CRICKET ROUNDUP

Ricky Ponting

DURBAN, South Africa: Australian captain Ricky Ponting will miss the rest of the Twenty20 world championships due to injury and is doubtful for the upcoming tour of India, team officials said.
Ponting suffered a hamstring strain while batting during Australia’s six-wicket loss to Pakistan at the Wanderers in Johannesburg on Tuesday night.
Ponting’s injury, which did not allow him to field against Pakistan, comes ahead of Australia’s must-win clash against Sri Lanka in Cape Town today.
The winner will qualify for the semi-finals along with Pakistan from group F, while the loser will crash out of the tournament.
Team physiotherapist Alex Kountouris said Ponting’s injury could keep him out of the game for four weeks, making him an unlikely starter for the seven-match one-day series in India starting on September 29.
“Over the next three to five days we will have a much better indication of where it’s heading, so we will know whether he will have to go home or be able to go to India,” Kountouris told reporters. “Hopefully, he will take some part in the series in India. The best case scenario is a couple of weeks. The worst case scenario is four weeks.” Kountouris said Ponting strained his hamstring while running between the wickets against Pakistan.
“He just took off for a run and felt it a bit,” the physiotherapist said.
“He was stretching his left leg because he was not sure if there was a problem. I don’t think he has had a hamstring strain before.
“He wasn’t really sure what it feels like.”
Ponting, who won the ICC’s player of the year award for the second successive year, arrived in South Africa just two days before the tournament began on September 11 following his wife’s illness.
But Kountouris said the late arrival or the return to action after a four-month break had caused the injury.
“It can happen anytime,” he said. “We get them anytime in a season.
“He’s been here for a week now so really I could not say with confidence that it had anything to do with it. It’s just coincidence.”(AFP)

I’d rather watch than play, says Gilchrist
JOHANNESBURG: Adam Gilchrist has become the latest Twenty20 sceptic following the Australians’s defeat to Pakistan, saying he would rather watch the quick-fire form of the game than play it.
“The more I play it, I am starting to, not so much like it as a player, but love watching it,” wicketkeeper Gilchrist said in the aftermath of Tuesday’s six-wicket defeat at the Wanderers.
Australia, who must beat Sri Lanka in Cape Town on Thursday if they are to advance to the semi-finals, also suffered a shock defeat to Zimbabwe in the opening round of the tournament in a result which went some way to undermining their all-conquering reputation.
The usually prolific Gilchrist has had a quiet tournament, failing to pass 50 in any of the Australians’ four matches to date. The opener said the format seemed to negate some of the skill factor although he admitted spectators were lapping up the close finishes that have been absent from so many recent 50 over matches.
“I am still not totally convinced that over the short term, the skills get to come through as much as they do in the longer formats, so that is evening the games up which is a great spectacle, but we’ll see over time,” said Gilchrist who insisted the Aussies were taking the tournament seriously. Despite the enthusiastic response from the spectators, a number of high-profile players have been distinctly unimpressed by Twenty20.
New Zealand captain Daniel Vettori has expressed hope the format is “not the future of the game” while West Indian skipper Ramnaresh Sarwan said ahead of the tournament that Twenty20 was “not really to my liking.” (AFP)

Harper leaves Kenya with some disappointment
NAIROBI: West Indian Roger Harper yesterday called for a proper cricket development programme in Kenya to prevent the sport lagging behind.
The 44-year-old Guyana national is leaving the country on Friday after 20 months of coaching the national team.
His only achievement was winning the World Cricket League title in February but a dismal performance at the World Cup in the Caribbean and the inaugural Twenty20 championships in South Africa sullied the former West Indies coach’s credentials.
“We have had our high points and also times when we could have done better,” said Harper, who opted to return home after turning down an extension of his one-year contract.
“I would like to think that we’ve made some positive steps as a team and some of the young players have grown, and even though I wouldn’t be here, I look forward on them to building on the foundation that has been laid and even going to greater things.”
Harper, who is credited with building a cohesive and disciplined playing unit, said the team’s future success would depend on the committment of the players and cricket administration in building sound structure of development.
He accepted the team’s batting lacked consistency and termed the fielding as “outrageous” during the World Twenty20 championships where Kenya took a big hammering against New Zealand and Sri Lanka in the opening round matches in Durban and Johannesburg last week.
“Beating the top-ranked teams is never going to be easy,” Harper said. “Kenya did well in winning the associate members tournament but we were a little of bit of disappointment in our perfomance at the World Cup and the Twenty20. The players did not believe on themselves when it came to playing against the big teams.” (AFP)

* LONDON: Former England batsman Usman Afzaal said Wednesday that he hopes to reignite his international career by signing a three-year contract with Surrey.
Thiry-year-old left-hander Afzaal, who began his career at Nottinghamshire, last played for England six years ago.
“My dream is to play more cricket for England, and I see this move to Surrey – where I will be under pressure to prove myself in a quality side – as a stepping stone to being recognised by the English selectors once more,” said the Pakistan-born Afzaal who has scored more than 11,000 runs since making his first-class debut in 1995. (AFP)

Pak get Musharraf praise, bonus for Aussie win
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s cricketers received  praise from President Pervez Musharraf and a 10,000-dollar bonus  each for their win against Australia in the Twenty20 World Cup,  officials said yesterday.
“The president spoke to captain Shoaib Malik late Tuesday and  congratulated him and the team for an outstanding performance,”  Musharraf’s spokesman Major General Rashid Qureshi told AFP.
Pakistan upset Australia by six wickets in a group F match of  the Super Eights on Tuesday to virtually seal a semi-final place in  the Twenty20 world championships being played in South Africa.
“The team’s performance has made the country proud,” Qureshi  quoted Musharraf as telling Malik, who put on a century partnership  with Misbah-ul Haq in the match.
Musharraf, who is also patron-in-chief of the Pakistan Cricket Board, hailed the team’s “very spirited performance and praised  Malik’s leadership and how well the seniors and juniors in the team  have gelled as a unit,” Qureshi said.
Pakistan’s second win in the group has left them needing a point  in the last match against Bangladesh in Cape Town on Thursday to  move into the last four.
The Pakistan Cricket Board has also announced a cash reward of  10,000 dollars for each player following the victory, a spokesperson  said.

Australia frustrated by Twenty20 format

Few would argue with Adam Gilchrist’s pre-tournament comment that Andrew Symonds was built for Twenty20 cricket. But even the big-hitting Queenslander admits to being frustrated by the shortest form of the game.

And it’s not simply because he has struggled to sometimes get a hit in Australia’s batting line-up.

The inaugural Twenty20 World Championship has shown just how great a leveller the 20-overs-a-side game can be in world cricket.

Australia were hardly challenged in romping away to their third straight World Cup one-day cricket crown undefeated just five months ago.

Yet they have struggled to assert their dominance at Twenty20 tournament in South Africa, losing even to minnows Zimbabwe in their first game.

True, rustiness has played a part, with the Australians still very underdone after a four-month break.

But the fact even the most mis-matched opponents need only perform for 40 overs – instead of 100 in one-day cricket or more than 400 in a five-day Test match – has brought Australia back to the field at the tournament.

And for a team used to having their superior skill and tactics win out over the longer forms of the game, that can be hard to take.

“It’s a frustrating game because you can be beaten by the lesser sides and they have to be good for a shorter period of time to beat you,” said Symonds.

“At least in one-day cricket you get the chance to work your way back into the game if you get into trouble, the same as in Test cricket over a much longer period.”

This world championship was always going to be a litmus test for the future of Twenty20 cricket at an international level.

In terms of public support, it has been a success. Crowds in South Africa have been healthy throughout.

Players, however, remain torn.

They have embraced the game because of the public interest – not begrudgingly, but it is clear they are by no means in love with it.

“I think the more I play it, I’m probably liking it less as a player, but the more I see of it, the more I love watching it,” said Australian vice-captain Gilchrist.

“I’m being more and more sold on why the public is so taken by this format.

“One over can really change a game and in a tight game it’s really crucial.

“I’m still not totally convinced that over the short term the skills get to come through as much as they do in the longer formats, so that’s evening the game up which is a great spectacle.”

Symonds also accepts that while Test cricket should always remain the pinnacle for a player, if the sport has any chance of becoming a truly global game – with more than a half-dozen truly competitive nations – then the three-hour slap-bang highlight reel is what’s going to get it there.

“Hopefully we don’t lose the traditional side, the purer side of the game, I really hope that,” Symonds said.

“But by the same token, I think it will be healthy for the game that cricket does go into the echelons where soccer is going all over the world.”

The relatively smooth running of the tournament itself has also done wonders for the game.

While many believed the International Cricket Council got it horribly wrong in dragging out the World Cup in the Windies for two months, the governing body may have finally got it right with Twenty20.

By Monday’s final, it would have taken a pain-free 14 days to decide the inaugural champion.

Playing on up to three games a day – including double-headers at venues – has proved a success. Far from overkill, it has given fans the rare chance to watch four international teams play on the same day.

Even if the first game is dud, there’s always a second to come – and for the most part matches have in any case been entertaining.

“The World Cup went far too long, we all know that,” Symonds said.

“But I think this has been structured – the time, the two games (a day) – it’s been put very well together in regards to the amount of games and how the pool systems worked.

“And I think that’s why people have enjoyed it as well, they’ve been able to see four teams play in the one day.”

The second Twenty20 World Championship has already been slated for England in 2009.

The ICC, though, have been wary to cap the amount of international Twenty20 games played outside a world championship with a limit of three home matches per year.

“At the moment they’re probably doing it right as far as keeping it to small doses,” said Australian fast bowler Brett Lee, who this week became the first player to take a hat-trick in international Twenty20 cricket against Bangladesh.

“If it’s played too often it loses its novelty value, whereas, if it’s played at the start of a tour it’s something different.

“And having competitions like this are great because it has its own little tournament.”

AAP

Twenty20 takes root

So what is the formula which enables the batsmen to reach strike rates which sometimes approach 220 runs per 100 deliveries? Well, gone are the tactical talks in the middle of the pitch! Gone, too, are the slow change of batsmen at the fall of wickets and the long drawn-out consultations about field placements. Over to Frank Tyson.

 

The Australian style of playing is ideally tailored to the Twenty20 format and English counties quickly recruited aggressive batsmen such as Andrew Symonds. In India, financed by Subhash Chandra, the head of Zee Televison — the station which failed to win the rights to telecast the official India international series — the Indian Cricket League has been established. With Kapil Devil as its recruitment officer, the ICL has quickly enlisted the services of players of international renown such as the recently retired Australian Damien Martyn, Mohammad Yousuf, Abdul Razzaq, Inzamam-ul-Haq (Pakistan), Brian Lara (West Indies), Lance Klusener, Nicky Boje and Andrew Hall (South Africa) and 44 players drawn from the Indian, Ranji Trophy ranks.The idea is to constitute six teams from the ranks of these recruits, give them names, based on Indian cities, and play a series of limited-over matches over a period of three years. The competing players are to be paid handsomely and further rewarded with prize money earned on the outcomes of the games. The format of the matches is also revolutionary, it being based on the concept of each team fielding a limited number of players who bat a maximum of 20 overs per side. Teams are divided into four groups and points are awarded for wins, ties and no results in each group. The teams then heading the points tables in each group, play “sudden death” semifinal play offs and the winners of those matches contest the grand final. All the games are to be contested in accordance with the ICC standard Twenty20 international playing conditions.

The $64,000 question is whether the trouble of organising the competition would be worth the effort. What is the entertainment value of the game’s shortest format like? In its initial season, Twenty20 served up boundary draw cards such as the groups Atomic Kittens, and The United Colors of Sound — and it was estimated that the crowd would have been larger had the Westminster Council given the MCC a council licence and the match taken place at Lord’s. Other matches saw the introduction of jazz bands, bouncy castles, fair ground rides, ferris wheels, roundabouts, side-shows. Such attractions kept the kids — and indeed the whole family — entertained. Moreover it produced cricket which everybody could understand. It had a staggering effect on the gates. In the whole summer of Benson and Hedges one-day games prior to the introduction of the Twenty20, less than 67,000 spectators went through the turnstiles. Contrast this total to the 240,000 spectators who watched the debut of the Twenty20 in the following year.

So enthusiastic were the supporters, that there were no fewer than 15 sell-outs of matches with a local derby flavour. On the day of the semifinals, no fewer than four sets of supporters travelled up the M1 to witness the games at Trent Bridge — and there was not even a home side playing!

The Australian style of playing seemed ideally tailored to the Twenty20 format and counties were not slow in recruiting aggressive batsmen such as Andrew Symonds and Michael Hussey. The former was quick to demonstrate his suitability to what many players describe as ‘rapid-fire’ cricket. In one county game he reeled off an unbeaten 96 in 37 balls; he followed this innings with a knock of 112 in 112 deliveries for Middlesex — yet still remained on the losing side! Victorian all-rounder Ian Harvey also has a formidable record in the Twenty20 competition having already reached three figures on two occasions in the English county circuit.

PTI

With Kapil Dev (above, seen with some of the Indian players who joined the league) as its recruitment officer, the ICL has quickly enlisted the services of players of international renown. So what is the formula which enables the batsmen to reach strike rates which sometimes approach 220 runs per 100 deliveries? Well, gone are the tactical talks in the middle of the pitch! Gone, too, are the slow change of batsmen at the fall of wickets and the long drawn-out consultations about field placements. The strikers take up their stance before the bowler begins his run. The batsmen shun jogging up and down before taking strike : they dream up innovative strokes such as the “paddle” and the “reverse sweep” to penetrate orthodox field placements.Should the bowlers employ negative bowling short of a length and to one side of the wickets, the striker uses his imagination to “clear the leg” by stepping away to the on side, and hitting under the ball with a baseball swing.

The first six overs of the batting side is circumscribed by limitations on the field placements of the bowling team: an ideal scoring opportunity for the batting side — but not a signal for experimental batting rashness, which — combined to orthodox field placements and an off-stump bowling line — could amount to batting hara-kiri. The English experience of Twenty20 suggests that, in the first six overs faced by the batting side, the striker should employ the straight-batted orthodoxy of the conventional game against balls of a full length — a tactic which should be countered by the placement of fielders in the arc between square-leg and cover. This forces the batsman to hit straight. Twenty20, however, does not allow the batter the luxury of playing himself in, or the indulgence of “dot balls”. It is all about aggression. He must play each ball with the maximum power possible, be ready to take runs off every delivery; and be willing to improvise strokes.

In this respect the skill of running between the wickets is of paramount importance. To invent strokes demands the rapid gift of judging length, and line — in short knowing which delivery can be hit with a minimum chance of being dismissed and a maximum chance of reaching the boundary. Critically, each and every player is in the game, from the moment he puts his foot on the oval: he must think on his feet.

The concept of playing cricket against sides of differing sizes and differing odds is not new. We read that Billy Budd and Squire Osbaldson were formidable single-wicket players, and that in the 18th century Lord Frederick Beauchamps and the Surrey professional William Lambert often played against the odds with many guineas at stake.

The popularity of Twenty20 cricket seems to indicate a present-day resurgence of short-formatted cricket. Recently the advance sales of a 40-over county final at Edgbaston were so good that the midland county had to lay on extra car parking to cater for the unexpected crowd. Certain kids in the crowd, even expressed a preference for cricket over football!!!

ICC should learn short game lessons

I t is hoped the International Cricket Council has learned some lessons from the proliferation of 50-over games before the cricket world is saturated with its latest limited-over reincarnation, Twenty20.

Judging by the success of the inaugural world tournament in South Africa, which has many of the things the 2007 World Cup in the Caribbean did not, it is full steam ahead for the shortened version. It has many things going for it for the general public – all over in three hours, plenty of big boundary hitting and it broadens the game’s appeal to a bigger base.

But the ICC need to be mindful of not killing the goose that lays the golden egg after the 50-over game spawned countless mind-numbing tournaments, usually among the teams from the sub-continent, that had little going for them apart from the opportunity for Indian bookmakers to fix matches.

That could arise again with Twenty20 with its even more hit and miss nature – who would know if a player is trying to get out for a low score?

The ICC should ensure the tournaments it runs are meaningful. Countries should play fewer 50-over fixtures, which are losing their appeal, perhaps just three-game series instead of six or seven, with a three-match Twenty20 series.

A balance between the half-day game and day-long contest seems sensible as the ICC comes to terms with the almost instant explosion of Twenty20. The chance is there, though, to pare back 50-over events without threatening the players’ livelihoods, for they would earn similar match fees.

The worry is the ICC is already promulgating a league series which does not directly involve countries but a mish-mash of players from different countries in various teams.

That is just shamelessly seeking to cash in on the sport’s quick fire success, admittedly under pressure from the emerging rebel Indian Cricket League (ICL) set-up, without thinking the issue through. Often less is more but there is the need to take the new game around the world.

Instead of a “club”-style leagues concept why not promote a Continental Championship which features teams from Oceania, Asia (2), Europe, Americas and Africa. There should be a maximum of players from one country, say eight, thus several players from other regions in the continent must be included.

Asia would be allowed two teams because it has four test-playing nations and that would appease the television giants of the subcontinent. Perhaps Pakistan could team with near neighbour Bangladesh while India link with Sri Lanka.

West Indies would dominate the Americas with a Canadian influence while England would make up the bulk of a European team complemented by players from Ireland, Scotland and the Netherlands. South Africa would be backed by Zimbabwe and Kenya.

A tournament could be played in each of the six regions with a round-robin and then semis and a final. Points would be carried through like sevens rugby to find a champion.

Already there are Africa and Asian confederations operating – why not formalise the whole thing?