Ponting & Aus team got fined for slow over rate against NZ in the first test of the series. This is the fifth time Aus and Ponting have been penalized this year but the penalty that he has been getting is miniscule fine. For same offence, Sourav Ganguly and Collingwood have been handed match-bans by ICC match refrees but when it comes to Aus and Ponting, same person takes a different view altogether and ignores previous breaches.
Chris Broad was the referee during Ind-Aus series and also during Aus-NZ series and in two consecutive matches he handed out penalty to Ponting but forgot that if same offence is repeated within twelve months, the level of penalty increases though he applied the same rule while penalizing Sourav Ganguly. In case of ponting, this is the "five-peat" of the same offence this year but he still gets away with a light rap on his knuckles.
ICC - Wake up. You cannot fool the biggest market like this and more people realize the double game that you are playing, more irrelevant you become in cricket affairs and more legitimized BCCI's attempts to control Internation cricket become.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
The farce in Kanpur
Yesterday we saw farcical ending to Ind-Eng ODI at Kanpur and it is hard to fathom why it ended this way.
The Stadium has flood lights, then why can't these be used when match is being played with white balls. We could even had a full 50 over match if lights were allowed to be used. Not sure why would ICC let captains decide this when cricket administrators have provided them all amenities to continue play even if natural light is low. So, both the captains are clearly at fault here.
If officials were aware that floodlights are not going to be used then either they should have reduced lunch time or reduced number of overs to be played. If 45 min are lost, it means a total of 11 overs should have been reduced and play indeed went on for 89 overs. I am not sure if they went as per ICC rules on this. If so, then these rules need a relook soon.
After ICC world cup and NZ-Eng match earlier this year, it was expected that ICC would have reviewed they way lost time is handled but clearly, ICC has not done its job well. Whether it is officials or rule book, something needs to be reviewed again.
I sam some blogs and media reports which blamed BCCI and Indian officials for this fracas. I do not understand this. BCCI does not control weather and sunshine and it has provided floodlights on this stadium to ensure game can be played. If ICC rules allow people to overlook those facilities, it cannot help anything.
The good part in this drama was that both the captains were aware of D/L coming into picture later in the day. MSD was carrying the scoring sheet for D/L with him and KP made sure that he used all his premium bowlers earlier in the chase and not later. At the time the match was called off, Flintoff and Broad were left with one over each and Swann had bowled out. So, KP gave his best shot to keep the Indian reply in check. But Indian team is far too strong for England under these conditions that they still won it comfortably.
Even if weather had not been a factor, India would still have won it. MSD wasted a lot of deliveries to ensure his wicket is intact because he knew that it was important to just stay there. Under normal circumstances, he would have played faster and India would have won with bigger margin.
The Stadium has flood lights, then why can't these be used when match is being played with white balls. We could even had a full 50 over match if lights were allowed to be used. Not sure why would ICC let captains decide this when cricket administrators have provided them all amenities to continue play even if natural light is low. So, both the captains are clearly at fault here.
If officials were aware that floodlights are not going to be used then either they should have reduced lunch time or reduced number of overs to be played. If 45 min are lost, it means a total of 11 overs should have been reduced and play indeed went on for 89 overs. I am not sure if they went as per ICC rules on this. If so, then these rules need a relook soon.
After ICC world cup and NZ-Eng match earlier this year, it was expected that ICC would have reviewed they way lost time is handled but clearly, ICC has not done its job well. Whether it is officials or rule book, something needs to be reviewed again.
I sam some blogs and media reports which blamed BCCI and Indian officials for this fracas. I do not understand this. BCCI does not control weather and sunshine and it has provided floodlights on this stadium to ensure game can be played. If ICC rules allow people to overlook those facilities, it cannot help anything.
The good part in this drama was that both the captains were aware of D/L coming into picture later in the day. MSD was carrying the scoring sheet for D/L with him and KP made sure that he used all his premium bowlers earlier in the chase and not later. At the time the match was called off, Flintoff and Broad were left with one over each and Swann had bowled out. So, KP gave his best shot to keep the Indian reply in check. But Indian team is far too strong for England under these conditions that they still won it comfortably.
Even if weather had not been a factor, India would still have won it. MSD wasted a lot of deliveries to ensure his wicket is intact because he knew that it was important to just stay there. Under normal circumstances, he would have played faster and India would have won with bigger margin.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Will Ricky Ponting be the same batsman?
Since the time McGrath & Warne retired, not only has the aura around Aussie cricket team diminished but also there is one more casualty that has not been noticed much and that is - Ricky Ponting's batting form. He has averaged way below his career average since Ashes 07 and he averaged way more than his career average in years 2005 & 2006.
This is true that Aus has mostly played against India since then and Ponting averages poorly against Indians. Still the dip is significant (avg 45 as compared to nearly 60 earlier).
The difference could be due to team situation and additional pressure of ensuring higher totals in the absence of Mcgrath and Warne. He knows he does not have the bowling attack to get opposition out cheaply and thus takes less risk. Moreover with the retirement of Gilchrist and Langer, his team depends far more on him than ever before and he cannot score as freely as he used to. I believe once Matt hayden calls it a day, their would be further slump in Ponting's batting form. Aus is slated to play 14 tests over next 8-9 months and they will give us good picture of how he shapes up now.
Till some time back, it was taken for granted that Ponting would end up with most batting records when Tendulkar retires. He may still end up with some of them though those will be pretty hard to get on current form and if Tendulkar gets selective in playing matches and focuses on test cricket only, even those may become further difiicult.
This is true that Aus has mostly played against India since then and Ponting averages poorly against Indians. Still the dip is significant (avg 45 as compared to nearly 60 earlier).
The difference could be due to team situation and additional pressure of ensuring higher totals in the absence of Mcgrath and Warne. He knows he does not have the bowling attack to get opposition out cheaply and thus takes less risk. Moreover with the retirement of Gilchrist and Langer, his team depends far more on him than ever before and he cannot score as freely as he used to. I believe once Matt hayden calls it a day, their would be further slump in Ponting's batting form. Aus is slated to play 14 tests over next 8-9 months and they will give us good picture of how he shapes up now.
Till some time back, it was taken for granted that Ponting would end up with most batting records when Tendulkar retires. He may still end up with some of them though those will be pretty hard to get on current form and if Tendulkar gets selective in playing matches and focuses on test cricket only, even those may become further difiicult.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
ICC and the art of being biased
ICC has once again proved how biased it is in favor of Aus and against Ind.
Ricky ponting got fined 20% of hs match fees after Nagpur test since his team was two overs behind. He was fined the same amount after Perth test in Jan 2008 as well. He & his team has been adjudged guilty of a Level 2 breach twice within same year. As per ICC rules, the penalty should be for a Level 3 offence meaning a ban for at least one match. Gautam Gambhir has been penalized in the same way (read my prev blog) but not Ponting. Ponting is a serial offender as far as over rates are concerned but ICC treats him with kid gloves since he is Australian.
Similarly, Cameron White was caught changing the condition of cricket ball during Nagpur test but there is no action taken. Had there been any Asian player caught doing the same thing, there would have been a penalty immediately. But ICC will still sleep over it.
Ricky ponting got fined 20% of hs match fees after Nagpur test since his team was two overs behind. He was fined the same amount after Perth test in Jan 2008 as well. He & his team has been adjudged guilty of a Level 2 breach twice within same year. As per ICC rules, the penalty should be for a Level 3 offence meaning a ban for at least one match. Gautam Gambhir has been penalized in the same way (read my prev blog) but not Ponting. Ponting is a serial offender as far as over rates are concerned but ICC treats him with kid gloves since he is Australian.
Similarly, Cameron White was caught changing the condition of cricket ball during Nagpur test but there is no action taken. Had there been any Asian player caught doing the same thing, there would have been a penalty immediately. But ICC will still sleep over it.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Gautam Gambhir penalized by ICC
Here is one more example of an Indian cricketer being penalized by ICC whereas cricketers from other teams primarily Aus, Eng and SA go scot free for similar kind of behavior on the field. There is a long history of ICC and BCCI playing games of oneupmanship and ICC has thrown rule book very frequently on India cricketers to settle their score and also to make people believe that India board has lots of money but not a good cricket team even after having deep pockets. This makes people think that BCCI is just busy in minting money with no regards to Cricket development. Whenever Indian team starts doing well against any of top nations, we see India cricketers getting penalized for minor infringements affecting their morale and performance. Sample this:
1. India beats SA in a test match for first time in SA in 2006-07 series. Sreesanth is fined.
2. India beats Eng in test series to go 1-0 up. Sreesanth is fined.
3. India beats Aus in T20 world cup Semi-final. Sreesanth is fined.
Incidentally, Sreesanth was a stand out performer in all these matches, and in match against SA, Andre Nel openly bad-mouthed him but still match refree chose to ignore that.
In the current series, Zaheer khan has been bowling very well and he has been fined already. Gautam Gambhir is the leading scorer and he has been banned for the crucial final test.
In the past decade, we have seen many cricketers who have good records against Aus being targeted by match officials on flimsy reasons and troubled with disciplinary actions - Muralidharan, Shoaib Akhtar, Harbhajan, Sourav Ganguly to name a few.
Aus cricketers openly call themselves aggressive but when it comes to taking action, ICC only targets Asian cricketers for aggressive behavior as if Aussies are saints on the field.
ICC mostly turns blind eye towards transgression by other cricketers esp Aus. During 2007-08 Aus-Ind series, Ponting was penalized for slow over rate in third test (Perth). Link: http://content-www.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/story/332294.html
For some reason, this does not figure in the list of breaches that are listed on ICC website - http://icc-cricket.yahoo.com/about-icc/breaches-and-penalties-2008.html
In the current series, during 2nd test, Aus bowled only 85 overs during the day + additional half hour. This is 5 overs less than overs specified (90) and Aus took 30 min extra too. So why was no action taken against Ponting now. Since the same breach happened again within a year, if ICC match refree had taken cognisance of that, then it would have resulted in a much higher penalty this time - may be a test match ban on Ponting but match refree chose to keep his eyes shut on this.
ICC needs to mend its ways pretty quickly. By denying Gautam Gambhir his rights of natural justice, ICC has further lost its credibility in the eyes of Indian cricket fans and it comes across as subservient to Aus cricket board once again. It was in best interest of Aus to get Gambir out of last test and they have ensured it through back doors that he does not play in the final test.
1. India beats SA in a test match for first time in SA in 2006-07 series. Sreesanth is fined.
2. India beats Eng in test series to go 1-0 up. Sreesanth is fined.
3. India beats Aus in T20 world cup Semi-final. Sreesanth is fined.
Incidentally, Sreesanth was a stand out performer in all these matches, and in match against SA, Andre Nel openly bad-mouthed him but still match refree chose to ignore that.
In the current series, Zaheer khan has been bowling very well and he has been fined already. Gautam Gambhir is the leading scorer and he has been banned for the crucial final test.
In the past decade, we have seen many cricketers who have good records against Aus being targeted by match officials on flimsy reasons and troubled with disciplinary actions - Muralidharan, Shoaib Akhtar, Harbhajan, Sourav Ganguly to name a few.
Aus cricketers openly call themselves aggressive but when it comes to taking action, ICC only targets Asian cricketers for aggressive behavior as if Aussies are saints on the field.
ICC mostly turns blind eye towards transgression by other cricketers esp Aus. During 2007-08 Aus-Ind series, Ponting was penalized for slow over rate in third test (Perth). Link: http://content-www.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/story/332294.html
For some reason, this does not figure in the list of breaches that are listed on ICC website - http://icc-cricket.yahoo.com/about-icc/breaches-and-penalties-2008.html
In the current series, during 2nd test, Aus bowled only 85 overs during the day + additional half hour. This is 5 overs less than overs specified (90) and Aus took 30 min extra too. So why was no action taken against Ponting now. Since the same breach happened again within a year, if ICC match refree had taken cognisance of that, then it would have resulted in a much higher penalty this time - may be a test match ban on Ponting but match refree chose to keep his eyes shut on this.
ICC needs to mend its ways pretty quickly. By denying Gautam Gambhir his rights of natural justice, ICC has further lost its credibility in the eyes of Indian cricket fans and it comes across as subservient to Aus cricket board once again. It was in best interest of Aus to get Gambir out of last test and they have ensured it through back doors that he does not play in the final test.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Twenty20 for 20
The last week's events in Antigua culminating in Superstars' win can be summed up as Allen Stanford's show from start to finish. He looked like the master of all he surveyed. He ensured that batsmen played with black bats, had full access to players dressing room and also had WAGs for company.
See this story in The Sun - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/cricket/article1864808.ece
He literally had English cricket in his lap :) (pun intended).
The whole event was nothing more than a publicity gimmick for him and he got better returns than he expected. Yes, he invested $20m into this but in my opinion, he got better returns than he or anyone else anticipated.
The kind of publicity that he got through this event would be worth much more than he spent. The result of the match (Superstars bt England in a one-sided encounter) would give everyone in WI a false hope of WI's cricket revival. Even sane people will forget that winning a match classified as exhibition does not make WI team a good team, leave alone great. But Stanford's spin-doctors would ensure that people in Antigua see him as a philanthropist who revived WI cricket. People will start comparing this result with drubbing that WI teams of 80s used to give England in their heydays.
It is ECB and english cricket which seem to have lost out from the drama of last week. In terms of quality of cricket, it was a pathetic display from English side who seem to be thinking more about how to spend the winner's cheque or how to behave after they have won. Giles Clarke used to call himself as champion of Test cricket, now he has no place to hide. English cricketers have emerged as money-hungry and whining sportsmen. They were seen as a side on upswing during their last series against SA but played as a club side during the match.
After watching this show, I fail to understand why does ECB has issues with its players playing in IPL? If they can play 20-20 in WI for a large amount of money, then can do the same in India as well.
I have been reading articles about BCCI becoming dominant body in ICC and trying to bully other cricket boards using their financial muscle. In this case, Stanford used his financial muscle to make ECB swallow its pride and made them and english cricketers a laughing stock. Not sure if the whole thing is worth it.
See this story in The Sun - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/cricket/article1864808.ece
He literally had English cricket in his lap :) (pun intended).
The whole event was nothing more than a publicity gimmick for him and he got better returns than he expected. Yes, he invested $20m into this but in my opinion, he got better returns than he or anyone else anticipated.
The kind of publicity that he got through this event would be worth much more than he spent. The result of the match (Superstars bt England in a one-sided encounter) would give everyone in WI a false hope of WI's cricket revival. Even sane people will forget that winning a match classified as exhibition does not make WI team a good team, leave alone great. But Stanford's spin-doctors would ensure that people in Antigua see him as a philanthropist who revived WI cricket. People will start comparing this result with drubbing that WI teams of 80s used to give England in their heydays.
It is ECB and english cricket which seem to have lost out from the drama of last week. In terms of quality of cricket, it was a pathetic display from English side who seem to be thinking more about how to spend the winner's cheque or how to behave after they have won. Giles Clarke used to call himself as champion of Test cricket, now he has no place to hide. English cricketers have emerged as money-hungry and whining sportsmen. They were seen as a side on upswing during their last series against SA but played as a club side during the match.
After watching this show, I fail to understand why does ECB has issues with its players playing in IPL? If they can play 20-20 in WI for a large amount of money, then can do the same in India as well.
I have been reading articles about BCCI becoming dominant body in ICC and trying to bully other cricket boards using their financial muscle. In this case, Stanford used his financial muscle to make ECB swallow its pride and made them and english cricketers a laughing stock. Not sure if the whole thing is worth it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)