reads: general, and very worthwhile.

I sometimes (often, actually) find myself not supporting anyone while watching a match (in any sport). Why I may be doing it is probably explained here, in a must read. I shan't quote from it.
We may not like them all, but we should enjoy them while we can.

link via the very wide sightscreen.

and more on excellence here, where the magician is written on, again.

When the ball leaves his hand, time seems to slow down as if the moment demands relishing, the breath holds in the lungs as his deliveries hover, plummet, skid, dart, spit, turns, every over with enough disguise to impress a chameleon

PS- are they really pushing the man up to Number 4? Hmmm.. not sure how good an idea this is...

war

Not content with following the Ashes series from afar, English and Australian
soldiers are staging their own five-match 'Desert Ashes' in Iraq. The venue for
last Thursday's opener was a rolled-out patch of earth next to the helicopter
landing site in the southern town of Al Muthanna. Resplendent in gold-and-green
pyjamas donated by Cricket Australia, the Aussies swept home by 119 runs - a
massive margin in a 25-over game. Each match is scheduled for the first day of a
Test, starting with a coin toss synchronised with Michael Vaughan's in England.

link

money spun out

Should I feel guilty for having a slightly smug feeling passing through me as I read this?

reads

'If they can't send over a better side than this there's not much point in the Ashes.'

'Send them home.'

'Maybe their women's team would like a game.'

And these were not said about England:)

This and much more in a great piece on the off-field goings-on at Lord’s in The Observer.

Propriety takes a bit of a hit, though, when the Grace Gate opens at 8.30am.
This is the signal for the poshest land-rush in sport, as the spectators walk
briskly through, ties flapping around the collars of cream jackets, each member
keen not to look too desperate in the scramble for a seat. In the middle of the
Tavern Stand throng, cheers greet the popping of the first Champagne cork. It is
9.09am.

Then there is this about smugness...er-arrogance...um, sport...Oh just go read it.

The Australians never really cottoned on to the idea that sport was a way in
which gentlemen amused themselves. They had this crazy idea that it was serious.

Refreshing to read, in the midst of all the joyous and/or dismal writings on the first Test.

inanity

Bob Willis at the start of Day 1 (though you have the give the Sky team credit for this one, he was surely fed the lines) :
-said in a hopeless attempt at pulling off a Vegas announcer style-

"In the red and blue corner....England"
"In the yellow and green corner, Australia"
"The world heavyweight championship...."
and best of all
"Get ready to rumble"

Sheesh.

ps- I have added a count for the sessions won on the right. Thanks for the idea, Will (I think I got it from you?)

The Ashes Day 1

ho hum. the poll is over, and a measly 95.2% of the votes say Australia will take that litte urn thing all over again (well, the Crystal cup, at any rate).

Australia wins 3-1 52.4%
Australia wins 3-2 19.0%
Australia wins 3-0 19.0%
England wins 4.8%

(total) Australia wins 95.2%

And as I write this, Australia have won the toss and will bat first. There's a kitty coming up at work for the score at lunch today- am not sure am a part of it. Let's see- the talk is over, and it finally begins. England are already up against it, then, though Vaughan seemed unperturbed. Here's wishing them well. ( a little 'weller' than Australia, cause they need it...and so do we!)

19 for no loss, 5 overs. A couple of knocks fo the openers from the tall bloke from Durham. Hoggard is looking a little patchy right now- and there, another no ball just smashed for four.There is a kitty at work for the scoreline at lunch. I'm in- going for 90/2. There is even a 150-0 there somewhere!

43-1, and Kevin Pietersen just had a horrible start to his career. Dropping the Australian captain on a duck in your first test, the first morning of an Ashes series. That has got to hurt, KP old chap. Great ball to dismiss Hayden, though- and coming after the didgy start Hoggard had. Admittedly, he had a good shape going since morning, except he was a little off the mark. But there's Harmison's hardwork paying off as well. Langer is going for his shots, carrying none of the baggage others possibly may be from being in England for over a month. I'd back hi m to be unbeaten at lunch, and England must hope they have not lost the chance to pick up Ponting- weak starter that he is.
And there- Ponting just got the nastiest one of them all on his cheek. This is seriosu stuff, and people are bandying the world that ends in '....line' around the office.

66-2, in 16 overs, and Harmison just goes off to make way for Flintoff bowling his first Test over against the Aussies. It has been a splendid spell from the premier bowler- he came hard at the Aussies, but did not get carried away. England will be glad they did not let Ponting make the most of the retrieve he got from KP.
This has been a cracker of a first session, and irrespective of where Australia go from here (they are still entirely likely to be 300 odd at the end of the day), this has been a exhilirating show of intent from England.
And I say that, Flintoff gets his first Ashes wicket in his first Ashes over- the dangerous and gritty Langer is gone! It is 66-3, and Flintoff gets a rousing round of applause- the first maiden of the day, and Flintoff has a dream start to his first Ashes.
Ah, I am loathe to, but I must leave now-back home-

-and my word! I just can't seem to hit 'publish' here, as Martyn plays a rank bad shot to give Jones a wicket off his first ball! this has gone from exciting to shocking. Can the other Ashes debutant, Clarke, pull his team out from here? It is 66-4...

The second session is about to begin, and this has been one of the most exhilirating starts to a test match in a long time. Of course, there is much cricket that remains to be played, but it has been an inspired start from the home team. A gilly century, though, would make this the most astonishingly special day of Test cricket. Mouth watering, and since I languish without a laptop, I shall have to run to the computer for comments on Will's blog or updates, and with a sprained foot that's going to be dodgy...

6 down! Just when Gilchrist looked like he was settling in for a Gilly classic, Flintoff has gone and done it. Incredibly pumped, and fiery despite being carted for a few, Flintoff has got the big big wicket, which will bring The Warne in, fresh from marital discord and hundreds for Hampshire.

Final session: 32 overs, 82 runs, 7 wickets.
What a day it has been. 17 wickets have fallen as I write this, with the last recognised pair in the England lineup just being separated. England might have had the better of the three sessions in the game, but Australia are going to lounge in the hotel pool less in need of a relaxing jacuzzi than England, you'd think. Suddenly Ponting's scar might just be a symbol of hard fought victory rather than an ambush he did not survive.

So much for all the "long in tooth", " ageing", "not quite spring chickens" and "over the hills" we read about McGrath off late. Wicket number 500 was Trescothick, and soon he had the entire top 5. One might not like it, but this man is probably going to be a force to be reckoned with till the day he hangs up his newly acquired gold Pony 500 boots.

Meanwhile, it does not look like Australia's record at Lord's is under threat. See, this is it- this is why you can never lie back and say-"oh, they're screwed now." Nope, not about them Aussies.

And on that note, me and my horribly sprained right foot shall retire for the night.

reads

Mark Nicholas offers a spooky, and entertaining, list of coincidences that might just get your hopes up a little more, if you’re an Englishman.

In a piece that fervently wishes for England’s cricket team to take this season by the scruff of the neck, Sue Mott in The Telegraph tell us that Sebastian Coe is the favourite in the BBC Sportsperson of the Year stakes, and then reveals some (to me almost startling) facts.

Ian Botham was the last cricketer to win the BBC poll, in 1981. But the Sports Journalists' Association award that same year went, ironically, to Seb Coe instead. Len Hutton was the last cricketer to win the SJA poll in - wait for it - 1952.

1952? Contrast this with India, where some cricketer receiving an award every year is de rigueur.

Simon Hughes paints a gentle portrait of Andrew Flintoff. For me- more than anyone els, even the searing hot KP- I’d love to see Flintoff take this series by storm. He genuinely has the ability to, and if he can the series will be immeasurably richer.

There’s more on Flintoff in this piece, that also has this from Bob Woolmer:

"I've always felt that the way to overcome Australia is to wear down their
bowlers," Woolmer said. "They only have four main bowlers and they aren't as
young as they were. To win, England have to wear them down as the series
progresses."

I quite agree, actually. The Australians must not be allowed to dictate the pace of the game, must be made to feel uncomfortable, and that will only happen if they are forced to play a game different from their own. This here, though, might a bit much to hope for:

England's best chance of winning the Ashes is to play the long game, to keep
Australia in the field and ensure that Glenn McGrath tumbles exhausted out of
bed on the second morning of the fourth Test after a wearing summer and thinks:
"I'm not sure if I want to do this any more”

...and more of Woolmer’s advice for Englishmen here

A fantastic cricketer says he will continue his walking habit, and responds to an attemptedly tricky question thus:

When asked what he would do if Australia were two short of victory in the final Test with one wicket at hand he replied: "I wouldn't nick it."

...and you know what? I believe him on both counts.

In other news, it is interesting to note that some people in Pakistan- news editors- are possibly still suffering from a long forgotten Toronto India-Pak series hangover. They still think of ol’ Ganguly as an all-rounder…

on Howard

The Guardian strings up the Australian PM.

Heaven knows what day this creature is to pitch up at Lord's but you can bet your last brass razoo that he'll be itching to give those fabled analytical skills a run-out.
[...]In 2000 Mark Waugh was palpably in the wind-down period of his career when he hit a surprise six at the SCG. Like a moth to a flame, Howard leant in to the microphone. "I think we're starting to see the old Mark Waugh again," he noted, a comment which if nothing else rendered Waugh's being bowled next ball utterly predictable.

I wouldn't know, but is he really this woeful?

Poll!

I could not resist.
So there is an Ashes poll on the right, and you can make a reckless (or well thought out) prediction, if you feel so inclined. For those who have a radically different scoreline in mind, leave a comment, and that shall be incorporated in the final analysis, after the ...er, thousands of votes pour in.

And, um- apologies for the slight Aussie skew in the poll. I maintain my happily neutral stand, but have to give in to some instinct...:)

update: the first vote for an england win is in! how many before 21st, when this closes?

@ Colombo

whassa happening?
Windies recovered to make 281/6 on Day 1, eventually wrapped up for 285, Murali took the solitary wicket, and Sri Lanka were tottering at 47/4 with Jayasuriya, Atapattu, Sangakarra and Jayawardene gone.
?

Final ODI

So there you go- the toss is done, and the Aussies have put England in on what seems a pretty good track to bat on. Botham and Lehmann were talking of 260-70, even 290 as being par for the course.
Again, the team winning the toss is the only one can that can hope to exploit the advantage that the Super Sub rule offers. Till a couple of weeks ago, Australia would surely have batted first on this track, but with Hayden in and Katich as an extra batsman, they would back themselves to chase even a biggish total.
England, on the other hand, will not only miss out on exploiting the new rule, but in this case hope they don't have to use it- Solanki can only come in here if England find themselves ina tight spot. Skewed rule, this.

and ol' Shep goes " Right gentlemen, play!". It is underway.

er...

come again?

Apart from the security, Bevan [representative of the England Players Association] was also concerned about England players having enough things to do while in Pakistan, the report added. The source was cited as saying that Bevan was "assured by the PCB that there was plenty to do for the English players like playing golf even at smaller centers like Multan and Faisalabad."

(stresses mine)
Am I missing something, or is this a bit ridiculous? What happened to exploring a new country, imbibing a different culture, or simply warming up for the next match?

read the original piece here in The News

Focus

Some of us may have doubts about Warne's ability to bounce back from what would seem like gut-wrenching personal turmoil.
Mark Nicholas has none.

Even to begin to think that the recent shambles in his private life will affect Warne's cricket is to miss the point completely. That shambles will concentrate his mind absolutely. The Ashes will be an escape route. A chance to put the madness and its consequences aside, and to remind his audience of the reason for their fascination in the first place.

Sub-super thoughts

Ok, so I thought the Super Sub rules meant something else. Up until the first one-day, I thought I was clear on the experiment, and believed it meant that a team announces a squad of twelve and then announces its playing eleven once the toss is done.
Of course, this is not the case. A team announces a playing XI, and a Super Sub. The captain then proceeds to the toss and hopes his selection works.

Somehow, I have believed that my misunderstanding of the rule is probably a better way of implementing this innovation. The team announces a squad of twelve and then pulls one guy out after they know if they are batting or bowling. It more or less ensures that a team will use the super sub, thus encouraging whatever spectator interest and ‘increased quality’ that was envisaged to begin with. It effectively means that the team will pick (usually) an additional specialist, depending on their strengths and weaknesses, and so have a stronger overall side.

Sure, it means there is less of a gamble. For those of us who believed that this rule eliminated the charm of the risk that team selection was (with XI players only), I suppose this gamble that a team is required to take works. My instinctive reaction, however, is that the purpose of the Subs, one would think, is to not only increase strategy and excitement, but increase the quality of cricket being played. Allowing the XI to be named after the toss increases the chances of this enhanced quality.

I have to admit I am a little torn here.
My problem with the current implementation is that it is too much of a gamble, and one that is not really necessary. If we are corrupting the old way of committing to eleven players, then we should corrupt it enough. This will probably encourage the bits and pieces players who can come in either way (or, of course, genuine all-rounders who are rare in the game already; if the allrounder is truly world class he will probably be in the eleven anyway) The good thing is that there is at least some lottery element retained, though the success of (of a specialist as substitute) is more dependent on chance than strategic selection.

My only problem with the other way is that there is no gambling at all. It will, however, let us see more specialists at work, and the good thing is that we are likely to see a team with a better chance of defending a total, or chasing it. In all, it will allow for a more rounded team performance- exploiting conditions, and resources, to the fullest.

Tax exemptions

So the Champions Trophy in India next year is finally confirmed, with the tax exemptions being granted.
Mr Mani is grateful.

Rule changes

Want the rules to create more buzz? Involve the public more?
Nick Whittock has some ideas. Fun.

Priceless.
Absolutely priceless, except someone, somewhere, deserves to be flogged....

oye BCCI

I suppose its good I find myself with so many words to choose from. Except its not. I am dismayed, annoyed, frustrated, ashamed and incensed. All at the same time.

As if it was not enough that the Indian Board more or less thrives on machinations within the (dis)administration. Or that nothing matters more to the powers that be than power. Or that these powers have no accountability, and no one to question how they run the body like its their own kingdom. Nope, thats not enough. One has, of course, to live with the fact that the Indian Board is hell bent on making an ass of itself in the international arena, scripting the newest chapter in the Ganguly-ban story.

When will these power games stop? Because thats all this is about- showing everybody how much clout India has in the world game. What clout is this, that is based on such churlish behaviour? What influence is it, that needs to flex its muscles like a school bully?

You are a cricket Board, your responsibility lies to your players, the followers of the game in your region and, above all, to the game itself. Is this the way you choose to uphold the spirit of the game, by laughing in the face of its laws? This blatant attempt to show the world your strength serves aught but to belittle the very game you wish so desperately to control.

And please, do not demean our intelligence by telling us that you are doing the 'right' thing by standing behind, and beside, your captain. This is not a personal attack, that he needs you to fight alongside him. This is not a slur on his character that he requires you to help him erase. It is a law of the game he plays, the very law that you are meant to be loyal to. So don't even try to mask your disloyalty with misguided solidarity.

Don't, because you will only sicken me further.

my previous thought on this, when it first happened.

Charlie Brown

Simon Briggs in the Telegraph

Where Waugh's steely-eyed Clint Eastwood impression was part of Australia's armour, Ponting's round, ingenuous face can make him look like a put-upon Charlie Brown. Saturday was like a typical Peanuts cartoon: Charlie/Ponting ran up to kick the ball, only for Lucy/Giles to whip it away at the last minute.

Weekend, & one-dayers

What a weekend.
Schumacher manages a podium though Alonso still wins and Raikonnen comes in second after starting the 13th position on the grid. But I could hardly be concerned with F1, the number of other things that were happening. The Championships in its final three days, with classic matches in the women’s half as Venus won. Federer is walking on another plane these days. Beating top seeds in the semis and finals, that too in straight sets. The man seems absolutely unmatchable. To crown the tournament (for Indians), Mahesh Bhupathi and Mary Pierce won the mixed doubles late last night. If that was not enough, Saturday was consumed by the Live8 concert, a marvel of conceptualisation and execution.

That it coincided with one of the most amazing matches in recent cricket history, is quite another story, which has been well documented in many places. Suffice it to say that these are the times when doubts are spectacularly dispelled for the disbelievers in cricket’s ability to excite, unnerve and overwhelm in equal measure; and for those who are unsure about following cricket not involving their own nation. This was a game for anyone, anywhere who knows what cricket is. Simply brilliant.

There is some irony in all of this though. In the weeks immediately preceding the introduction of ICC’s new experiments in ODI cricket, the cricket world has gotten to see some exceptional cricket matches like this and this, even more so this and this. And this, of course, crowned a happily unpredictable tournament. But, in all their wisdom, the people in the know have brought in new rules. While I have been sitting with my backside comfortably parked across the ample surface area of this hotly debated fence, I doubt if anyone can debate that these new rules will, at the very least, be interesting. With every surge of resistance that I feel regarding the spirit of the game being violated, I cannot help but think about how the cricket world must have reacted to the advent of the shorter game, the use of a white(!) cricket ball, coloured clothing… I think it might be worth remembering that our first reaction is mostly always to resist change.
Let’s give this a chance- if we let ourselves, we might just enjoy this.

aaargh

It is a tie. i CANNOT believe this.
The finals have ended in a tie. This is insane. I cannot believe I am not watching this.
(Shame, shame.)

I do not know if the Final of any tournament has been tied. INSANE.

the Final

>48 reqd off 42. I cannot believe I am not watching this. damn.

> 24/4. The great hope, KP, has departed. The only hero of the last Ashes, Vaughan, has departed. The openers have gone. All without a whimper. If the summer was due to really start today, England might just be wishing it had not. Sub 200 was not the Australia we know. But this is.

> 183 for 9. England better not lose it from here. Either way, Australia are in some trouble.

> This is unbelievable stuff. Left work at 50 off for 1, came back to 5 down. Proceeded to see the better part of 28 dot balls that included a wicket. 28. That is the most un-Australian thing I have seen in a long time. (besides that match a couple of saturdays ago).

> There you go. England have won the toss and invited Australia to bat first. Overhead conditions, the pitch being covered...everything indicates that Australia could have a tought time if it batting.

If England needed a chance to win this final, they just got it.
(and I think I might be missing chunks of the mtach...ouch)

July 30/ 31. please.

So you have two teams eager to embrace the new rules (bring them on!), get into wat could be an exciting phase sooner rather than later, and you have these people nitpicking on the start date of their tournament.
(irrespective of what any of us think about the 'innovations', surely it is better to dive right in that look for ways to not?)

the Championships

Watching a fascinating tussle between V Williams and Sharapova.
How unidentifiable this is from the women's tennis we saw growing up.
It looks nothing like it.
Nor, in fact, does it sound anything like it.

9th ODI

Australia,while heading for a prety certain win, are still looking scratchy. I am very surprised how they allowed the Bangaldeshis to score 250, given they were 75 for 5. And the opening patrnership, while not looking woefully out of form, still inspires not too much confidence, forget the awe they ususally have been.

Meanwhile, they have finally confirmed that the new ODI regulations will bein place for the Natwest Challenge. Interesting times.

inanity

Bob Willis to Darren Lehmann:
"So, do you think Glenn McGrath will be back in the team on Saturday (for the finals)?"

Um, let's see Bob. He doesn't, you know, deserve to be there. Let's just drop him. (After all, we know what Will calls him)