise I am happy to quit because I have plenty of offers to play from counties and from Chennai. I must see how my body can take it. My body cannot afford Test cricket anymore because I have bowled thousands of overs and I can feel it. I just can’t force myself to play. Twenty20 is four overs and I am not playing for my country. In one-day cricket you bowl only 10 overs, so I can manage.How do you want to be remembered?
I think I’ve had a pretty good career. I have both bowling records in Test and ODIs. I have taken 66 five-fors and 45 four-fors, which means out of 132 Tests I have failed only in a handful – maybe 3% to 5%. In one-day cricket I have taken 512 wickets in 334 matches, average 22 and an economy rate of 3.9.I never thought of records. Cricket was built in my system. God had given me that gift.As a person, if I have to say something, whether it is right or wrong, I will say it to the face. I don’t say things behind people’s backs. Ninety percent of people like me for that. If I realise I was wrong, I will say sorry. I don’t have any enemies. I want to be remembered as a good person who played very hard and brought a lot of success to the country. I have achieved more than most other cricketers and I want to retire gracefully and enjoy life with my family.

Somerset’s 19-year-old crowd favourite steals the show in the absence of the longed-for Andre Nel histrionics

John Pascoe30-Aug-2010Choice of game
The match was the Clydesdale Bank 40 Group A match between Somerset and Surrey at Taunton. I was tempted to go, having watched Somerset with admiration in the tournament so far. Although Somerset were on a magnificent run, Surrey were also in with a shout of second place, making it a tough one to predict.Team supported
I was barracking for Somerset as they are my local (well, nearest anyway) first-class team. I also grew up following Middlesex, so that rubber-stamped it.Key performer
Tough one this as Craig Kieswetter, Mark Ramprakash, Murali Kartik and Chris Schofield all contributed significantly, but the winner for me was Jos Buttler. His 87 was achieved in double quick time, had a mixture of deft touches and magnificent sixes, and was a match-winning innings.One thing you’d have changed
The rain breaks were a shame, so perhaps I would have changed the weather, but the main thing I would change is Andre Nel’s injury. The game needed a bit of tension. Gunther would have helped. Oh, and I wouldn’t have left my sunglasses in the car!Face-off you relished
I was looking forward to Nel v Trescothick but Nel’s injury put paid to that. Shame! There is nothing like Nel’s bowling being whacked to all corners to ignite his competitive side. Kartik v Ramprakash was also worth waiting for and didn’t disappoint.Wow moment
There was not really a wow moment as such but I left the ground extremely impressed with Schofield. His bowling was accurate and awkward. He was clumped into the Andy Caddick pavilion for six by Kieswetter early on but didn’t lose heart. He has an incredibly accurate arm, bags of enthusiasm, and plays the game with a smile on his face.Player watch
At various times Ramprakash and Schofield were fielding near us at deep backward point. The crowd was very lenient with them and let them get on with it. They even reacted with sympathy when Ramprakash slipped and let a square cut through his legs, which was then unsuccessfully lunged at by Steven Cheetham like a desperate football defender. Unfortunately the ball still didn’t reach the boundary.Shot of the day
Another tough one this, as there were some lusty blows on show. The best for me was Buttler’s paddle round the corner for six off Chris Tremlett’s bowling. Down on one knee facing one of the fastest bowlers around is no mean feat. Jade Dernbach’s massive six into the top tier of the Sir Ian Botham Stand came in a close second.Crowd meter
I’ll get some stick for saying this but the crowd were extremely disappointing. The ground was probably two-thirds full. The win meant that their team qualified for the semi-finals, but there was never any sign of that from the crowd. I got the impression that they would have been more alive had Somerset been chasing. They love Buttler though. He got a lot of cheers. I’m not surprised either. He is only 19. What a find.Fancy-dress index
There was a group of Smurfs who appeared periodically. Twice during rain breaks I went to have a chat with them but they had disappeared without a trace. Strange.There was also a group of hula “girls” who occasionally sang some Wurzels’ songs and “Baa Baa Black Sheep”, but who also disappeared for long periods. On the whole, a very bad show!Entertainment
There were a few apparently random bursts of music when wickets fell but only during the rain breaks did the choice of music make sense (“Why Does it Always Rain on Me?” And “Umbrella”). The music did nothing to inspire the crowd.The peripheral entertainment was good. It was Armed Services day and the services had some demonstrations going on throughout the afternoon. The ECB Roadshow was also there, giving kids a chance to show off their skills.I loved the fact that there was tombola close to the main scoreboard. It gave it the feel of a club ground. Very quaint!Accessories
The most important accessory was a DAB radio to keep up to speed with the progress of the Test match at Lord’s. I initially left it at home the sideboard and then went back four miles to retrieve it. The Test match finished before a ball had been bowled at Taunton. Typical.I wish I had taken a towel to dry the seat after the rain showers.Overall
The atmosphere was a little flat but that was not necessarily a bad thing. It is not always everyone’s cup of tea to have too much inane yelling. The cricket was entertaining and, although it ended a little one-sided, was liberally sprinkled with great shots, good fielding and tight bowling. The boundaries were just the right length to make it an achievement to clear them. The food was tasty and reasonably priced. For me it was a good day out.The stadium at Taunton is rather bitty. It looks like someone has taken a load of different architectural styles and thrown them up in the air. This is true of a lot of the modern county grounds, especially those that don’t host Test matches. It is a shame as it gives the ground a bit of an amateurish feel. However, the Somerset supporters I spoke to all think it gives the ground a homely feel. I feel an article coming on.Marks out of 10
Some rather restless children brought it down from 7 to 6.5.

Sri Lanka scored more runs, lost fewer wickets, and made India sweat through most of the three matches

S Rajesh09-Aug-2010In terms of stats, Sri Lanka clearly outdid India in the three-Test series which finished in Colombo on Saturday. They scored more runs, lost fewer wickets, and made India sweat through most of the three matches. (It helped, of course, that they won all three tosses.) India, though, capitalised on the only opportunity they got of winning a game, leaving the series tied at 1-1, and their hold on the No.1 rank still reasonably secure.Sri Lanka’s huge totals in the first two Tests meant they averaged almost 60 runs per wicket in the series. They also lost ten fewer wickets than India, who averaged less than 45. Two batsmen from the Sri Lankan team, Kumar Sangakkara and Thilan Samaraweera, averaged more than 100, while two others, Tharanga Paranavitana and Mahela Jayawardene, had 50-plus averages. The only Indian with a 100-plus average was Suresh Raina, though three others – VVS Laxman, Sachin Tendulkar and Virender Sehwag – averaged more than 65.The glaring difference, though, was in the bowling stats. The best bowling average among the Indians belonged to Sehwag, who took seven wickets at 27.57. Among the specialist bowlers, Amit Mishra had the best average at 46.75, though that number clearly flattered him. Ishant Sharma, Abhimanyu Mithun and Pragyan Ojha, India’s leading wicket-taker, all conceded more than 60 runs per wicket. Among the Sri Lankans, though, three bowlers – Muttiah Muralitharan, Lasith Malinga and Suraj Randiv – had sub-35 averages.

The average partnerships for each wicket also shows how dominant Sri Lanka’s top order was: their average stands for the first five wickets all exceeded 50, with the second-wicket partnership being particularly prolific. Their opening pair of Tillakaratne Dilshan and Paranavitana were consistent as well, with four half-century stands.India’s top-order stands, on the other hand, were patchy. Of the first four wickets, the average partnership was more than 50 only for the third wicket. India were saved by the partnerships for the fifth and sixth wickets, with Tendulkar, Laxman and Raina leading the way: each of them was involved in two century stands for the fifth wicket.

For the Sri Lankan batsmen, this series was a fine opportunity to boost their home record against India. In the seven home Tests that Samaraweera has played against India, he averages more than 130, with three centuries and as many fifties. Sangakkara and Jayawardene both average more than 70.

Among the Indians, Rahul dravid was the big disappointment, scoring only 95 runs in five innings. His overall average in Sri Lanka slips to 33.10, which is his lowest in any country. Laxman’s unbeaten matchwinner in the last Test is his first hundred in the country, while Tendulkar and Sehwag continued the fine run they’ve had in Sri Lanka.

Contrasting fortunes against RandivOne of the fascinating aspects of the series was the performance of debutant Suraj Randiv. He was hardly fazed by the powerful Indian batting line-up, and almost led his side to victory in the third Test. His stats against Sehwag are interesting: Sehwag scored 30 runs off 28 deliveries from Randiv – clearly the idea was to try to take the initiative against the debutant – but Randiv easily had the better of the exchanges, dismissing Sehwag three times. Dravid didn’t have a good time against him either, but most of the other Indian batsmen handled him well. Raina and Laxman faced more than 140 deliveries from him without getting out, while Tendulkar fell to him only once. Had Dilshan take that sharp chance offered by him on the last day in Colombo, though, Randiv’s final figures in the game, and the series result, could have been very different.