Stats highlights of West Indies’ 40-run win against Pakistan in Providence

S Rajesh16-May-2011Saeed Ajmal had match figures of 11 for 111, which are the second-best in a losing cause for Pakistan•AFP The victory is West Indies’ first in 18 Tests, since they beat England by an innings and 23 runs in Kingston in February 2009. In 17 Tests during this period, West Indies lost eight and drew nine.Meanwhile, Pakistan’s win-loss since 2007 isn’t much better: 5-15 in 30 Tests, with ten draws. The defeat also means Pakistan’s record of never having won a Test series in the West Indies will stay on a little longer. The highest score in the match for West Indies was Lendl Simmons’ 49, which makes it only the fourth time since 2000 that a team has won a Test without a single half-century by any of their batsmen. It’s the second such win for West Indies during this period – they’d beaten Zimbabwe by 35 runs in March 2000 when their highest scorer had been Shivanarine Chanderpaul with 49. The previous such instance was New Zealand’s four-wicket win against India in Hamilton in December 2002, when no batsman from either team touched 40. Saeed Ajmal’s match figures of 11 for 111 are the second-best figures by a Pakistan bowler in a losing cause, only a run behind Wasim Akram’s 11 for 110 against the same opponents in Antigua in 2000; in fact, it’s almost exactly 11 years since Akram’s feat. Akram also features three times in the top four such performances for Pakistan. The best figures in a defeat remain Javagal Srinath’s 13 for 132 against Pakistan in Kolkata in February 1999. The match average of 17.90 runs per wicket is the third-lowest in Tests in the West Indies since the beginning of 2000. The lowest is 15.32, in that Test between West Indies and Zimbabwe in Port of Spain in 2000. Darren Sammy’s match figures of 7 for 45 are his second-best in Tests, after his 8 for 98 against England at Old Trafford in 2007. In 12 Tests so far, Sammy has taken 36 wickets at an impressive average of 26.25. Ravi Rampaul’s 7 for 75 are easily his best match figures; in fact, in his previous five Tests he had taken four wickets, and had gone wicketless in his previous two matches. After being reduced to 2 for 3 in their fourth-innings run-chase, Pakistan fought back valiantly with an 81-run stand for the fourth wicket, which is only the third time they’ve managed a fifty-plus stand for the fourth after being three down for less than ten. In conditions in which most bowlers enjoyed themselves, Pakistan’s premier strike bowler Umar Gul had a poor game, finishing wicketless for only the third time in 35 Tests.

ESPNcricinfo presents the Plays of the Day from the second day of the second Test between India and West Indies in Kolkata

S Aga15-Nov-2011The product placement
With a small traffic jam for the No. 6 spot in the Test line-up, Yuvraj Singh knows that time isn’t on his side. Having failed to make a dent on the scoreboard in Delhi, he arrived at the crease here knowing that a platform was already in place for a huge total. En route to 25, he miscued a pull and got hit. It was the slowest of the West Indies pace trio that dismissed him though, with Darren Sammy getting one through his defences to win a close leg-before shout. Yuvraj’s slow walk back included plenty of glances at the giant screen. But instead of a replay, it just kept showing an advertisement.The delayed redemption
MS Dhoni was on 13 when he threw the kitchen plumbing at a Kemar Roach delivery. Carlton Baugh caught the edge, but the celebrations were cut short by a no-ball call. Dhoni had added just three more to his total when the routine repeated itself, only this time Roach’s foot was even further in front of the line. By the time he finally got his man, Dhoni had pummelled the small matter of 144 runs.The swat
Soon after the two no-ball reprieves, Fidel Edwards decided to test Dhoni with a short ball. The response was smashed straight past him with the velocity of a Roger Federer forehand. It set the tone for a buccaneering innings.The trademark wristwork
Years from now, when we think of VVS Laxman, we’ll think of those clips through midwicket, often picking up the ball from well outside off stump. One such stroke, essayed with typically wondrous timing got him to his fifth century at Eden Gardens.The payback
It was like watching a replay of countless dismissals from the 1980s and 90s. Only, this time, it was a West Indian at the receiving end. Short of a length at lively pace from Umesh Yadav, a bit of extra bounce and a tentative fend from the batsman that flew off the edge to the slip cordon. Times have changed.The where is DRS moment
With 432 needed just to stave off the follow-on, what West Indies didn’t need was to lose a second wicket before the gloom descended. But R Ashwin was getting appreciable bounce, and most of the close-in fielders went up in appeal as the ball looped up to short leg off Kraigg Brathwaite’s forward prod. The umpire’s decision didn’t take much time, but replays appeared to suggest only pad and no bat. With no Decision Review System in place for this series, Brathwaite could only grimace and walk off.

A much-anticipated contest between two top teams turned out to be hopelessly one-sided as England overwhelmed India in every department

Madhusudhan Ramakrishnan24-Aug-2011

India’s drastic fall

Stuart Broad’s 25 wickets in four Tests is the joint-highest in a home series for England since 2000•Getty ImagesBefore the series started, the contest was expected to be tight with a realistic possibility of India winning their second consecutive series in England. Instead, the series turned out to be one of the most lop-sided in Test history with England trouncing India 4-0. While the margin reflects the gulf in class between the two sides, it does not do complete justice to England’s exceptional all-round dominance nor does it completely put India’s abysmal show into perspective.India, who were No.1 before the series started, lost the first two Tests by margins of 196 runs and 319 runs and the next two by an innings making it only the third series against England in which they have lost two or more Tests by an innings. Further evidence of England’s superb performance is the fact that all four defeat margins feature in the top sixteen Indian losses since 2000.England’s outstanding display is all the more creditable as they outperformed an Indian batting line-up which was among the best in the business before the start of the series. While India failed to cross 300 in any of their eight innings, England racked up over 500 in three consecutive innings. India’s batting failures were harder to fathom since their line-up featured Test cricket’s top two run-getters in Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid.It wasn’t just the batting that failed for India. The bowlers struggled for impact and consistency throughout and the England batsmen piled on the runs in every Test. India managed to pick up just 47 wickets while England picked up 80 wickets, bowling India out on every occasion. England’s wickets-per-match figure in the series (20) is well above their mark in the Tests preceding the series (15.84). The wickets-per-match figure for India in the series (11.75) is much lower than the corresponding number in the Tests before the series (15.63).A look at the numbers before the series and during the series clearly outlines England’s dominance. Both teams had very similar batting averages in Tests played between the start of 2009 and the beginning of the series while England had a slightly better bowling average. In this series though, the difference between the teams’ averages was a massive 34.21 in favour of England.

Outclassed with bat and ball

England’s 4-0 win is their third whitewash in series of three or more matches since 2000. Their previous such results in the home summer of 2004 when they blanked both West Indies and New Zealand. India, who had won at least one Test in every series since their 1-0 defeat to Pakistan in 2005-06, suffered their first whitewash since the 3-0 drubbing in Australia in 1999-00.The average difference between the teams in this series (34.21) is the highest among all series whitewashes since 1999-2000. England’s average (59.76) is more than double that of India’s (25.55) and the ratio of the two averages (2.33) is also the highest among all series whitewashes in the same period. Not only is the run difference of 765 the highest in the table, the 33-wicket difference between the two teams is second only to the 37-wicket difference between Australia and England in the 2006-07 Ashes.

Worst loss against England since 1974

England, who have inflicted series whitewashes on 13 occasions (minimum three matches), completed their fourth such series win over India. It is their first whitewash against India since the 3-0 win in the home series in 1974. While the average difference of 48.33 in 1974 and the wickets difference of 38 in 1967 are the highest in India-England series, the corresponding figures in the 2011 series are not too far behind. The 4-0 margin is only the sixth time that India have lost four or more matches in a series with the previous such result coming in the 1991-92 series in Australia. India also suffered innings defeats in two consecutive Tests in a series for the first time since the 1974 series.

England’s exceptional lower-order batting

England’s top-order batsmen did struggle in the first two Tests but were rescued on both occasions by the lower order. While Stuart Broad and Matt Prior shared a superb century stand in the second innings at Lord’s, it was Broad and Graeme Swann who took England to a competitive 221 in the second Test after they were perilously placed at 124 for 8. The story of the next three innings was completely the opposite. The lower-order batsmen were hardly required as Ian Bell, Kevin Pietersen and Alastair Cook hit top form. Bell, in particular, was brilliant scoring 159, 34 and 235 in his last three innings. Cook shrugged off a poor start to the series with a mammoth 294 in England’s innings-win in Edgbaston. The lower order, however, averaged higher than the top order while also scoring at a higher run-rate.India, who were extremely disappointing with the bat throughout the series failed to stitch together any substantial stands. They had only two century partnerships in the series while England had ten. The top order averaged just 28.85 with only Dravid demonstrating the right technique and application. India’s lower order, in sharp contrast to England’s, averaged under 21 and were rolled over far too easily in almost every innings.

In a league of his own

With none of the other Indian batsmen offering a fight, Dravid’s superlative batting efforts were solely responsible for reducing the margins of defeat. He scored three centuries for the second time in England becoming only the second visiting batsman after Don Bradman to achieve the feat. During the course of his unbeaten 146 in the final Test, he also became the third Indian batsman after Sunil Gavaskar and Virender Sehwag to carry his bat. Only Tim Bresnan troubled Dravid dismissing him two times while conceding just 44 runs. In 472 balls from James Anderson and Stuart Broad, Dravid was dismissed only three times. The other Indian batsmen, however, have a balls-per-dismissal figure of 46.71 against Anderson and 37.08 against Broad. Dravid’s average of 56 and 105 against Anderson and Broad is far ahead of the rest of the top-order batsmen who have corresponding numbers of 25.50 and 13.15.

Broad’s all-round heroics

Broad, who was declared England’s player of the series, returned outstanding figures of 25 wickets at an average of 13.84. His average is the sixth-best among fast bowlers who have picked up 15-plus wickets in a series against India. In the second Test, both Broad and Bresnan joined the list of England players with a fifty-plus score and a five-wicket haul in a Test against India. Swann, who wasn’t quite at his best in the first three Tests, bowled superbly at The Oval and picked up his 11th five-wicket haul. His average of 40.69 was much better than that of Harbhajan Singh and Amit Mishra who averaged 106.66 and 143.50 respectively.As another indication of England’s all-round dominance, Prior, in the hugely-important role of a wicketkeeper-batsman, comfortably outperformed his counterpart Dhoni. He averaged 67.75 at a run-rate of 5.14 and the confidence in his batting was reflected in his quality keeping. Dhoni, on the other hand had an ordinary series as a wicketkeeper and struggled with the bat averaging 31.42 at a run-rate of 3.25.

ESPNcricinfo looks back at the players who helped Pakistan to a famous whitewash over England with the spin bowlers and a fine captain to the fore

George Dobell07-Feb-2012Mohammad Hafeez 7/10
Technically correct, patient and disciplined, Hafeez dealt calmly with a testing England seam attack – they dismissed him only once in the series – but was troubled more by Monty Panesar’s left-arm spin. He made a polished 88 in the first Test to give his side a strong platform and weighed in with useful contributions in a low-scoring game at Abu Dhabi. He also claimed five wickets – all of them left-handers – at an average of just 16 with his miserly offspin. England could barely hit him off the square and he conceded fewer than two runs an over.Taufeeq Umar 3
A series of diminishing returns. Looked disciplined and solid in making 58 in his first innings of the series, but was subsequently unsettled by James Anderson’s inswinger and drawn into a series of unwise pokes outside the off stump. He only made only 29 runs in his next five innings.Azhar Ali 8.5
A breakthrough series for a 26-year-old who could go on to be Pakistan’s Test captain. Certainly Azhar demonstrated a temperament that might have been tailor-made for Test cricket. He also showed a tight technique and a welcome aptitude to shine under pressure. The highlight was his marathon effort in Dubai, but he also produced a match-turning innings of 68 in Abu Dhabi. No-one on either side batted for longer or came within ten of his series average of 50.2.Younis Khan 7.5
He may only have contributed one innings of substance to the series, but what an innings it was. Dripping with quality and class, Younis’ century in Dubai changed the course of a game that Pakistan – bowled out for 99 in their first innings – might easily have lost. He looked in decent touch for the rest of the series, but never went on to register a significant score.Misbah-ul-Haq 8.5
How can we evaluate Misbah’s influence on the team? It clearly extends far beyond making runs; important as they often were. Misbah sets the tone for Pakistan, on and off the pitch, coaxing the best from his team and ensuring calm professionalism pervades whether winning or losing. It would be easy to characterise him purely as a dour, obdurate batsman – and there were certainly periods during his vital half-century in the first Test where those qualities stuck out – but he also showed his selfless, intelligent side with his calculated attacking at Abu Dhabi that brought him four sixes. He may have to watch one weakness with the bat, however, as England soon worked out that, for all his discipline outside off stump, he is a likely lbw victim. He fell that way in all five innings. Despite all the team’s success, some still dislike Misbah. They accuse him of being boring. Maybe, though, after everything that has happened in Pakistan cricket over the last few years, a little bit of boredom is not such a bad thing?Asad Shafiq 6.5
Played a large part in the victory in Abu Dhabi – in a low-scoring game his contribution of 101 runs in total was highly significant – and top-scored with 45 in the first innings rout in Dubai. He showed with his dismissal in the first innings in Abu Dhabi – heaving across the line due to a lapse in concentration – that he is not the finished article, but he displayed enough talent to suggest he should have a long future at this level.Adnan Akmal 6.5
An accomplished keeper who, but for one out of character mistake on the last day of the series, kept neatly to spin and seam alike. He still has some work to do on his batting – he contributed only one meaningful innings as a batsman and may be a place or two high at No. 7 – but this is a man who could represent Pakistan for much of the next decade.Saeed Ajmal was the leading bowler during the series•Getty ImagesAbdur Rehman 8.5
A vastly underrated cricketer. Rehman may not have much mystery, but he has excellent control and a wonderful ability to change his pace quite extravagantly without any obvious change in his action. He finished the series with 19 wickets at 16.73, including his first two five-wicket hauls in Tests. Ajmal ended with more wickets, but how many came partially as a result of the pressure built by Rehman who simply hardly bowled a poor ball? It is hard to think of a better spin partnership in contemporary world cricket. His problems with the bat – and he struggled horribly against Graeme Swann – will be over-looked if he continues to bowl like this.Saeed Ajmal 9
Masterful. With 24 wickets at 14.7 apiece, Ajmal tortured the England batsmen. As if his doosra was not enough – and it was more than enough for Ian Bell, who fell to it four times – he also displayed superb control and a host of other, subtle variations. Sometimes it was the ball that spun that caused England problems; sometimes it was the ball that went straight on. His 7 for 55 in the first Test set the tone for the series and unsettled several England batsmen. He may even have ruined a couple of illustrious careers.Umar Gul 8
An unsung hero in a side built around spin, Gul still enjoyed an excellent series. Wholehearted, strong and fit, Gul gave his side an edge with his committed seam bowling and at times troubled the England batsmen as much with his pace as his consistent line and length. Fully deserved his last day burst of four wickets.Aizaz Cheema 4
In years to come, the identity of the second seamer in the famous victory in the third Test might make a searching quiz question. With just one wicket in his two Tests, it could seem that Cheema was almost an irrelevance. He actually bowled pretty well without much fortune and supported Gul and the spinners better than the figures suggests. He beat the England openers frequently.Junaid Khan 2
On the face of things, Junaid had a shocker: he made a pair in his only Test and dropped an easy catch. He actually bowled very well in his limited opportunities – he beat Trott on several occasions -and, on more helpful pitches, will surely enjoy better games. His fielding does have to improve, though.

A lifeless low-scoring match in East London did nothing to dispel the criticisms of 50-over cricket

Firdose Moonda at Buffalo Park14-Jan-2012Keen to time-travel back to the late 1980s? Come to East London. Everything from bad hair to mozzarella music exists here in all the glory it did more than 20 years ago. On Saturday, also present was the 1980s ODI, the one that has always cowered in the shadow of Test cricket and then faced the guillotine when its spunkier cousin, Twenty20, came along.The old-school ODI still exists, and when it makes an appearance the argument that 50-over cricket is outdated surfaces with it. If the 2011 World Cup added years to ODI cricket’s life, the match in East London confirmed why it is still an endangered species, one that probably does not deserve protection. Mediocrity seldom does.Sri Lanka rolled back the years to an era before Sanath Jayasuriya and Romesh Kaluwitharana revolutionised the first 15 overs. They ground out 37 runs from the first 15, a return Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana would have sniggered at. Sri Lanka’s innings had all the makings of an old-school classic: a slow start, and a rebuilding process in which one batsman pushed through and had contributions from a sprinkling of pinch-hitters surrounding him. Dinesh Chandimal’s 92 was built on nothing but hard work, an oddity in the modern game, where flash and flair are the main ingredients.South Africa’s bowlers were accurate without being deathly. At times, they were too short, but usually they were saved by committed fielding. AB de Villiers showed some creativity in managing his attack but even that did not draw too many flutters from a determined Sri Lankan batting line-up.To their credit, South Africa wound the clock forward a little with the bat. They reached the Jayasuriya-minimum of 75 in the first 15 overs and they did not lose a wicket getting there. Steady contributions from the top order set the stage for de Villiers to take the match to its foregone conclusion. When he couldn’t, JP Duminy was there to do it. His contribution was vital but quiet, except for his big six off Rangana Herath, which briefly brought to life a slumbering match.Sri Lanka’s bowlers were better than they were in the first ODI, but still not good enough. The visitors lost interest as early as the 10th over, by which time they had tried five different bowlers and seen South Africa respond with ease. Their lack of motivation was compounded by their poor fielding, and their breakthroughs came too late, when South Africa only had formalities to complete. South Africa’s batsmen, who were careful on a slow pitch, played with a sense of routine and obligation, not passion.If the last four paragraphs almost put you to sleep, then you will have a sense of what the match as a whole was like. That is not to say that games with average scores are always dry and cannot captivate; some of one-day cricket’s best contests have come from low-scoring matches (think of South Africa against India at the Wanderers last year) and some of the highest-scoring ones have turned into one-sided, punching bag stuff.It is simply that this one lacked spark. It could have been different if the chase was tense and the contest absorbing. Any notion that the action was gripping evaporated when the crowd broke out into a fight on the grass banks. When police dragged away one of the perpetrators, the applause was louder than it had been for any of South Africa’s three half-centurions. There were even louder gasps when the lights went out and one of the pylons was set on fire. International cricket only comes to East London every few years but the 12,000-odd people at Buffalo Park were there for their own party. The cricket was merely a side show.The numbers eventually said five runs were needed off 10 balls, which tells a deceiving story about how compelling the match really was. Without being sub-standard, it was unengaging, tiring and lacked the “wow” factor.Like most things, there will be times when cricket, in all its forms, fails to capture attention. The problem with ODI cricket is that it takes almost eight hours to do that. In instances where those eight hours feel like a lifetime, one-day cricket can’t shake off the impression of being unnecessary. If played in a series without any real context, such as this one, it searches for relevance.

Plays of the Day from the first day of the SSC Test between Sri Lanka and Pakistan

Kanishkaa Balachandran in Colombo30-Jun-2012Shot of the day
Taufeeq Umar got Pakistan rolling with meaty drives against the seamers, but the most elegant shot came off Mohammad Hafeez’s bat. In need of runs, Hafeez extinguished all self-doubt with a punch through mid-off off Nuwan Pradeep, using the pace of the ball to send it to the boundary. His placement couldn’t have been better. The fielder at mid-off merely turned and watched the ball race away without budging.Let-off of the day
On a flat pitch, the best hope of getting a wicket was the batsman throwing it away. Opportunities were hard to come by all morning, and post lunch, Hafeez had a reprieve. He was positive against the spinners from the beginning, but when he tried to clear the boundary off Suraj Randiv, his heart must have been in his mouth after seeing Nuwan Kulasekara sprinting to his left from deep mid-on. It was a clever field placement. Kulasekara did the hard work of getting there, but failed to catch it on the dive and prevent the boundary.Second let-off of the day
After the umpiring howlers in Galle, Pakistan needed some luck. Hafeez had lots of it. He nearly undid all his hard work in the last over before tea. Angelo Mathews pitched short down the leg side and Hafeez tried to pull it down to fine leg but gloved it. Prasanna Jayawardene took a sharp catch to his left. The umpire Ian Gould wasn’t sure if it was a legal delivery and asked the TV umpire. His doubts were confirmed. Mathews had overstepped and Sri Lanka had to cut short their celebrations.No DRS fault of the day
Hafeez was the survivor again. Shortly before stumps, Rangana Herath had a close shout for caught behind turned down. The ball had spun, bounced and seemed to take the edge off Hafeez’s bat. Prasanna Jayawardene began celebrating but Simon Taufel was not so sure. The magnifying glass seemed to detect an edge, but with no DRS in place, Sri Lanka had to live with the umpire’s decision. Summed up a hard day.

The MCC university cricket system provides a chance to prepare for life after the game while pursuing a county contract

George Dobell22-Jun-2012If the last few days have taught us anything, it is that there is far more to life than cricket. So while the outcome of the final of the British Universities and Colleges Cricket (BUCS) competition might not, in itself, seem particularly important in the grand scheme of things, such encounters actually carry much deeper significance. Indeed, you could make a strong case to suggest that the introduction of MCC University cricket (MCCU) is, alongside Chance to Shine, central contracts, four-day cricket and the adoption of promotion and relegation, one of the most positive developments in domestic cricket in the last 20 years.Professional sport is a seductive beast. It sucks you in with whispered promises of glory and glamour and spits you out with broken dreams and an aching body. For every cricketing career that ends in a raised bat and warm ovation, there are a thousand that end on a physio’s treatment table or in an uncomfortable meeting in a director of cricket’s office. Many, many more stall well before that level.And that’s where the trouble starts. Young men trained for little other than sport can suddenly find themselves in a world for which they have little training and little preparation. Without status, salary or support, the world can seem an inhospitable place. It is relevant, surely, that the suicide rate of former cricketers is three times the national average.The Professional Cricketers’ Association does sterling work trying to help former players who have fallen on hard times, but prevention must be better than the cure, and a huge step on the road of progress has been taken in the form of the MCCU.It has had different names along the way but the MCCU scheme was set up in the mid-1990s by former England opening batsman Graeme Fowler. Confronted with a choice between university and full-time cricket when he was 18, Fowler opted for university. It was a decision that provided the foundations for financial stability that extended far beyond his playing days. As Fowler puts it while watching the Durham MCCU team he coaches play Cambridge MCCU in the BUCS final: “Even a cricketer as successful as Alec Stewart had more of his working life to come after he finished playing. And not everyone can be a coach or a commentator.”The fundamental aim of the MCCUs is to allow talented young cricketers to continue their education while also pursuing their dream of playing professional cricket. It is to prevent a situation where they have to choose between the two. It should mean that young players gain the qualifications and skills for a life beyond cricket while still giving themselves every opportunity to progress in the game. Graduates will have enjoyed good-quality facilities and coaching while also maturing as people. It should be no surprise that several counties actively encourage their young players into the scheme as they know they will return, three years later and still in their early 20s, far better prepared for the rigours of professional sport and life beyond it.It works, too. Just under 25% of England-qualified cricketers currently playing in the county game graduated through the system. Durham MCCU alone has helped develop more than 50 county players, six county captains, three England players and, most obviously, England’s Test captain, Andrew Strauss, who credits the initiative as vital to his success. “It was at Durham University that I went through the transition of being a recreational cricketer to one who had the ambition to play the game for a living,” he has said. The MCCUs have a mightily impressive record.And, these days, it costs the ECB nothing. Not a penny. Instead the six MCCUs (Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Cardiff, Leeds/Bradford and Loughborough) have, since 2005, been funded by the MCC. Each institution receives £80,000 a year and hopes to cobble together enough extra funding from sponsorship and other smaller grants to meet their annual running costs of around £130,000. You might well ask why the ECB – despite its annual income of around £110 million and rising – cannot find some more money for such an admirable scheme.Indeed, it is interesting to reflect on the roots of the MCCUs. In the mid-1990s, the ECB (or the TCCB as it was known at the time) lost its Lottery funding as the Lottery Commission was concerned that the sport did not possess a complete development programme that incorporated higher education. The board, in panic, embraced Fowler’s plans and appointed a couple of dozen regional development officers. Had the Lottery Commission not intervened, it is debatable whether the ECB would have had the foresight to act at all.

Fowler never actually wanted the games to carry first-class status but worries that if such status is stripped the funding may disappear too. He also worries that the matches against the counties – key factors in the development of his young players – might go

There are detractors. When, in April, Durham MCCU were bowled out for 18 by a Durham attack that contained Graham Onions, among others, it provided fresh ammunition for those who say that such games should not hold first-class status.It is a fair point. Fowler never actually wanted the games to carry first-class status but worries that if such status is stripped, the funding may disappear too. He also worries that the matches against the counties – key factors in the development of his young players – might go. Without those two facets, the system loses its attraction and the safety net disappears. The odd aberration in the first-class record might well prove to be a price worth paying for the benefits of MCCUs.As it was, Cambridge MCCU, boosted by an innings of 129 by Ben Ackland, defeated Durham MCCU by 24 runs in the BUCS final in the scenic surrounds of Wormsley. Perhaps only four or five of the players on show have realistic hopes of enjoying a career in cricket – Surrey’s Zafar Ansari is currently with Cambridge MCCU, though he missed the BUCS game, while Paul Best (Cambridge MCCU and Warwickshire), Chris Jones (Durham MCCU and Somerset) and Freddie van den Bergh (Durham MCCU and Surrey) are among those already affiliated with counties – but it was noticeable that at least one first-class county sent a scout to the match.”I spent my whole professional playing career on a one- or two-year contract,” Chris Scott, the Cambridge MCCU coach, says. “It probably made me a more insecure, selfish cricketer than I should have been. The MCCU scheme provides a safety net for players and helps them grow up and improve as players as people. It helps prepare them for life, whether that is in cricket or not.””And it’s not just about playing,” Fowler adds. “Some of our graduates have gone to be coaches or analysts at counties. Some might have become solicitors, but set up junior coaching schemes at their local clubs. There is a cascade effect that people sometimes don’t appreciate.”The quality of the head coaches is a vital factor. Scott, for example, is a philosophical fellow well suited to preparing his charges for the inevitable slings and arrows. He has needed to be. As Durham wicketkeeper he was, after all, responsible for the most expensive dropped catch in first-class history. Playing at Edgbaston in 1994, he put down Brian Lara on 18 and moaned to the slip cordon, “I bet he goes on and gets a hundred now.” Lara went on to score an unbeaten 501.Cambridge are the standout side among current MCCUs, and Scott’s record in aiding the development of the likes of Chris Wright and Tony Palladino should not be underestimated.The graduates of Durham MCCU are also lucky to have Fowler. Not just for his playing experience – anyone who scored a Test double-century in India and a Test century against the West Indies of 1984 knows a thing or two about batting – but also his life experience. For his easygoing good humour and mellow wisdom. He enjoyed a long and distinguished career as a player, but the formation of the MCCUs is surely his biggest contribution to the game.

Having felt let down by their side in losing the 2011 World Cup final, Sri Lankan fans are back behind their team hoping for their party to climax

Andrew Fernando in Colombo06-Oct-2012There is an unnatural hush in the Khettarama locale of the Premadasa Stadium. The area is often a crush of commotion; tuk tuks spluttering around a labyrinth of roadside stalls, produce vendors squawking out prices to a tangle of passersby, and in the evening, the Muslim mosque and Buddhist temple on opposite ends of the ground go toe-to-toe on loudspeakers. On the eve of the first major final the stadium has hosted, only the yelps of children playing with a taped up tennis ball and homemade bat pierce the quiet. Here at cricket’s coalface, the suspense is unmistakable. Over the past few days, it has spread swiftly from the tournament’s nerve centre to every corner of the island. Sri Lanka are in another final, and this time, they’re playing at home.For many fans, the pain from the 2011 World Cup final loss was still raw when this tournament began. They had expected Sri Lanka to win that trophy, imagined the team arriving triumphantly and parading along Galle road as it had done in 1996. Many had stockpiled fireworks to set loose at the clinching moment. Others sprung for new televisions and antennas to behold the spectacle in the highest number of pixels their money could buy. What stung them most was not that Sri Lanka lost, but that the team had seemed so limp in the field – hapless against a more determined India. Many swore off cricket that day. Unfairly, there was even a hint of betrayal because they felt the team had not really tried.That is not a criticism anyone will level at Sri Lanka in this tournament. There have been all the hallmarks that make the hosts such a watchable side – a mystery spinner bagging the format’s best ever haul, a captain who seems to fashion savagery from silk and a gifted teenager who has taken the pressure of international cricket on the chin. But this time, Sri Lanka have backed their flamboyance with an iron will. When tested, they have shoved back harder, and like lovers who spurned-then-returned after realising they couldn’t do any better, Sri Lanka’s fans have flocked to support the side once more.Mahela Jayawardene has been on the forefront of the team’s new resolve, and for all his instinct and brilliance on the field, it is his understanding and focus that has snapped Sri Lanka out of a post-World Cup funk, and brought the joy back into their cricket. He has his own reasons for wanting to rid himself of the reins, but while he has been at the helm, Jayawardene has coaxed the best out of the individuals under him, and cultivated a resilience the team had missed. Youngsters like Thisara Perera and Lahiru Thirimanne have flourished on Jayawardene’s watch. At the older end of the scale, Tillakaratne Dilshan and Rangana Herath have revelled in the freedom to be themselves.Part of the attraction of Sri Lanka’s campaign has also been the breadth of contributions they have benefited from. Unlike West Indies who have fired or failed largely on the strength of Chris Gayle’s blows, there is no obvious talisman for Sri Lanka. Kumar Sangakkara and Ajantha Mendis prospered in the tournament opener, Dilshan and Lasith Malinga shone in the first Super Eights match, the middle order proved their mettle against England and Herath and Angelo Mathews bowled the hosts into the final against Pakistan. Along the way, fringe players like Jeevan Mendis and Akila Dananjaya have also made their presence known.They have all added to the texture of Sri Lanka’s campaign and the fans have taken notice. After Sri Lanka’s victory in the semi final, the party in the stands spilled raucously into the streets. Tickets are selling for four or five times their retail value on the black market. Suddenly, thousands of people are wearing Sri Lanka team shirts and the anxious excitement preceding a final has taken hold.”Playing in Sri Lanka is not an added burden for us at all,” Jayawardene said. “We are very lucky to be able to do that. Playing in a final with our home fans gives the team strength and confidence. It’s unfortunate the capacity is only 35,000. The enthusiasm is so much people who come in will have a great time, and the rest of the fans will find a way of supporting us as well. Their thoughts and prayers will be with the team and I really appreciate that. We enjoy having that kind of atmosphere playing at home.”Jayawardene’s men will not read into three failures in recent finals, and perhaps rightly so. On each previous occasion, they were defeated by a team much better than themselves. This time, things are different. They are the form team of the tournament, and have proven themselves against a variety of opposition at three distinct venues. On Sunday night, Sri Lanka will watch once more. Perhaps this time, their fireworks will have lit up the night.

Clare Connor, head of the ICC’s women’s cricket committee, talks about strategy and funding plans for women’s cricket, and the decline of their Test game

Interview by Siddhartha Talya30-Jul-2012What is the biggest challenge facing women’s cricket today? Is it a lack of recognition, a lack of visibility?
I think those are the challenges that have always existed. I won’t say they are the most significant challenges that the women’s game faces.It’s probably better to look at the opportunities the women’s game has got, especially with what the T20 format has brought to the game in the last few years, the growing numbers of women and girls that are taking up the game globally in really exciting pockets of the world that have never experienced cricket at all before. Those are huge opportunities for growth.The obvious opportunity that we must capitalise on is the decision the ICC board has made to commit to the ICC World Twenty20 being a joint men’s and women’s event moving forward. That is a huge opportunity to drive the profile and exposure for the women’s game.Obviously, funding is going to be an issue, with ever-tightening budgets across all sport and across all businesses, so the opportunity to find funding through non-conventional sources, through government funds, corporate social responsibility funds, different commercial opportunities… we have to really explore what those are. What were your immediate objectives when you took over as the head of the women’s cricket committee at the ICC in July last year? You’ve also spoken about the ICC’s strategic plan for women’s cricket – could you share that with us briefly?

One of my short-term priorities when I took over a year ago was to really get our teeth firmly into the Females in World Cricket strategy, which the women’s committee has been working on for the last 12 to 18 months. There are five pillars to the strategy.One is growth, in terms of participation, so the number of females playing the game globally grows, but also growth in investment.[Second is] the performance standards of the women’s game at the highest level, so we’re really trying to push the number of highly competitive women’s teams. We just don’t want to rest on a strong five or six; we need a game that is strong across the globe with more and more international games being played.Profile is another pillar of that strategy, so trying to drive the profile of the women’s game through broadcast rights, negotiations, double-headers in the T20 format, and for more of our Full Members to have female-specific promotional plans in place.There are two other key pillars. One is around integration and influence. How can we, as the ICC women’s committee, really help the full integration of the women’s game? The main way, we think, is through influence – so having more champions for the women’s game across the globe, having regular international forums focusing on females in cricket, keeping the engagement of key staff through the ICC’s senior management, and also across the Full Member level, on everything related to the women’s game – that’s a really big piece for us. From my experience with the England and Wales Cricket Board, which is my day job, the better integrated the women’s game becomes, the more natural it becomes for all members of staff to see women’s cricket as the same entity as boys’ and men’s cricket. Obviously there will be some subtle differences, but in terms of driving opportunity, participation, income, setting budgets, coach education, all of those areas, we have to get as integrated as possible.The final pillar of our strategy is around optimising the enthusiasm for cricket in Asia, especially with the World Twenty20 coming up and the women’s World Cup coming up in India in February 2013, and the next World T20 for the men and women being in Bangladesh. So we’ve got a big opportunity there to engage with Asia and a growing passion for women’s cricket in that part of the world.You spoke of funding. Women’s cricket doesn’t have the kind of viewership among TV audiences that men’s cricket does. What are the sources of funding that women’s cricket receives?

Each member funds women’s cricket differently, so it’ll be hard for me to generalise. As you rightly say, a huge importance is placed on broadcast rights, and one of our aspirations is for all ODI members to include women’s cricket in their next broadcast rights negotiations. I don’t think that’s too lofty an ambition.We have to look at non-conventional sources of income, so looking at the activity agenda, the obesity agendas, health agendas, other government funding streams which might be out there – they certainly exist in England and I’m sure those opportunities exist for other members as well.I think there is a lot of partnership work that can be done. I’m sure with some creative thinking and some partnership thinking, there are funds out there.

“One of our aspirations is for all ODI members to include women’s cricket in their next broadcast rights negotiations. I don’t think that’s too lofty an ambition”

We’ve had about five seasons of the IPL now and one of the things people say is that it has drawn more women and children to the game. If I were to flip that around and ask you, what does women’s cricket need to do to attract more men to watch the format?

It’s brilliant to see loads and loads of young females having a great time at IPL matches, but what we need to focus on is not how do we bring more male or female spectators in; we just have to appeal generally by having good, competitive matches, focusing on where we stage those matches.I think we have to appeal to families. That way we attract young people and we attract men and women. It’s just a case of having a good product, having good competitive teams on display and the importance of maximising the opportunity to play double-headers alongside the men’s game.There have been some key tipping points. For instance, the semi-final of the World Twenty20 in 2009 between England and Australia women, which was played just before the men’s semi-final. Many male cricket fans came out, and cricket writers such as Mike Atherton, Mike Selvey and Nasser Hussain – lots of those guys came out and said that that game of cricket between England and Australia women, where England chased down 164, was one of the games – if not game – of the tournament, regardless of whether we’re talking about men’s or women’s tournament.If we put a good product on and if the skills are high, the athleticism is high, we all know that that will appeal to men and women alike.Speaking of having double-headers, is the women’s cricket committee considering having something along the lines of the FTP that the men have?
We do have something similar in place. It’s not a legally binding contract, as it is in the men’s game, but when the women’s committee meets, that is something on our agenda – to look at the FTP in the women’s game, how much is being played.One of the things we have done in the last six months is increase the number of the minimum standard regulations, the number of games – bilateral cricket – that must be played in the ODI and T20 format. So that’s something we’ve been constantly looking to address – really encourage as much bilateral cricket as possible, so that players have the opportunity to play in all different sorts of environments and all different sorts of opposition. What we don’t want is for members to become too reliant on the ICC events.Women haven’t played a Test match since early 2011. Why is that?

This is a really difficult subject. As you rightly said, the only Test cricket that remains in the women’s game, or has been over the last few years, is between England and Australia. The Test you mentioned was the Ashes Test – it was a one-off Test match in Australia. It really polarises opinion. For me, personally, I would hate to see Test cricket disappear for women.However, the reality is that since the T20 format came into being in international cricket in 2004, there has barely been any Test cricket. That’s because the T20 format gives us that platform. It’s a shorter format, it’s more likely to grow the game from a participation perspective and from a commercial perspective. It gives us probably more opportunity to get on television, and I think that is the way the women’s game is headed. That’s the reality and we have got to embrace that, and we are, with more and more double headers, as we talked about.But I do believe there is a place for women’s Test cricket. I’ve played the game myself and some of my greatest memories as an international player were of Ashes contests between us and Australia. I think until the women’s game is fully professionalised and players can afford to be on tours of up to two or three months, like the men do, it’s very hard to fit in all three formats. The reality is: if we don’t play Test cricket, if Australia and New Zealand, for instance, are no longer going to play Test cricket, in the period of time needed to play a Test match, they could play three T20 games. They can get them on television and they can play alongside the men, and that’s a huge opportunity.Speaking of wanting to professionalise women’s cricket, in a lot of countries women still have alternate careers alongside playing cricket at the highest level. Is there much being done by the ICC to incentivise women’s cricket a lot more, drive more women to take up cricket as a professional career? England and Australia came out with contracts for women in 2008. You do have a contracts system in place in the West Indies.
I do believe the ICC can advise, in terms of the governance areas of women’s cricket, the performance standards and participation and all those things that we’ve talked about. So long as there is a really healthy bilateral FTP in place and so long as the ICC sees that the performance standards in the women’s game are going up, I don’t think it’s up to the ICC necessarily to legislate on whether the women’s players should be fully contracted or fully professional. In an ideal world, yes, we would see that, but I don’t think we are probably ready for it yet, and I don’t think there are enough countries ready to fully professionalise the women’s game for there to be enough women’s cricket to be played that is commercially viable, if you like.Clare Connor: “I don’t think we are in a position yet to fully centrally contract across all teams, and I don’t think it’s the ICC’s decision to force that implementation”•Getty ImagesLots of members are making really good strides with different types of contracts, whether they be central contracts or coaching contracts or part-time contracts. One of the best cases of how that’s helped improve standards has been the West Indies, who in the last four years have really shot up the rankings and are a force to be reckoned with. There is the evidence there to show that some form of contracts is really useful and can be beneficial, but I don’t think we are in a position yet to fully centrally contract across all teams, and I don’t think it’s the ICC’s decision to force that implementation.Finally, if you were to talk of expanding cricket beyond the traditional cricketing world, how has the reaction been among women taking up the sport in Associate countries and other countries? Has the ICC been involved in development programmes in these countries?

Yes they have, and the work that’s being done by the regional development teams across the world is staggering, and I can now see that in the position I now hold on the ICC development committee. I had no idea, really, if I am honest, until the last 12 months, of the fantastic work being done across the regions in terms of developing the women’s and girls’ game.What’s really exciting and provides the women’s game with a huge opportunity is taking cricket to new territories – for instance to Papua New Guinea or to Thailand. What you can do there is grow the women’s game as quickly if not more than the men’s and the boys’ game because it’s completely new in itself anyway. It’s a new activity, a new opportunity, and whilst boys and men might have lots of other team sports in which to participate, cricket provides women and girls with a whole new opportunity that they possibly haven’t had before.The numbers, the growth we’re seeing in places like PNG, EAP, in Thailand – the women’s and the girls’ game is growing far more quickly in Thailand than the men’s and the boys’ game. We have to really harness that enthusiasm, look at why it’s working, what is driving that growth and enthusiasm in those areas, and work to share that best practice in other regions for whom it might also be relevant. That, for me, is certainly one of the most exciting parts of the experience I’ve had in the ICC in the last 12 to 18 months.

The teams comprising Group C in the Under-19 World Cup in Queensland are a microcosm of the disparity among the 16 participating countries

George Binoy in Brisbane10-Aug-2012Hanuabada is a coastal village on the outskirts of Port Moresby, the capital of Papua New Guinea. In Motu, one of hundreds of languages spoken in the country, Hanuabada means big village. According to Wikipedia, its population is more than 15,000. Eleven of its residents are in Townsville at present, preparing to take on the might of India, the collective strength of the Caribbean islands and Zimbabwe.The teams comprising Group C in the Under-19 World Cup in Queensland are a microcosm of the disparity among the 16 participating countries. There are the haves and the have-nots, and those in between, across all groups.India have all they could want: a large talent pool of high quality to select from, the resources to develop chosen players, and various structures to keep these kids in the game. West Indies have also invested significantly in their youth programme, trying to bridge gaps in their set-up, and the efforts have produced an experienced squad. Zimbabwe have a youth system in place but need to improve their feeder competitions and find ways to retain the talent. That Papua New Guinea are at their sixth tournament is a testament to what they can achieve with basic structures and help from Australia. Two victories from 29 previous matches at the World Cup, however, indicate how wide the gulf between them and the rest is.The disparity starts at the beginning. Twelve out of 15 players in India’s Under-19 squad have represented their states. A few are members of IPL franchises. Those who have not played domestic cricket have tested their skills in high-standard club cricket. Six of the West Indians have played domestic cricket and their captain Kraigg Brathwaite is the only Test cricketer in the tournament. They have experienced what it’s like to play against men – some who are former first-class or international cricketers – and are tougher because of it. Only two Zimbabweans have played for their franchises, and their coach Chris Harris believes his cricketers are a year or two behind where they could have been in their development had they had the same exposure as their competition.”[The youth structure] is not too bad [in Zimbabwe]. We have representative teams right up from colts, Under-14s through to Under-19s,” says Harris. “The players that get into those sides are looked after by very good coaches.

In Zimbabwe, the club structure is not as good as you’d like it to be. Most of these boys don’t even play in club cricketChris Harris, Zimbabwe U-19 coach

“The problem is the competition that feeds into those teams. That’s probably not as strong as we’d like it to be and it’s basically run through the school system. In an ideal world, we need a more competitive environment leading into those representative sides. In Zimbabwe, the club structure is not as good as you’d like it to be. Most of these boys don’t even play in club cricket.”So right from the onset we are slightly disadvantaged, but we are trying to rectify that. We’re trying to get the club structure right. We’re also trying to get a national league up and running. If we can get that in place, it’s going to make a huge difference. It will expose these guys to the type of cricket they will face when they come to World Cups like this. We simply have to play more. I think you become a better cricketer through your experiences. You play an Indian side and their boys may have played 100 competitive games of cricket at club level. Ours might have played 25.”No question that there’s plenty of talent in Zimbabwe. The problem we have is based purely on experience. The talent is not exposed to a strong enough competition.”In Papua New Guinea, there are about 400 cricketers at Under-19 level, according to John Ovia, a former cricketer who is part of their management team in Townsville. Most of them are from Port Moresby and Hanuabada. “It’s like a village challenging a country,” says Ovia of the matches ahead.Papua New Guinea’s first game, however, is against Zimbabwe, who have not had much match practice in the lead-up to the World cup. They haven’t been on any tours outside Africa to assess where they stand against their opponents. And like several other teams, they’ve also had just a week in Queensland to get acclimatised to the weather and the conditions. It’s their first time in Australia.The tournament is also West Indies’ first visit down under but they got here on July 21. “We’ve had a camp while we’ve been in Australia. We’ve acclimatised nicely. Hopefully we can catch a few teams on the hop,” says Roddy Estwick, the West Indies coach. “The board has made a conscious effort. This team went to Dubai [to play Australia], we went to India [quadrangular series], we went to Miami … in the past you would meet up and not have a lot of time together.”The West Indies team also had a camp at the High Performance Centre in Barbados and have travelled to Australia with a heavyweight management team. In addition to Estwick, they also have Courtney Walsh and Stuart Williams to guide them.Seasoned teams have arrived to the World Cup after elaborate preparations•ICC/Bhaskar Rao KamanaIndia’s preparation has been elaborate. They hosted a quadrangular series, went to another one in Townsville and played the Asia Cup in Kuala Lumpur, all in the last 12 months. They also went on various team-building exercises during a training camp at the National Cricket Academy in Bangalore in July.”They have a lot of self-belief,” says coach Bharat Arun of his team. “There’s little more we can do on the skill front. The mental side is going to be very important because it’s about handling pressure at the World Cup.” To that end, the team had interactions with Yuvraj Singh, Rahul Dravid and Sachin Tendulkar before flying to Brisbane.India might triumph in Townsville. West Indies could too. It’s unlikely either Zimbabwe or Papua New Guinea will. But the real triumph depends on how many of their players kick on to greater achievements in cricket. And therein lies another challenge.The Indians can go back to the competitive domestic structure they came from and use their learning to perform better in that environment. More of them will play IPL and be employed by corporates that field strong cricket teams. Most won’t have to worry about financial security. Some may not turn out to be good enough, but very little of the talent that is on show at the World cup will be lost for want of opportunity.West Indies, according to Estwick, have taken similar steps to keep their young. “Before, you would come to the World Cup and if you don’t break into your national side, it would be another two or three years before you were seen again. Now they’ve got a chance to get into the High Performance Centre, which does a few tours: Dubai last year, Bangladesh this year.”We’re trying to bridge that gap between first-class cricket and Under-19 cricket. If we can get a few of them breaking into the High Performance Centre and the A team, in a year or two year’s time, then all the work would be worth it. Yes, we want to win the World Cup, but we’ve got to think long term and getting West Indies cricket strong again.”The situation in Zimbabwe isn’t as promising. What happens to their Under-19 cricketers, says Harris, is “the other part of the problem.””Hopefully some of these guys will make it into the franchise system,” Harris says. “But that’s not that easy to get into. Boys that don’t get into the first-class structure, there’s not really too many other places for them to go. They go back to club cricket and as I said we are trying to put systems in place that will make that stronger.”From Zimbabwe Cricket’s point of view, a lot of these boys have had a lot of money invested in them. They’ve come up from Under-13 all the way to Under-19, they’ve been on tours overseas, they’ve come to a World Cup, so it’s really important we don’t lose these players. The difficulty lies in keeping them involved.”The irony is that keeping players who have made it to this level involved with the game seems to be less of an issue in Papua New Guinea, because of the smaller talent pool. “Most of the guys who will play Under-19 will go to the senior team,” says Ovia. “We have national contracted players.” The challenge is how far they can take the senior team.Papua New Guinea have been consistent qualifiers for Under-19 World Cup but are yet to debut at the senior event. They have a shot at 2015, though, if they fare well at two qualifying events over the next two years. Some of Hanuabada’s residents currently in Townsville might have another World Cup in them.