Michael Clarke does not hit big sixes, or switch hits, and has a strike-rate well below 100. But in an age of two new balls and lively pitches, his conservative style could be successful in one-day cricket

Sidharth Monga at the WACA11-Feb-2012Michael Clarke is a bit of an old-world ODI batsman. He doesn’t hit the big sixes, he doesn’t even think of switch hits, he is not going to score double-centuries, he has converted only six of his 56 scores of 50 or more into centuries; but the beauty of ODI cricket is it has space for him. To be more specific, modern ODI cricket, with new balls at each end, played on bowler-friendly surfaces, has space for him; especially, when he has around him big hitters who can make up for the slow rate in Powerplay or death overs.The 2000s and Twenty20 nearly took out of the game the middle-order batsman who fought through innings to help his side play out their 50 overs. Such batsmen scored at not more than 70-75 runs per 100 balls, but they controlled the middle part of the innings. They worked the singles and couples, they set the stage for bigger hitters towards the end. When the limits were stretched in the 2000s, though, such batsmen went out of fashion. You either added big hits, or innovation, to your game or dropped out. Mahela Jayawardene, for example, modified his game and became a superb improviser. Younis Khan added the big hits to his manoeuvring of the field. Rahul Dravid went out of the game.Now, though, a new, exciting legislation has been added to ODI cricket. Each ball gets only 25 overs old in an ODI. It might have an adverse effect on cricket in the subcontinent, reducing the effectiveness of spinners and reverse-swing, but it has made ODI cricket on lively pitches more interesting.The Perth ODI between Australia and Sri Lanka was an example of that. “Little bit slower than we all expected,” Clarke said of the pitch. “Some balls kissed off a lot faster than others. Hard to get your timing, we saw that with both teams.” Also the ball kept seaming a touch all through the 99.5 overs, asking questions of batsmen, and the defining innings of the match came at a strike-rate of 64.77, and it included only four boundaries.Clarke played that innings. He was not fluent. He was not even going to make up for his slow strike-rate in the final overs. He may have to an extent, had he remained till the end, but he would not have converted the strike-rate of 65 into 100, which has nowadays become the accepted norm for ODI batsmen. But Clarke hung in for long enough to get Australia to a total they could fight with.Clarke also knows that this might not work in more batsmen-friendly conditions. Jonathan Trott in the World Cup is a good example. He played similarly, he was often England’s best batsman against spin, but in the absence of big hitters around him, he was criticised for his 75-ball half-centuries. In tough conditions, these innings are inconspicuous but vital, but on flat tracks they become conspicuous.”When I think of my own performance, I was a bit disappointed with the way I batted,” Clarke said. “I felt I could not time the ball. I just tried to hang in there. I have got some really good strikers around me so that might be my role a little bit. If it is difficult to score, I have got to be the one to hang in there a little bit. Just do whatever it takes to help the team. That’s what everyone is doing.”Clarke has the temperament and the mindset to do it. He is primarily a Test batsman, and doesn’t feel obliged, unlike other limited-over batsmen, to hit out if the runs are not coming at a run a ball. He can be an important batsman in ODIs that feature scores of less than 250. The Adelaide ODI against India might not be a less-than-250 game, and staying inconspicuous – if not noticed for a strike-rate of 125 – in such games is Clarke’s big challenge.

Kumar Sangakkara, the tenth batsman to reach 10,000 runs, stands out among Sri Lankan batsmen because of his strong performances in foreign conditions

Madhusudhan Ramakrishnan17-Feb-2012Until November 2011, Sanath Jayasuriya was the only Sri Lanka batsman in the elite 10,000-ODI-runs club. Just 11 matches after Mahela Jayawardene reached the mark against Pakistan, Kumar Sangakkara also achieved the feat, during his breezy knock of 30 against Australia in Sydney. Sri Lanka are thus the only team to have two current players with 10,000-plus ODI aggregates, and also the second team after India to have three players who have surpassed the landmark. Sangakkara, who has been the mainstay of Sri Lanka’s batting in Tests and ODIs along with the classy Jayawardene, reached the 10,000-run mark in his 315th ODI. He is the fastest to the mark among Sri Lanka batsmen, both in terms of matches and innings. While most Sri Lanka batsmen have struggled overseas over the years, the compact Sangakkara has dealt with foreign conditions a lot better, and averages close to 40 outside Sri Lanka.Overall, Sangakkara has a highly respectable record in ODIs, averaging 37.80 with 12 centuries and 67 fifties. However, what is surprising is that his away record is much better than his home one. In 106 home ODIs, Sangakkara averages slightly below 35 with just one century. In away matches, not only is his average much higher (39.29) but also his century tally (11). His away stats, however, are slightly skewed towards performances in the subcontinent. In the subcontinent, he averages 38.80 while scoring ten of his 12 centuries. Outside the subcontinent, he has done fairly well (average of 36.52) but has a poorer ratio of centuries to fifties (2:31) as compared to the corresponding number in the subcontinent (10:36). As is the case with most top ODI batsmen, Sangakkara has lifted his game in World Cups. Among Sri Lankan batsmen who have played at least 25 World Cup matches, his average of 45.04 is the second-highest behind Arjuna Ranatunga’s, and his aggregate of 991 runs is behind only those of Jayasuriya and Aravinda de Silva. He has no century in tournament finals but his average of 38.18 is marginally better than his overall ODI average.

Sangakkara endured a fairly ordinary start to his career before cementing his place as one of Sri Lanka’s best ODI batsmen. In his first four years (2000-2003), he had an average of just 28.55 and a strike-rate of 69.39 in 96 matches, while scoring only two centuries. Things turned around after that though; in the next five years (2004-2008), his average went up to almost 41 as he scored eight centuries in 139 ODIs. His best year in the period was 2004, when he scored over 1000 runs at an average of 53.15 with one century and ten fifties. In 2008, he averaged 39.25 but scored four centuries in 27 ODIs. In the last three years (2009 onwards), his average and strike-rate have gone up to 42.50 and 78.48, but he has struggled to convert the starts into centuries (two hundreds in 80 matches). Between 2009 and 2011, when Sangakkara was the ODI captain, he scored 1756 runs at a high average of 47.45.

Sangakkara and Jayawardene’s stats are, in many ways, strikingly similar. Both batsmen have close to 7000 runs in away matches and over 3000 runs in home ODIs. In away matches, both batsmen have the same number of centuries (11) but while Sangakkara has just one century in home ODIs, Jayawardene has four. Sangakkara has been the more successful player in Australia, averaging 38.72 to Jayawardene’s 32.94. Jayawardene has three hundreds in England but his average of 43.80 is lower than that of Sangakkara, who is yet to score a century there. In ODIs in South Africa and New Zealand, Sangakkara is comfortably ahead of Jayawardene, who averages just 17.45 and 20.42 respectively in each country. However, in the West Indies, Jayawardene has done much better, averaging 47.21 with a century and five fifties, while Sangakkara has struggled, scoring four fifties in 17 games and averaging 28.68.

Sangakkara, who has batted at No. 3 for the majority of his career, has been immensely successful in that position. He is one of only four players to score over 5000 runs at No. 3. Ricky Ponting leads the fray in terms of runs but Jacques Kallis’ average of 46.94 is the highest among batsmen with 4000-plus runs at No.3, and is followed by Brian Lara’s 45.84. Sangakkara averages a relatively lower 38.53 but has a strike-rate of 75.57, which is bettered only by Lara and Ponting, who have corresponding numbers of 85.98 and 80.82 respectively. However, Sangakkara’s century tally at No. 3 (5) is the second-lowest in the group and is better only when compared to Marvan Atapattu, who managed to score just four centuries batting at that position.

Sangakkara’s feat is all the more remarkable considering that for the majority of his career he has also kept wickets. In Tests, his average in matches when he has played as a wicketkeeper is much lower than in those where he has played purely as a batsman. However, in ODIs, the numbers are reversed. Sangakkara has relished the dual role and his run-tally as a wicketkeeper-batsman is second only to Adam Gilchrist’s. Among batsman-wicketkeepers with 4000-plus ODI runs, Sangakkara has an average of 39.50 which is bettered only by MS Dhoni, who has a stunning average of 51.41. By virtue of batting higher in the order, Sangakkara has scored ten centuries, which is behind only Gilchrist’s tally of 16, but his strike rate of 76.72 is well behind those of Gilchrist and Dhoni, who have corresponding numbers of 96.94 and 88.32.

South Africa could have declared earlier and tempted the hosts to go for the target in Wellington, but having dominated the series Graeme Smith did not want to risk a loss

Firdose Moonda at the Basin Reserve 27-Mar-2012Few could deny that South Africa deserved to win the Test series against New Zealand. They were, as their captain Graeme Smith said, “on the front foot” most of the time. Their bowling was pure class, their batting got better as the series went on and they kept New Zealand under pressure throughout. If anything, the victory could have been by a bigger margin than 1-0. Had rain not affected the first and third Tests, had Smith left New Zealand a few more overs to face in Wellington: these are the what-ifs that will remain.Smith had to perform a tricky balancing act on the final day, knowing that a draw was enough to seal the series but a win would make the scoreline more emphatic. He could have dangled a carrot and set New Zealand a chaseable target, but waited till the target had swelled to 389 runs off around 80 overs before declaring. Smith said he did not want to give the hosts any chance of levelling the series, since it was one South Africa had dominated.”I don’t think New Zealand deserved anything more,” he said. “Being 1-0 up in the series I didn’t think they deserved any more.” Smith’s statement suggested he did not think New Zealand had earned the right to be in with a chance of victory, and he was not going to allow them one with a sporting declaration.New Zealand had been behind in the Test right until the final day. After putting South Africa in to bat, they conceded 474 runs, despite South Africa having to bat through significant rain-delays. New Zealand collapsed in familiar fashion on the fourth day as they failed to contend with a display of pace bowling that will be remembered for a long time. They did finally get things right on the final day, battling with the bat to earn a draw, which according to Smith, was all they deserved from the Test. Smith said New Zealand were the team that had shown less intent to go after a win.”I felt New Zealand could have been more aggressive in their first innings,” he said. “They never got to three runs per over throughout the Test match and maybe played a bit defensively through the middle part of the game. But we were aggressive throughout.”Smith had the luxury of a bowling attack that is naturally aggressive but he said they had also batted with the same positivity. “We showed that last night with the way we came out and built a platform. This morning I thought we played positively from the get-go and scored well.” AB de Villiers and JP Duminy helped South Africa score 114 runs in just over an hour on the fifth morning, at a rate of 7.92 runs per over.New Zealand never showed the same intent at any stage in the series, and Brendon McCullum admitted South Africa had been the team in control. “I think they deserved to win the series, they’ve been the better team throughout,” he said. He also said he understood Smith’s tactic to bat New Zealand out of the game before declaring. “They definitely didn’t want to give us a sniff, and I completely understand that because they dominated the game for so long. They didn’t need to entertain the thought of us winning.”The gulf between the two sides has at times during the series seemed wider than Lake Taupo. However, there were phases when the contest was much closer. In each of the first two Tests, New Zealand bowled South Africa out for under 300 in the first innings. In every match, New Zealand have had a partnership that has threatened to take the game away from the South Africa bowlers.At every juncture though, New Zealand have stopped short of taking control and allowed South Africa to assert themselves. At those same junctures, South Africa have had answers.”We’ve competed at times and I guess we’ll never know what could’ve happened in that first Test,” McCullum said. “As a whole I think a fighting effort like we put up on this final day was a really good result. We had them on the ropes at times but I think 1-0 is probably a fair reflection of the series.”Edited by Dustin Silgardo

Injuries are part and parcel for a pace bowler and James Harris has already had to deal with his fair share. He talks to ESPNcricinfo about the challenge

Alex Winter08-May-2012Perhaps Dylan Thomas didn’t compose poetry in reference to a cricketer with a groin injury but there is much about James Harris in the opening lines of . Harris’ career has suffered a significant stalling; a brighter predicament than the darker scenarios mostly discussed in Thomas’ work, but one that has created the most frustrating time of his life. It could be a good thing.Harris, like Thomas, born in Swansea, turns 22 next week and when he returns to fitness this will be his sixth season as a professional: an outrageous fact. He has already learned enough to look at his career-path pragmatically. For him, what comes out of the sighs of this injury break is long-term benefit.”I’ve never had an injury that’s kept me out for this long,” Harris told ESPNcricinfo. “It’s been tough, it’s been a bit of an eye opener. I was bad for a bit, I was angry and annoyed but if you look at it objectively, it’s not the worst thing, in years to come I might look back and think those six or seven months off gave my body a chance to catch up.”His body probably needs a catch up. Harris describes himself as his own worst enemy; his love of playing saw him send down over 1,000 first-class overs from April 2010 to September 2011. “I had a busy 18 months with basically no rest. Looking back I could have gone ‘I’m going to snap at some point’.”Harris took 63 wickets in 2010 and earned a place on the England Lions tour to the West Indies: a tour where 14 wickets at 30.35 was the first step on the path to his predicted international glory. Last season 47 more wickets followed before the perennial rise was cut down.A groin injury forced him out of the final two games of the 2011 summer. After some time off, the problem didn’t ease at Loughborough or in Potchefstroom with the England Performance Programme – a trip, despite his troubles, that Harris described as “very, very good”. Suddenly a double hernia operation was needed: a moment where his spirit, grown with unbroken success, perhaps cried for the first time in his career.A first injection to the problem area, Unfortunately not, a second injection rendered him almost immovable for 10 days. But an overtly emotional response to an ultimately minor setback isn’t Harris. He is calm, collected, charming and cool over the seriousness of his plight.”I had an injection in the middle of my pelvis five weeks ago and March 30 was the injection right where it hurts,” Harris, in full Glamorgan training gear, said. “It might take 5-10 days to kick in and then it’s about building up match fitness. I’ve been able to do all the work apart from top level sprinting.” A positive sign that any grief of missing cricket will be quickly knocked down.

A second injection rendered him almost immovable for 10 days. But an overtly emotional response to an ultimately minor setback isn’t Harris

The frustration built into a final angst of not being able to do anything while the injection does what is hoped. Harris was even banned from shopping on Oxford Street following his treatment in London – he has seen all the best people. There has been no golf either. No trips to the Celtic Manor where he is trying to justify a membership. Team-mate Dean Cosker is also a regular on the TwentyTen course.Stationary doesn’t seem at all right for Harris which is probably why he isn’t exactly one for literature. But he cooks and the time off has given him chance to experiment in the kitchen. Two summer curries were recently conjured; Mexican is also on the menu, but he can’t get on with sushi. Steak is his favourite dish.Given such pleasure at talking over food options, one assumes Harris has not followed the Stuart Broad 2,000 calorie-a-day diet while he has been injured? He didn’t need to. “I’ve done a few periods of brilliantly eating for a couple of months. But I’m quite lucky in that I don’t tend to carry any weight at all. My trouble is putting on weight; I go through a summer and lose weight.”His physique earned him the nickname “bones” – something regular shifts in the gym is trying to erase. “I love the gym sessions. I come in most mornings early and do a session, especially now I’m not playing.”Harris has also used his time off to mull over some ideas for his future – remarkable given where his career is at. But his plans are slow burners. Architecture is one of them – an eight-year part-time course – law is another. He’s full of ideas. And when conversation returns to cricket he’s cracked the problem of a franchise system for T20: something he says has to happen in this country.”Change the contracts so players have deals for four-day and one-day cricket. Then July would be a gap for a T20 competition with teams by cities and everyone in an auction. You’d get all the overseas guys because there’s no other cricket at that stage. If you get picked up, brilliant, you sign another contract for that month. If you don’t get picked up, it’s in your county contract that you’d get 10 days holiday mid-season and the other 20 days you’re in working on skills for the last two months of the season. And they’d have to split the profits between counties.”Done deal. Send Harris to the ECB meetings. He coped with the “Lions’ Den” interview process at Loughborough where all the players faced a four-man panel and had to explain why they should be picked for England. “It’s a little bit scary,” Harris said. “I like to think I speak quite confidently but some of the boys were really fretting about it.”Fretting is not something Harris seems to have ever done or ever will do. He is skilled enough to play at the highest level and already experienced enough to know how to get there. Like Dylan Thomas, Harris has achieved a great deal early in life and for him, much is to come out of the current sighs.

In Bangalore, the visitors showed pluck and glimpses of the skills in their possession. Now, they must sustain their desire to do well in Test cricket

Andrew Alderson04-Sep-2012Five losses out of the last seven Tests makes poor reading for New Zealand, but there remains a feeling of respite in the aftermath of the Bangalore defeat. Despite a winning margin of five wickets, with Indian partnerships of 77 and 96 in the final innings, there was a sense of fight in the New Zealand ranks; something the first Test shambles lacked.The Hyderabad loss left a taste of insipid apathy; the Bangalore loss reinvigorated the Test appetite. Losing in a decent contest earns respect. New Zealand demonstrated pluck through the batting of captain Ross Taylor, the bowling of a youthful pace attack and the guile of offspinner Jeetan Patel. Even at 32, Patel showed he is an alternative coming out from Daniel Vettori’s shadow. In the second innings, Patel was treated lightly by Virender Sehwag and Suresh Raina before bowling them, while Cheteshwar Pujara was hesitant before flicking a catch. Patel deserved his three wickets in challenging circumstances.Unlike December’s victory over Australia, New Zealand could not drag the Test their way. In that match in Hobart – also minus Vettori – they were assisted by a strip with bite. Bangalore provided more of a contest for bat and ball, where the will of India captain MS Dhoni and Virat Kohli proved unbreakable.Yet, until the last few balls, the pair had to work hard. The contest made for an absorbing evening’s viewing in New Zealand. Fans could afford to shelve channel-surfing contingency plans.Ross Taylor’s first-innings century and aggressive captaincy – placing a regular three slips in the cordon for Southee and a short leg and silly point for Patel in the fourth innings – showed a maturity and a quiet fury to propel his team into a better era. He was rewarded with tight bowling for moderate periods. Taylor backed his hunches; like refusing Patel the right to put a man back after Sehwag blasted him for a six over long-off. Sehwag was bowled three balls later.Sadly for New Zealand, Taylor was given little top order batting support in the first innings as he eased to his seventh test century. Fifty to 100 more runs could have taken New Zealand out of danger. Likewise, in the second innings, no New Zealand batsman could fully dominate the spinners, with seven batsmen scoring between 22 and 41. The hosts faced a manageable 261 to haul in, despite it being a record fourth-innings chase on that ground.

The Hyderabad loss left a taste of insipid apathy; the Bangalore loss reinvigorated the Test appetite. Losing in a decent contest earns respect

Tim Southee, backed by like-minded aggression from Trent Boult and Doug Bracewell, produced a gifted spell to knock India back. His 7 for 64 that places him sixth on the list of all-time best New Zealand bowling performances. His ability to trouble India’s line-up by moving the ball to and fro was a credit to his mental aptitude after he earned inclusion at the expense of veteran Chris Martin.Inspirational moments peppered the fielding performance too, like Daniel Flynn scampering crab-like from short leg to take a one-handed catch off the in-form Pujara.Hopefully, though, New Zealand fans can resist reverting to apologist-speak like “rebuilding” and “moving forward” to describe the current team. Those excuses tire quickly in an era where there is more exposure to the international game than ever before from age-group level up. There is plenty of talent but more consistency is required. On the bowling front the India batsmen worked too many loose balls to the boundary with their wrists or “on-the-up” limited-overs style. The batting top order remains more miss than hit with porous defence.Taylor said afterwards they were disappointed with how they played in Hyderabad and wanted to show some fight and courage. They did so, but the onus is now on the players to avoid losing that desire to apply themselves in the longer form. For several of the team, patience is about to be replaced with premeditation at the World Twenty20. The Sri Lanka Test series is shortly afterwards and New Zealand need to further demonstrate that they have serious aspirations in the Test game to keep the public with them.

A hit so hard, the batsmen just kept running – a true story from the Aboriginal tour of England in 1868

Ashley Mallett12-Aug-2012Sporting long hair and a slinging action, Twopenny was the Lasith Malinga of the 1868 Australian cricket team. But that year it had been just four since the lawmakers allowed a bowler to operate with his bowling arm at a height above the shoulder.Twopenny was a fast round-armer but his greatest claim to fame on the 1868 England tour was with the bat not the ball. It wasn’t the number of runs he hit, for that was a lightweight 589, at an average of 8.29. He was a terrific hitter, but the kind of lower-order batsman who hit across the line – much like, I suppose, the way Doug Walters a hundred years later tried to hit medium-pacer Norm Graham into orbit against Kent in Canterbury in August 1968: with a round-house agricultural swipe that was described the next day in the newspaper as a “wild village-yahoo” slog.Twopenny’s fame came from his exploits with the bat in the match against Sheffield at Bramall Lane over August 10 and 11, when he achieved a feat that eluded WG Grace, Don Bradman, Ricky Ponting or Sachin Tendulkar. In his score of 22, Twopenny hit a ball so high and so far that he completed nine runs before the ball was returned to the wicket. That is, an all-run (no overthrows to swell the tally) nine.A keen witness was present to record the event for posterity in the form of the cricket correspondent for the :

“Twopenny made the sensational hit of the match, accomplishing a feat that has no parallel on Bramall Lane, and we should say on no other ground, and Mr Foster, who was well up, did not offer for some time to go for the ball, and when started it was at a slow pace, the result being that nine was run for the hit amidst vociferous cheering.”

Poor Mr Foster. Short of being built like a 104-year-old elephant with lumbago, he must have been very slow in his fielding efforts indeed. Little did he know how the enthusiastic Aboriginals struggled in their judgement of a run, and that in the 47 matches they suffered 60 run-outs in all.The Aboriginal players were given sobriquets because their pastoral landlords back in Australia could not pronounce their tribal names. This is the popular theory, although there is a condescending tone to some of the nicknames. In any case, cricket scorers were relieved that instead of Murrumgunarrimin, the player was called Twopenny; Brimbunyah was Redcap; Unaarrimin was Johnny Mullagh; Pripumuarraman was Charley Dumas.Twopenny played 46 of the possible 47 matches, but team captain Charles Lawrence was reluctant to bowl him for any decent spells until late in the tour. When he did bowl, Twopenny collected 35 wickets at 6.9, off just 704 balls – a strike rate of a wicket every 20.11 balls. Against East Hampshire, he proved a sensation, with match figures of 15 for 16 (9 for 9 and 6 for 7). Lawrence’s reluctance to bowl Twopenny early on the tour was due to his fear that his fast bowler might be called for throwing. His fear was unfounded – Twopenny’s action had never been queried in Australia – and when he did get to bowl in England, critics marvelled at his skill and applauded his performances.All the Aboriginal players were expert in throwing a boomerang or spear or both, or wielding a stock whip. Dumas was the team’s star boomerang man. He brought 15 of his best boomerangs with him to England and blew the crowd away at The Oval with his throwing: he made a boomerang soar the entire length of the ground, past the famous gas holders and back to a position where the ancient aeronautical marvel gyrated “obediently” for its master and landed gently between his feet.A few years ago Twopenny’s boomerang turned up at an auction house. There was some doubt about its authenticity but on the back were autographs of some county players who played against the 1868 Aboriginal tourists.Mosquito was an expert at the stock whip; Dick a Dick was the veritable Artful Dodger of the group, due to his amazing ability to dodge cricket balls hurled at him from ten paces; Johnny Cuzens, whose action was catapult-like in the Jeff Thomson mould, could run like the wind; and Redcap nailed a squirrel scampering up a tree at Mote Park with the deadly accuracy of Viv Richards throwing down the wicket in the field.Twopenny (standing, first from right) was a fast bowler but marked his presence on the tour of England with his lower-order hittingThe 1868 Australian team won 14, lost 14 and drew 19 of their matches in England in 1868. This was Australia’s first international sporting tour of England, and the team delighted crowds with their cricket, athletic prowess and throwing of spears and boomerangs.Mullagh excelled with bat and ball, hitting 1698 runs at 23.65 and taking 245 wickets at 10. At the other end of the scale was Sundown, a specialist batsman who played only two matches and scored one run. It was the only run Sundown ever scored in any match, either in Australia or in England. He must have been the original hero of the legend: “In the first innings he made one and in the second he was not quite so successful.”Back in Australia, Twopenny played one first-class match for New South Wales against Victoria in the summer of 1869-70. He was the first man of Aboriginal descent to play top cricket, but his one game produced just eight runs in two completed innings and figures of 0 for 56 off 30 fruitless overs.However, his all-run nine on the 1868 tour is a batting record that will stand forever.

The world body’s CEO, Dave Richardson, talks about the proliferation of T20 leagues, corruption in the game, and the role of technology

Interview by Nagraj Gollapudi and George Dobell19-Oct-2012What is the biggest issue cricket is facing currently?
On the cricket side, with the proliferation of domestic T20 leagues, there has to be a way to make sure that they can exist and complement international cricket rather than destroy or cannibalise it.There are huge benefits to having three different versions of the same game which appeal to different audiences and can keep cricket relevant to different people at different times. But with that comes the challenge of making sure that one format of the game does not prejudice the other two and vice versa. So that is probably the biggest challenge: making sure the international calendar works, providing balance between and context for the three formats. All the best players cannot play all of the time and need their periods of rest, and that is a challenge too.Is the Champions Trophy an example of that sort of sacrifice? Isn’t it a shame that if done right, it could have been the best world ODI tournament?
It is not so much about what went wrong. It is a good event. The point is, we now have three viable formats of the game and it makes sense to have one global event for each of the three formats rather than two 50-over formats and no Test event. Yes, it is a pity because the Champions Trophy is a good event – compact, sharp and contested by the best teams, but it is being replaced by the World Test Championship, which will be contested by the top four teams. So it would have a worthy replacement.As important as the many domestic T20 leagues are, don’t you think they are eating into the international calendar, which is the lifeline for the ICC?
That is what the recent at the chief executives’ committee and board have been about and trying to make sure they do not impact negatively on the primacy and relevance of international cricket. But not all the players are going to play in all the leagues. You might have a few who become specialist domestic T20 league players. But in the long term their marketability depends on how well they do at international level. That is where they make and retain their names. So I do not agree that it will be a total disaster. These leagues bring a lot of advantages: they have attracted more fans, they provide more opportunities for a deeper pool of players to play at the professional level. Before domestic T20, there was a very select band of players that actually were providing revenue for the game. Now it is a much bigger pool. And that is good for the game.There has been strong demand for the IPL having a window. Former India captain Rahul Dravid said earlier in the summer that creating a window for the IPL might enhance the quality of Test cricket because all the best players would then play?
In practical terms an informal window will be created for so long as the IPL retains its importance and players want to play in it. Even the likes of West Indies, who have traditionally played during the IPL window, will do their best to start scheduling their international cricket outside of that period. So that will happen just naturally without it being enforced. The difficulty of formally creating windows is, where do we stop? In two years’ time the USA might have a very viable [T20] league with lots of money and backing, so are we going to give them a window? I suspect you have to accommodate these domestic events while making sure international cricket remains relevant and attractive for the top players.

“Before domestic T20, there was a very select band of players who were providing revenue for the game; now it is a much bigger pool. And that is probably good for the game”

A conflict that always makes headlines is when a player requests his country’s board for a NOC to participate in an overseas domestic T20 event. Is that a source of controversy?
The international game and its development depend on the revenues generated from international cricket. Players get to where they are by coming through the system. It is reasonable to expect that cricket must do what it can to ensure that this development pathway is sustained. Ensuring that the best players are available to play for their national teams is very important to retaining the value and primacy of international cricket. NOCs help in this regard. If a restriction placed on players, which might be considered as a restraint of trade, is done for the reasonable purpose of ensuring the future of international cricket, then the court will say that is a reasonable restraint of trade. A restraint of trade is only unlawful if it is unreasonable.Speaking on the alleged corruption scandal involving umpires, you said it is a war you are fighting and it is all-encompassing. How does the Anti-Corruption and Security Unit better train the watchdogs appointed by the member boards to stem the rot of corruption?
We have an anti-corruption unit whose resources have been increased in recent times – they have got more personnel, they have got more money allocated, and their databases have been upgraded. What has happened is, because the international players are well educated now and know the risks, displacement has occurred and the bookies are now targeting domestic leagues. So to counter that we have made sure that every Full-Member country has its own anti-corruption unit in place and its own anti-corruption code, so that what we are doing at the international level can be mirrored at the domestic level. And in doing so we have increased the total resources available [to fight corruption]. Each country now has its own anti-corruption unit and the ACSU provides a co-ordinating role. Next year there is a big seminar scheduled to share information and best practice. Hopefully they can operate effectively as a whole.This has been suggested earlier, but is it possible or necessary for the ICC to run an undercover operation as regards to anti-corruption?
The primary strategy of the anti-corruption unit has been prevention. They are not a police force and have quite restricted investigatory powers. So the focus has been to try and prevent. In other words, gather intelligence, find out who the crooked bookmakers are and keep them away from players. When they come near the players, let us warn the players to stay away. And only if they ignore the warnings then nail them [players].The criticism has been “How come you have never caught anybody?” But actually it is bit like a good lawyer; he keeps you out of court. He does not wait for you to get to court and then try to help you. The ACSU operates on a similar basis.A policy of prevention relies on building trust between the ACSU and the players. Sting operations will only serve to destroy that trust. Obviously in some cases the ACSU has not prevented everything and sting operations have exposed things, but by and large the strategy of prevention is proving very successful.In some ways, can it not be regarded as a success that the sting operations are only exposing the lesser-known people?
Yes, it means that the efforts at education and prevention at the international level are working and the match-fixers have been forced to turn their attentions to domestic levels. We would love to get to a situation where all countries have legislation in place which makes it a serious criminal offence to approach a player to fix a match.The corrupt bookmakers are the problem. On the other hand, the players have got no excuse anymore – every single one of them has been educated, has been warned as to how these guys could entrap them. They have to say no.Was there a loophole in the vigilance in the case of these suspended umpires?
Not exactly. The umpires also have rules which prohibit corrupt conduct. Certainly, one would have expected more of umpires. Maybe at the domestic level there could have been an oversight in not providing proper education. That responsibility and that of taking disciplinary action falls on the member boards. The ICC has no jurisdiction over domestic umpires.”The fact that technology is used to the degree it is used in tennis is proof that it is not something developed in some garage”•Associated PressA big talking point in the last few years has been the extent to which technology is used in assisting umpires, which is proving to be crucial in matches. Does there not remain large room for improvement in terms of consistent use of technology?
Technology is a moving beast. Technology will keep improving. At the moment we use ball tracking [Hawk-Eye] and Hot Spot. We do not want to limit ourselves to those two tools and we have to keep an open mind to new technologies. As far as consistent application of the DRS in all international cricket, the BCCI remains unconvinced. They are against it as a matter of principle; they also have concerns that the technology is not accurate enough. It is our job to try and alleviate their concerns.Is it just the BCCI that is opposing the move?
Pretty much. The only time DRS is not deployed in other countries is due to costs.During the ICC AGM in the Kuala Lumpur it was understood that the ICC was satisfied with the improvements made in Hot Spot and ball tracking by an ICC-appointed Cambridge professor. Has that progress been stalled now?
The testing is work in progress. But the point is, we have presented the results which confirm the improvements in the technology to the BCCI. Hawk-Eye is improving with new cameras, Hot Spot has new cameras. The technology available today is good and provides accurate and reliable outcomes. Often people will say, “Oh, that can’t be right.” But it is more often than not, their perception that is wrong rather than the ball tracking. The fact that the same technology is used to the degree it is in sports such as tennis is evidence of the level of its accuracy. It is not something developed in some garage.We have shown the results of the testing to the Indian board. It is now a case of giving them a bit of breathing space and letting them make their own minds up. I do not believe in forcing anything on anyone. We know that Hot Spot is not going to be effective 100% of the time – there are faint edges which are not picked up at times. Yes, there are occasions when the ball-tracking technology may get it wrong, but it is not often; they occur very occasionally. The BCCI’s view is that until it is 100%, they do not want to use it.In your experience as an ICC employee for many years, what do you believe are the best methods to get the members – particularly Full Members – to approach the concerns of the ICC from a global perspective rather than from a national perspective? Or is this a pipe dream?
No, it is not pipe dream. It is something we need to work on. My view is that encouragement and persuasion always work better than a big stick. What you have to bear in mind is that not everyone’s view as to what’s best for the global game is the same. You might think it is best to have DRS, but someone else does not think it is. Who is right?Does the ICC lack teeth for the purpose?
It is not a case of lacking teeth. People need to understand what the ICC is: it is a collective of members, it is a co-operative. If the ICC management wants to change the size of the sponsor logo on a team shirt, they would need seven Full Members to vote in favour of that move.

“My view is that encouragement and persuasion always work better than a big stick.”

Recently the ICC carried out a detailed review of the governance. There were a whole number of recommendations provided in the Woolf Report. Quite naturally there are differences of opinion as to which recommendations should be implemented and which should not. It is going to be a hard road to get consensus. There is no easy way out. There will be heated debates, differences of opinion among the members. No organisation has ever changed its governance structure overnight. It is a process.Is there a worry the business model of cricket is not sustainable?
I do not think anyone really has all the answers. So finding the optimum volume of cricket which generates optimum revenues is always going to have a bit of trial and error involved. Market forces will come into play. If the TV rights being paid for bilateral series start to drop, that might be a signal that you should play less but with added context.That is why the World Test Championship is a good idea because all the matches will matter and people will fight hard to qualify. But will that trickle down to the teams lower in the rankings, and do we end up in a situation where there is a good argument for promotion, even in the top ten?
Whether that happens in Test cricket in the long run is something to be considered in the future. But certainly in the ODIs, the ICC board had already made a decision to introduce promotion and relegation in 2019. That means somewhere before that we need to start the process where we tell the teams that at a particular cut-off date you will be promoted or relegated. That process would probably need to be put in place sooner rather than later, so that teams have sufficient notice. The details as to how that is going to happen still have to be worked out, but promotion-relegation combined with qualification for the ten-team World Cup will provide incentives for the teams and context to bilateral ODI series.Fortunately because of the traditions, Test cricket has always been about bilateral series. Having the World Test Championship provides fantastic context for Test cricket. The road to the first event in 2017 begins now. Only the top four teams will qualify. Already I am thinking about the cut-off date for the 2017 event. If the cut off were today, would India, for example, be in the top four? The quality of the top eight teams is now so close that we are going to see some very good cricket.

ESPNcricinfo revisit some of the most memorable individual performances at the World Twenty20 2012

Nikita Bastian09-Oct-2012Brendon McCullum, 123 off 58
Bangladesh v New Zealand, Group D
Group D, comprising New Zealand, Bangladesh and Pakistan, was one of the tougher groupings in the tournament, making a winning start that much more important. New Zealand also had to contend with question marks over their ability to cope with the Bangladesh and Pakistan spinners. Brendon McCullum did not waste time wresting the initiative for his team with a brutal ton – his second in T20 internationals, he being the first player to score a second in the format – that came at more than two runs a ball. It was not just about big-hitting though. Instead, it was a lesson in how to pace a T20 innings: coming in to bat in the fourth over, he had a look early on, getting nine from his first 10 balls before picking up the pace with a six over cover off Shakib Al Hasan’s left-arm spin. From there on, McCullum interspersed the regular flow of boundaries with quick, well-placed singles, all the while priming for the final assault. That was launched in the 17th over, McCullum blasting 53 off his final 17 deliveries to lift New Zealand to 191. After the game, McCullum said he had played enough T20s to “get the pattern of how to play”. And it is the near-perfect pattern of play for Twenty20 batsmen, indeed.Jacques Kallis, 4 for 15
South Africa v Zimbabwe, Group C
Yes, this performance came against lowly Zimbabwe. Still, there was little Jacques Kallis could have done better with the ball in hand. He got the ball to move away slightly, he got it straight and full to cramp the batsmen, he got the ball to bounce at awkward heights, he followed the batsmen who tried to make room. All in a tidy 24-ball package, during the course of which his figures read 2.4-1-5-4. And Kallis struck just as Zimbabwe were looking to rebuild after a poor start, having gone from 16 for 3 to 51 for 3: he came on in the 11th over and removed Stuart Matsikenyeri and Elton Chigumbura with consecutive deliveries in a double-wicket maiden. Zimbabwe finished with 93. For Kallis, it was his best bowling performance in T20 internationals; for South Africa, it was an ideal start to the World Twenty20.Shane Watson, 3 for 34 and 72 off 42

Australia v India, Super Eights
Shane Watson has the most Man of the Match awards in T20 internationals: eight. He won half of those in the World Twenty20, in consecutive games. One of the award-winning performances, and perhaps the most dominating of the lot, came against India at the beginning of the Super Eights. Watson had a poor start to the match, being taken for 13 runs in an over by Virat Kohli and Irfan Pathan. Far from falling to pieces though, Watson struck with the first ball of his second over, bouncing out Yuvraj Singh. He also got rid of Pathan in that over; India were 70 for 2 after 10, 74 for 4 after 11 and from there Australia did not cede control of the match. Chasing 141, Watson, with some help from David Warner and the India bowlers, orchestrated a massacre. He had six sixes before hitting his first four. The smooth brutality of the innings could be captured in one shot: a flat, pulled six over midwicket off Pathan, which landed just above the Australian dugout. The chase was over with more than five overs to spare. So commanding was Watson’s performance, and subsequently Australia’s, that suddenly they became hot favourites.Chris Gayle, 75* off 41
Australia v West Indies, semi-final
If Australia were the team to beat, Chris Gayle remained the wicket to claim. Australia couldn’t get him out, and he made them pay in the semi-finals. The most striking factor of this knock, though, was Gayle’s willingness to be watchful. There was no big hundred, despite him batting through the innings, but that was mostly down to him gaining only a fraction of the strike: 41 balls. Some of those 41 he faced in discomfort, with an apparent abdominal muscle strain; most of them he faced with caution overriding aggression as he pushed Australia to the brink. With Kieron Pollard joining Gayle for the final push, West Indies cleared 200, a total that proved way beyond an out-of-sorts Australian line up.On cue, Ajantha Mendis mystified on his international return•Associated PressMahela Jayawardene, 42 off 36
Sri Lanka v Pakistan, semi-final
Remember Mahela Jayawardene’s silky century in the final of last year’s ODI World Cup? This was another one of those masterful innings. But this one included a lot more battling, for it was not on that kind of pitch. In place of the placid Wankhede pitch, was a powdery, crumbling turner at Premadasa: one of the toughest pitches you’d come across in the shortest format. Of course, in such conditions, you’d expect to fall back on Jayawardene and he didn’t disappoint, crafting a skilful, gutsy innings that proved to be the difference between the two sides. As Sohail Tanvir kept it in the channel outside off, he made sure he played with soft hands and, with the ball spinning square for the slower bowlers, brought out an array of sweeps and reverse-sweeps, with the odd fine glance and lap shot. A classy display from Jayawardene, which went a long way in putting Sri Lanka into yet another big final.Ajantha Mendis, 4 for 12
Sri Lanka v West Indies, final
Ajantha Mendis had already showed glimpses of what he could do in his first match back in Sri Lankan colours in eight months, when he took two wickets in two balls in his first over against Zimbabwe in the group stage, on his way to figures of 6 for 8 – the best in Twenty20 internationals. On biggest night of the tournament, he would deliver again. West Indies seemed overawed by the occasion, poking their way to 12 for 1 in five overs when Mendis came on. It took him four balls to trap a tentative Chris Gayle, the player many said West Indies’ hopes rested on – one ball was swept at and missed, and two produced shouts for lbw, the second of which was upheld. He went on to rip the heart out of the West Indies line-up with the wickets of Dwayne Bravo, Kieron Pollard and Andre Russell. At one point, he was on a hat-trick, and was denied only by an inside edge from Darren Sammy that narrowly missed the stumps. By the time Mendis was done, he had reduced West Indies to 89 for 5 in 16 overs.Marlon Samuels, 78 off 56

Sri Lanka v West Indies, final
A knock of 78 at a strike rate of 139 in a T20 game might not seem like much. You’d have to factor in that it was the World Twenty20 final, that West Indies had scored 32 off 10 overs and the opposition attack included Lasith Malinga and Ajantha Mendis to better understand the significance of this Marlon Samuels’ special. Sample this: never before in T20 internationals had any batsman hit Lasith Malinga for more than one six during the course of an innings; Samuels hit Malinga for three sixes in an over, clearing the midwicket, extra cover and long-on boundaries. Two more sixes followed in Malinga’s next over, the final one being a monster 108-metre hit onto the roof of the R Premadasa Stadium. The world’s best Twenty20 bowler dealt with, Samuels had reignited West Indies self-belief and put them on their way to a famous win.

Perhaps the perfect role model for Sri Lanka, Rangana Herath suffered a grave injustice by going wicketless on day two despite a performance that could have brought his side back into the match

Andrew Fernando in Melbourne27-Dec-2012As the torment of day one morphed into day two’s toil for Sri Lanka, the indiscipline that laid their batting low invaded their efforts in the field and worsened distress to despair.Perhaps it was never fair to expect Sri Lanka to outplay Australia at home, and even less likely they would effect a series win given the paucity of their pace attack. But the most disheartening aspect of their MCG performance has not been their lack of muscle. They have instead been clobbered by their own dearth of resolve and an inability to mount a riposte at Australia’s challenge.Sri Lanka may have been significantly hampered by a probable series-ending injury to their leading fast bowler, Chanaka Welegedara, but the chances they missed in the field were a greater cause of grief, as defining as they have been to the scoreline, and as such, to Sri Lanka’s hopeless plight. When they had Australia at 117 for 3, Sri Lanka could dream of beginning the second innings with a deficit on the sunnier side of 100, but instead they shelled chance after chance of surging back into the game.Michael Clarke was the first to be reprieved by Tillakaratne Dilshan at short mid-on, before Kumar Sangakkara gave Shane Watson the first of his lives by spilling an edge. They were tough chances, and Sangakkara would not have expected to don the gloves at the MCG, but when your side has made such a paltry first innings total, failing to take such opportunities is to accept an invitation of pain.Clarke danced down the track to Rangana Herath all morning, and when a stumping chance finally came, he was again let off. Luck may have spat on Sangakkara, as the ball deflected off Clarke’s back leg to evade his grasp, but Sri Lanka can hardly be dismayed when fortune spurns them when they have so consistently spurned her. Clarke is so drenched in form he could exhale runs at present and given Sri Lanka allowed him a third life on a good pitch, perhaps they should be grateful he only made a century.

If Herath’s much-praised colleagues had displayed even a fraction of his desire in this match, Sri Lanka might well be alive in it.

The Clarke chances, the dropped slip catch off Watson and another difficult chance off Michael Hussy, were all off Herath’s bowling, and perhaps for the first time in his international career, the determination in his perpetual grimace gave way not to disappointment, but to anger. “I served up the wicket of the best batsman in the world this year and one of the world’s best players of spin, twice,” his expression screamed in the first session. “This is a first innings pitch. What more do you want me to do?”That Herath ended the day without a scalp to his name is not only a severe injustice, it is an indictment on his teammates who have ill-supported their matchwinner. Herath is new to the praise that his misfiring colleagues have been adorned in for years, but if they had displayed even a fraction of his desire in this match, Sri Lanka might well be alive in it.In many ways Herath is also the perfect role model for Sri Lanka. They may never have a domestic competition so burdened with treasure that they can dip into it at will and unearth a cricketer of immediate Test quality, as Australia have done with Jackson Bird, but there are means to maximising limited talent and Herath has achieved that through force of will. If he was playing at club level, Herath might take bagfuls of wickets but few will suspect he is capable of being one of the best bowlers in the world. If his refusal to be cowed by the opposition at the bowling crease does not make plain the avenue he has trod to acclaim, his tenacity in the field certainly outlines it.Among Test cricketers, he is perhaps the most unlikely athlete, yet he drives himself to be safe in the field, and has, three times, pulled off the kind of unforgettable catches most cricketers might only achieve once in their career. His stellar one-handed grab to dismiss Hussey at long on bore strong parallels to an almost identical, but perhaps even more thrilling, effort against the same opposition in an ODI at the Gabba early this year, though his catch diving forward at the Premadasa in a Test against West Indies was of a completely different vein altogether. In all three catches, perhaps a quicker man would have covered the ground with more ease and pocketed their chances more comfortably. But faced with a daunting task, Herath exploited every ounce of ability available to him to achieve the desired result.Sri Lanka may not have a Test side capable of dominating Australia from start to finish, but in Melbourne they have been as meek and as inept as they have been in any Test in recent years. They are hurtling towards an innings defeat, with any hope of a 2011 Durban repeat obliterated long ago. Unless they can dig up the nerve and the courage that have at times been at the core of Sri Lanka’s cricket, their first Boxing Day Test in 17 years could end in three days.

Tony Greig genuinely loved the game, was always well-informed about it, and brought an energy all his own to the commentary box

Harsha Bhogle29-Dec-2012It didn’t matter if you didn’t agree with Tony Greig, and I don’t think it mattered to him either, but gee, you listened to him.He had what every commentator must: he had energy, and he loved the game, and the two always went together. And because he so loved the game, he knew everything about it. If there was a change in the playing conditions, he was up with the news first; if there was a match going on in Gwalior and he was in Port Elizabeth, he knew what was happening; and if there was a controversy, he waded into it.I didn’t actually work a lot with him but whenever I did, I noticed he was always ready. He had his facts and he would go into battle with them. “Righto, let’s take a look at this…” meant you had better be prepared to talk about what he was going to come up with. When I wasn’t completely sure about a couple of aspects of the DRS debate, I went to his blog, and sure as ever, everything was there. He liked to know what was happening.But Greig the commentator was merely the reflection of Greig, the outstanding cricketer. He came to Hyderabad in 1972-73, and I instantly disliked him from our school stand because he produced a beauty to bowl our hero, GR Viswanath. He had long strides, and like all South Africans hit the deck hard. We went home that evening and while we couldn’t match the length of his strides, we still copied his run-up and delivery.Those two England tours of India, 1972-73, and then as captain in 1976-77 were memorable. We didn’t know silly point till he stood there. He batted for ever and ever in Calcutta to score 103 and win England a game, and of course, in Bombay he lifted Vishy up in his arms when he got a hundred. That picture appeared everywhere.He was English, he was Australian, and often he was Sri Lankan, but somewhere the South African in him never went away. On the few occasions we chatted, I asked him about South Africa and I thought there was a different tone to his voice. He was one of cricket’s great travellers.I will miss the zest he had for cricket.