SPIN August 2011 Sampler

SPIN

YOUNG CRICKETERS SHOULD BE MADE TO DO NATIONAL SERVICE − GRAEME SWANN

SPIN THE INDEPENDENT VOICE OF CR ICK E T

WWW.SPINCRICKET.COM

AUGUST 2011 £3.95

ZAHEER "I WANT TO DO THEM AND THEIR FAMILY ILL"

DHONI

VIRU

SACHIN

BHAJJI

I SSUE 62 AUGUST 2011

INDIAN SUPERHEROES! BUT ARE THEY DESTROYING WORLD CRICKET? GEOFF MILLER / WINDIES LEGENDS / JAMES TAYLOR / SIMON KATICH SPIN_August_Online.indd 1

25/07/2011 14:40

Artballing A4 ad.pdf

14/7/11

12:50:57

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

SPIN_August_Online.indd 2

25/07/2011 14:40

Contents

58

28

SPIN ISSUE 60

Welcome to SPIN. India are coming, lock up your off spinners. Well not exactly, because England’s off spinner is trying to force all cricketers into national service, which is probably better than them performing in dodgy pub bands. Geoff Miller takes us behind the processes and skillsets to show us how the English team gets picked, James Taylor professes his love for batting, and, as the only cricket magazine with a cluster of women writers, we celebrate their love of the game. But mostly we fear India . . . because everyone should fear India; watch out, Navjot Sidhu is BEHIND YOU.

SUBSCRIBE TO SPIN AT SPINCRICKET.COM

34

COOK, PLODDERS & DONKEYS 06 ATHERTON,

SPIN’s editor Jarrod Kimber looks at the media’s need to entertain and also stay on good terms with the players.

14

JAMES TAYLOR

This month’s young player to watch is the lover of batting from Leicestershire.

18 ALISTAIR BROWN

SPIN founding editor Duncan Steer talks to Notts and former Surrey legend about Adam Hollioake and going home.

22

GEOFF MILLER

Daniel Norcross talks to England’s chairman of selectors on the strategies he uses to pick his team.

GREIG REVISITED: AN INDIAN WINTER 50TONY

An extract from David Tossell’s new book on the controversial fomer England captain.

THE FLAMES OF FIRE IN BABYLON 58FANNING

Vithushan Ehantharajah talks to the key players of the Fire In Babylon period about their hopes and fears for their team. Jimmy Adams also gives his views and introduces us to the Titans of Cricket extravaganza.

68SCENT OF THE WOMEN

New SPIN reporter Lexi Boddy trawls the badlands of county cricket to talk to the women who brave this largely male domain.

OTHER CONTENTS

28GRAEME SWANN

21 SPIN OFF

34INDIA TOUR PREVIEW

76 FILM/BOOK REVIEWS

SPIN’s top dog George Dobell takes on the man with the golden jaw in a madcap interview about national service and how he’d like to kill poor fielders.

The SPIN team look at the key players for India, how both sides can win, Sehwag’s viral mutation and the big question: Is India’s influence destroying world cricket?

SPIN is introducing a new online newsletter - SPIN OFF - which will, by issue three, be available only to SPIN subscribers.

We report on the films From the Ashes, and the book Out of the Ashes.

82 THE CONTESTS

Flintoff Vs Kallis 2008. Nasty.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 3

SPIN 3

25/07/2011 14:40

NOT A FAT ONE JARROD KIMBER ON HOW WIRES CAN SOMETIMES GET CROSSED WHEN CRICKET JOURNALISTS SEEK TO ENTERTAIN AS WELL AS INFORM Plodder and donkey are not nice terms.

There aren’t many who include them on their CV. Yet they are the words Michael Atherton used to describe Alastair Cook when discussing his promotion to captain of the ODI side. Cook was not seen as a good enough ODI player to make the entire World Cup squad. Atherton looked at his strike rate of 71, average catching and limited athleticism in the field as a negative for a man taking over the side.

Hence plodder and donkey.

That Atherton’s comments are based on solid evidence seems to be less important.

Had he said that Cook’s batting lacked dynamism and he was far from athletic in the field, the newspapers would have hardly covered it and we’d have no ‘donkey jibe’ headlines. Cook’s response was: “It takes one to know one”. Sure it’s a bit schoolyard, but I’m rubber and you’re glue.

All of this occurred on Cricket Writers on TV (CWOT), which is a decent idea for a programme that works even better as a podcast when you don’t have to see out-ofshape middle-aged men talking about cricket. The idea is simple enough: get a bunch of cricket writers to justify their opinions, debate key issues and talk over each other. It can veer towards masturbatory waffle, but not in a bad way.

It’s also the kind of show where you say something for effect. Atherton’s comments weren’t overly abusive, he didn’t call Cook a date-rapist or suggest that he microwaves kittens, he just used strong descriptions of exactly how he rated Alastair Cook’s oneday cricket.

He’s also not the only person to offend someone on CWOT. A far smaller storm was created by our top dog and chief writer, George Dobell, in discussion of what is wrong with the T20 tournament this year.

George believes the game has slowed down and to illustrate his point said: “I think the most successful bowler in this year’s T20 is a 40-something, fat Welshman, very good bowler that he is, Robert Croft. That is not the glamorous personality that people were hoping to see to attract more people into the grounds.”

George was not making things up either.

Croft is a very good bowler but over 40, Welsh, and large for a cricketer. He may not be fat for a normal human being - no one is about to put him on the Biggest Loser or sign him up for Fat Families - but by the standard of most first-class professional cricketers, he’s large. At the time there was one complaint on Twitter. Then several more – about ten - from people who heard

Atherton’s comments weren’t overly abusive, he didn’t call Cook a date-rapist or suggest that he microwaves kittens the quote out of context or hadn’t even seen the show. As Twitter controversies go, it was pretty lame, until George received a call from Croft who was less than pleased.

George’s point was lost because of one word – fat. A word that has been used for far better cricketers than Croft, and by most of the media at some point publicly or privately in the last month in reference to Samit Patel. This one word could have soured relations between SPIN and Glamorgan. It hasn’t. George has apologised and admitted that fat wasn’t the best word to use. Croft has accepted that. The issue is now closed.

It’s a fine line. Cricket writers rely on good

relationships with cricketers. They can be frozen out by players, and if you upset a key English player there is a chance the whole team could side with them and your livelihood is suddenly in jeopardy. The good news is that most cricket writers get paid so badly that they can always make up the shortfall by collecting trolleys at the local supermarket.

The line is different for different writers.

Writers like Atherton or Dobell are paid for their opinions as much as anything. Their line is far further out than the one cricket writer on a paper who ghosts a column for a star player. Most writers rely on quotes from players for their copy; they need to watch what they say so that their job isn’t harder or even in danger. Usually you have no idea that a player is reading your copy until you’ve offended them.

That’s not to say that players are storming into the press box to scream at writers for calling them fat, shit or over the hill. But it’s in the back of the mind of most people who write about cricket. Cricket is a surprisingly small industry, and it doesn’t take much for you to be stuck in the lift with the same player you have spent the previous day calling an averagely-skilled trundler who shouldn’t be playing international cricket.

Some players understand the media’s function and handle it well. Jonathan Trott is obviously not happy with the odd treatment the media can dish out, yet of all the England players he is the most likely to accept a request from a journalist for a chat without the urging of the ECB or a kind sponsor.

Others are less thick-skinned. Recently a county reporter wrote a factually accurate article about a star player. That player then stopped talking to him altogether and the

6 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 6

25/07/2011 14:40

captained explained: ‘Don’t be surprised when players tell you to f*** off if you write negative things about them’.

And Steven Finn refused to do the intro for The Two Chucks (my Cricinfo show with Sam Collins) because we’d upset him. As this was relayed to us second hand, we’re unsure of exactly what it was that Finn didn’t like. It may have been editing together the eight times in one press conference he said “right areas”, Sam’s technical analysis of Finn or even me referring to him as a registered charity. As a fun cricket show that is about entertainment as much as information we are required to push the line further than a quotes man at a newspaper. We weren’t trying to piss off Finn, or any of the cricketers we make fun of. The idea is that cricket is taken so seriously that someone should be talking about it in a fun way. In fact, most cricket writing, TV or radio is supposed to be entertaining. We don’t blame Finn for not wanting to come on a show that used him as an affectionate punch line, but it does show how easy it is to lose yourself a contact.

The Two Chucks, Atherton and our George were all speaking our minds from a factual basis, while looking to entertain. Had we been less entertaining we might have all been OK. Perhaps we’re guilty of being smart asses (we definitely are), but nothing was said maliciously. At SPIN we want access to the players, but we also want to be able to speak our minds. We are more than aware it’s a fine line, not a fat one.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 7

SPIN 7

25/07/2011 14:40

AUSTRALIA’S PATSY Jarrod Kimber says the former Australia opener was made a scapegoat for the failings of others

Simon Katich gave a brilliantly angry, yet restrained press conference when he was sacked by Cricket Australia. His dismissal from the list of Australian contracted players was a decision made because it seemed like the easiest thing to do. The Australian batting order was a flaccid old saggy waste of space, and something had to be done. Four of their top seven were over 30. Australia had continued to struggle to make totals over 100, 150, 200 and 250. Their bowling line-up was changing from Test to Test, but the batting line up was a hard place to be removed from.

Marcus North was a 31-year-old journeyman. He’d played county cricket for a bunch of teams, had always been a low profile, low average Shield player, and was largely picked because he could bowl a bit

‘It seems that Katich’s main problem wasn’t his age, but his lack of public profile’ of off spin. In the past Australia would not have accommodated a man of his age and a meagre record in first-class cricket. Now, it seemed, they would. The team was almost impossible to get out of. But the press and public had turned. They saw a pitiful display in the Ashes and an ordinary effort in the World Cup, and they wanted something to happen.

The first change was Ricky Ponting stepping down as captain. Ponting must have known the knives were sharpening, and what he did was move himself into a

position where he was less likely to get shafted. It was a very clever move from a man not known as a political thinker. It would have been a big move to oust Ponting as captain; it has been decades since an Australian captain was fired. Even Kim Hughes resigned. Whether Ponting would have been fired or not is uncertain, but if he had been he probably wouldn’t have played on. Australian captains almost never stay on in the XI, and Ponting’s best chance was to step down from the captaincy and then hope he wasn’t asked to take the next step - out of the team.

The second change was a monumental one.

It’s perhaps the biggest shift in world cricket. Australia let go their part-time fielding coach, Mike Young. Young had been involved in Australian cricket since 2000. It was an on and off again relationship, like

12 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 12

25/07/2011 14:40

never quite moving in with your girlfriend and always keeping your eye out for someone better. Australia’s fielding in the Ashes was quite ordinary, but Young still wasn’t given a full-time role. Now he has been terminated.

The decision is seen by many as the first of the review into the performance of Australian cricket led by Don Argus, the former BHP chairman. Sitting alongside Argus are Steve Waugh, Mark Taylor and Allan Border. Their job is to fix what is wrong with Australian cricket, although the choice of Border, Waugh and Taylor may be the problem itself. Australian cricket has become such an insular place that few were surprised that an American fielding coach was the first to be outed. While this review is ongoing, with its findings not due for months, Australia picked a new bowling coach.

Craig McDermott was their choice. It was a baffling one. McDermott had been seen by some as a lock-in for the England job until his interview. Having lost that job to Saker, McDermott was now up against Allan Donald, who had just added extra venom to Tim Southee, and Allister de Winter, the bowling coach from Tasmania who had turned an ordinary looking bowling attack into Shield champions. Queensland’s bowlers, with their great potential, had achieved far less under McDermott.

McDermott was also caught up in the collapse of a $Aus 40 million real estate deal and allegations that he had failed to pay child support. Some people believe that these things shouldn’t affect his position as a bowling coach. However, Cricket Australia is the organisation that took a moral judgment on Shane Warne over his adultery, removing the vice-captaincy from him. It’s also doubtful that, had Donald or De Winter had similar recent histories to the flame-haired Queenslander, they would have even got an interview. Justin Langer, another Australian legend, was then promoted from batting coach (of a team that lost a series of Test matches because of batting collapses) to assistant coach.

But perhaps the biggest indication that Australia are making poor decisions in their coaching appointments comes with the one that was made before the Ashes and World Cup - giving Tim Nielsen a three-year contract extension. Even fans of the head coach would think that giving him an extension on the verge of two very important events is jumping the gun.

Others think it is just plain absurd.

Then there are the men who pick the teams.

At the press conference at the end of the Ashes, Andrew Hilditch said that he’d done a good job and wasn’t to blame for Australia’s performance. It was a stunning

statement, and one that would have got him fired from most public positions. However, Hilditch is still Australia’s chairman of selectors, even if he does, in one way, share the position with Greg Chappell, who is the ominously named national talent manager.

Hilditch’s selectorial mistakes and public blunders are far too numorous to list here but here is one example: suggesting that Michael Beer had a home ground advantage at a ground he had played only four times before.

myth, but Simon Katich played like he was trying to honour the cap on his head. He was desperately unstylish as a player, had run-ins with Ponting and Michael Clarke (once choking him in a changing-room when Clarke wanted to leave the celebrations early) and cared little about anything other than squeezing every last drop of talent out of his body. In the second Ashes Test at Adelaide in the winter, he injured his Achilles, and could have asked for a runner, but he was too proud to.

Elsewhere, the decision to announce a 17-man squad prior to the Ashes will go down as one of the stupidest marketing decisions ever made while the replacement of the 50-over competition for domestic one-day cricket with a split innings 40-over format was a highly mocked idea that emerged from too many focus groups, and was binned after a year. And, if the person who put forward former prime minister John Howard as a future president of the ICC is still employed by Cricket Australia, there should be a review into why.

That didn’t make him sexy, but it did make him a very important part of the Australian set-up. It was Katich’s steadfast denial to give his wicket away cheaply that papered over the cracks in Hussey and Ponting’s form. The Australian team must rebuild.

There is no doubt about that. As an older player, Katich’s name should have been on the list. But to sack him before they got rid of several others, playing and non playing, is a disgrace and another mistake of a Cricket Australia regime that makes mistakes each time they breathe.

But back to Australia’s top order. Alongside Ponting in the ageing stakes are Mike Hussey and Brad Haddin. Since March 2008 all three have averaged under 40; Katich has averaged 50 in that period, which is also more than new captain Michael Clarke and star player Shane Watson. Yet when looking forward to the 2013 Ashes the Australian selectors decided that they needed a new opening partnership – even though that was the only part of the line-up in good working order.

There is also one more important thing that doesn’t seem to have been answered at this stage. Does Australia have an opener who can replace Katich? They couldn’t find a spot for Eddie Cowan (man of the match in the Shield Final and ODI player of the year) in the Australia A side, and Phil Hughes averaged 16 in three Tests against England last summer.

It seems that Katich’s main problem wasn’t his age, but his lack of public profile. Mike Hussey’s form spurt at the start of his career, even if it was for only 18 Tests before a massive career slump, made him a legend. Ponting is still loved by the Australian public, especially as a batsman.

Katich was just a bloke who had worked hard to overcome some technical flaws, get recalled at 32, and become a consistent performer. He wasn’t a legend, didn’t advertise many products, and few if any kids had his picture on their wall.

The left-hander is one of those players who has always done exactly what Australian cricket asked of him, and in their time of need recently, he was the one who stood up more often than not. Once back in the Australian side (after breaking many records in Australian Shield cricket to get noticed) the middle-order regular changed his game to make himself an opener.

In the Australian side no one tries harder, or performs more for the honour of representing Australia. The ‘baggy green’ may be largely a modern Steve Waugh

Mickey Arthur, Greg Shipperd, coaches of Western Australia and Victoria respectively, or others could replace Tim Nielsen. Mostly, Greg Chappell has already replaced Andrew Hilditch. Tony Dodemaide, chief executive of Cricket Victoria and a former head of cricket at the MCC, or Keith Bradshaw, the head honcho at Lord’s, could replace James Sutherland as chief executive. Brad Haddin could be replaced

by Tim Paine. And for the other jobs there are several replacements that could do as good a job or better waiting in the wings.

The one job Australia can’t really replace straight away seems to be that of Katich.

Perhaps Cowan or Ryan Broad could fill the job that Katich fills, both are obdurate batsmen with solid techniques who like to be thought of as unflinching. Neither made the Australia A squad for Zimbabwe, both beaten to a place in the squad by David Warner. Warner for Katich could be the call; after all, Warner has averaged 36 in seven first-class games. If you follow Australian selection logic of past years, who better?

But if others kept their jobs and Warner is in line as a possible replacement, Simon Katich’s anger in his farewell press conference was nowhere near misplaced.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 13

SPIN 13

25/07/2011 14:40

14 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 14

25/07/2011 14:40

‡

BATTING AND JAMES TAYLOR ‡

A MODERN LOVE STORY Jarrod Kimber speaks to Leicestershire’s hottest property, while overleaf, George Dobell reports on his next move.

Sarah Ansell provides the pictures While England have at present opted for Eoin Morgan to fill the gap opened by the retirement from Test cricket of Paul Collingwood, many seasoned observers of the county scene have identified another diminutive middle-order batsman as a possible better long-term bet: Leicestershire’s James Taylor.

Anyone who was present at the Oval in early May to watch the 21-year-old defy an attack of Chris Tremlett, Yasir Arafat, Stuart Meaker and Jade Dernbach on a dog of a pitch on his way to a second-innings fifty against Surrey will need little convincing – especially if Morgan’s issues outside the off stump continue.

Because while all around him were blown away on a wicket on which batsmen were never sure if the ball would rear up alarmingly or rip through anklethreateningly low, Taylor stood firm, ignoring a series of hits to his hands and body and one savage blow to his helmet.

“The one that hit me on the head shot up off a length,” recalls Taylor, who at one point had garnered only 15 runs from 93 deliveries – and almost as many bruises.

He was eventually dismissed for 52 from 145 balls – but not before hooking Tremlett for a couple of sixes. In the press box, journalists realised that this was probably not the innings of a young man on the rise but one of a fully-fledged Test batsman.

It may not have been pretty – and at no point did it appear as if Taylor could really guide his county past a forbidding target of 423 – but it was a message to those assembled that this

guy really loves batting and is prepared to do it ugly if required.

When he says: “I just love to bat and get annoyed when I’m not at the crease,” you

I LIKE TO THINK I CAN HIT THE BALL WHERE THERE AREN’T FIELDERS understand that that is something of an understatement. In fact, if batting were a teenage girl, you could imagine Taylor camping outside her parents’ home, professing his undying love from beneath her bedroom balcony.

“Whether it’s from speaking to people about cricket or watching it on TV, I’m always wanting to learn,” is another of his phrases and you get the feeling he stored away for future reference several lessons from that afternoon in Kennington alone.

I JUST LOVE TO BAT While other young cricketers might think it’s kind of nerdy to be so into cricket that you would study other players on the box in your downtime in an attempt to gain an upper hand, all this does is mark out Taylor’s uniqueness.

Another thing is his strokeplay. Taylor may not have a textbook technique – something that may result from a small, slight physique – but has one that works for him. “I like to think I can hit the ball where there aren’t fielders and it’s probably likely to be an unorthodox shot in all honesty,” he says.

“Coaches have never tried to coach it out of me; they’ve just tried to keep it simple and trust my instincts.” Don’t tinker with Taylor, in other words.

It also means that where those with smoother and more effortless styles have departed for polished but ultimately pointless 30s, he remains for the long haul.

Indeed, Iain O’Brien, the former New Zealand pace bowler who spent some time at Leicestershire, often talks about how patient is the Cricket Writers’ Club Young Cricketer of the Year for 2009 -and how he knows when to attack and when to just soak up the pressure.

Not that this implies that he is only at home with the longer forms of the game. It may be a testament to his maturity that depending on who you talk to, Taylor is either a one-day or four-day specialist. “I think one of my main strengths is adapting to any given situation, be it one-day or four-day cricket,” says a man who averages 48 in both forms of the game and followed his maiden firstclass century in 2009 with his first in oneday cricket only five days later..

That flexibility – he opened for England Under 19s –may prove to be a great advantage when his abilities are assessed against the claims of others by national selector Geoff Miller and his team.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 15

SPIN 15

25/07/2011 14:40

ALISTAIR BROWN

My Life In Cricket

That Alistair Brown never cemented a place in England’s stuttering one-day side is a mystery of modern cricket. A century against India in his debut series in 1996 suggested a long future in the international game but before his final game, in 2001, he made just 16 appearances. For Surrey, his brutal batting brought a set of world records: a double-century off 118 balls in a 40-over game against Hampshire at Guildford in 1997; a world-record 268 off 160 balls in a 50-over game against Glamorgan in 2002; 176 off 97 balls as Surrey hit 496 for four from 50 overs against Gloucestershire in 2007. Now 41 and playing for county champions Nottinghamshire, Brown was a key part of the all-conquering Surrey team that won championships in 1999, 2000 and 2002 and a total of six trophies in five seasons, including the first-ever T20.

Pigeonholed as a one-day player, Brown’s first-class average, in the mid-40s, was for a long time the highest of any current player not to have played Test cricket. Brown

SPIN_August_Online.indd 18

speaks to former SPIN editor Duncan Steer.

SPIN: You were arguably the most attacking English batsman of your generation: who made you that kind of player?

Alistair Brown I had two idols: Viv Richards and Ian Botham. They were the guys who shaped the way I wanted to play. I think they inspired me to play more aggressively than some. Then my father . . . my dad had played for Surrey Young Amateurs in the ’50s - he never played professionally, but I used to go with him to club games and he played very aggressive knocks.

SPIN Is it a state of mind to play so attackingly? Could more batsmen play like you if they decided to?

Brown: I think it’s got to be in your makeup. But it depends on circumstances too. It was lucky for me that I was able to get some of those big scores, because I had a very

strong batting side around me. When you know you have Chris Lewis or Brendon Julian coming in at number eight, it gives you an extra freedom.

SPIN: What was it like coming into the Surrey set-up in the late-80s?

Brown: The dressing-room was quite a poor place when I joined. Ian Greig was in charge and I don’t think he had the full support of the players. I remember as a youngster I was sent to find [West Indies fast bowling legend] Sylvester Clarke one morning. I was told he’d either be in his flat or at Ladbrokes.

But I couldn’t find him in either, so he didn’t play the game. Greig wasn’t happy but I think it showed the lack of respect that Clarke then came for a drink in the Tavern at the end of the day’s play. It was indicative of what was wrong. And if the dressing-room isn’t right, it doesn’t matter who you’ve got in your team. When you’ve got people like Waqar Younus or Clarke in your side and

25/07/2011 14:40

you’re not getting close to winning trophies, it suggests something’s not quite right.

I got into the first team in 1992 and within two or three years it had gelled and by 1995 we were capable of winning trophies. A lot of our players came through at the same time: Graham Thorpe, Martin Bicknell, Mark Butcher, Ian Ward . . . and a lot of that gelling was down to the captaincy of Adam Hollioake. He was the best captain I played under: he was a strong leader, he had a lot of ideas, he was well respected and he got the team playing as one.

SPIN: What was the highlight of Surrey’s long run of success?

Brown: Definitely the first championship win, in 1999. That’s higher than any individual honours. You strive for so long to win championships and to be part of that

band of players coming together was very special.

SPIN: After that team started to break up, Surrey stopped winning trophies, and eventually got relegated. Was the transition period managed badly?

Brown: I think it all started when Ben [Hollioake] died in 2002. The season after that we felt, ‘We’re going to win this for Ben’.

But it was a hard blow for Adam and he was never the same player again. Adam was an extraordinary leader, a very hard leader.

And, of course when Ben died that affected Adam and we didn’t have that leadership from the top. That was the start of the end for us as a team. Ian Ward was sacked, which I found difficult to understand. He was sacked, basically, to bring in younger players as I was, in the end. Ward was sacked to

bring in Scott Newman as I was sacked to bring in James Benning.

But that was the start of it, in 2002. the whole atmosphere in the dressing-room changed. Add to that, Saqlain Mushtaq, who had been outstanding for us, had a knee injury and I don’t think he ever came back to be as good a bowler again.

When Adam stood down, Jon Batty came in as captain. Jon was a great guy but it was difficult for him to follow someone who was Surrey’s best captain for 30 years. Another factor was that if our overseas player went away for five weeks to the Asia Cup or whatever, we didn’t tend to bring in a temporary replacement - as most other sides would do. I think because we’d had such a good era between 1996 and 2002, there was a feeling that we were good enough to get away with it.

In that good era if we had a team meal everyone would go out and get on well together. But post-2002, it started to fragment a bit.

SPIN: In his first book, Mark Ramprakash suggests that some of the players from the next generation simply didn’t have the right work ethic to succeed . . .

Brown: I have seen lots of county players who could be better, players for whom the penny hasn’t quite dropped. But it’s not necessarily about working harder. You need to find what’s best for you. At Surrey I don’t think anyone trained as a hard as Ramps: he’s as good a player as I’ve played with or against. My preparation was always geared to my being able to perform to the best of my ability. So I did less than Ramps. Then one year, I thought, ‘Maybe I should do a bit more.’ So I trained with Ramps, went for throw downs at 8.30 instead of 9.30. But by the time I got to the game I wasn’t as fresh as I wanted to be. I did what Ramps did for half a year and averaged about 26. So I went back to being a bit more relaxed – and averaged 80 for the rest of the season.

SPIN: Your 268 is the innings you will be remembered by – is that the one you personally rate as your No 1?

Brown: It’s the sort of innings that comes along once in a lifetime. I’m lucky enough to get days where I see the ball like a beach ball and that was one of them. The ball was swinging around for the first few overs but I hit a few off the middle, then I hit a few more off the middle. Sometimes you hit the ball really clean and think: ‘I hit that well.’

Then you think: ‘My God, I hit that really well.’ And I just continued with it. When you come in after an innings like that, you know you’ve played out of your skin. And all the players come up and shake your hand - and

SPIN_August_Online.indd 19

25/07/2011 14:40

The machinations of Mr Miller Daniel Norcross talks to England’s Chairman of Selectors, about how the team is chosen, Samit Patel, Darren Pattinson and how to become the next cab off the rank.

22 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 22

25/07/2011 14:40

s

It’s midnight on Christmas Day in the Geoff Miller household. A largely family affair is drawing to a close. England’s National Selector is wilting. But duty calls. England are playing Australia in Melbourne, so Miller turns on the TV. With Australia at 60 for three, though, his resistance crumbles and before retiring to bed he sticks a tape in to record the action for him to watch in the morning.

“When I woke up I could see that Strauss and Cook were batting and thought ‘that’s good. Now just don’t lose a wicket before close of play.’” he recalls. “I couldn’t see the score at first but then it came up.” It was 146 for no wicket. “I thought ‘what? How long have they been batting?’ Then I saw that the Aussies had got 98 all out. I tell you, at that moment there was no prouder man in England than Geoff Miller, sitting in his little house in Chesterfield. I’ve had some fantastic moments in my career but to win the Ashes home and away as a player and a selector made me very proud.”

Indeed, other than Alec Bedser, Miller is the only Englishman to achieve that remarkable feat. So how is it that a man who confesses to being a limited Testmatch performer, a joker in the dressingroom, and a regular on the after dinner circuit has managed to preside over the most settled regime in the post war history of English cricket?

After all, he played at a time of comparable riches at the top of the English game; a time when selectors could choose from Gooch, Gatting, Gower, Botham, Willis, Knott, Underwood, Randall, Hendrick and a whole host of worthy back-up players.

Yet selectorial controversy was far away.

Recall the endless debates about Gatting or Randall? The fiasco of Botham’s sacking (or was it resignation?) as England captain in 1981. The repeated knee-jerk reactions to intermittent failure that can so destabilise a team.

“We’re looking for players not to be looking over their shoulder the whole time so they can instead focus on the team ethic,” says Miller. “We give the players honesty. We give them a fair crack. We give them consistency and continuity. It’s no accident [that we have a settled side]. It’s done by meticulous method. When I was playing, far better players than me didn’t know if they’d be in the side from one game to the next.”

Consistency, continuity and method are Miller’s favourite watchwords and he returns to this theme repeatedly during

the 80 minutes he spends with me.

“It’s not that I’m closing the shop. I’d never do that. There will always be opportunities for players to come in.

After all, we are looking for strength in depth and the last thing we want is to find that we lose a whole load of players all at one time. We don’t want to find ourselves having to rebuild. Our job as selectors is to plan for today and for the future. And with there being so much international cricket today the players need a rest, which allows us to feed new players in to the side gradually. But it’s my job to explain to the players why they’ve been left out. It might be because they need a rest, some ‘chill time’ as the modern players say. It may be because they’re not performing. But if that’s the case we’ll be honest with them and in return I expect them to be honest with us.”

AT THAT MOMENT THERE WAS NO PROUDER MAN IN ENGLAND THAN GEOFF MILLER, SITTING IN HIS LITTLE HOUSE IN CHESTERFIELD

This is all such a far cry from the days when one Chairman of Selectors announced to the world the inclusion of “Malcolm Devon”, a player he’d never seen play. For Miller, unlike many of his predecessors, is a fabulous paradox. He talks with passion, and is thrillingly engaging about such mundane concepts as “process” and “analysis”. He and his team - Ashley Giles, James Whitaker and Andy Flower - have simplified what for every other English selection committee has been an almost impossibly complex task. After all, no other country has to wade through the competing claims of players from 18 first-class clubs, nor such a widely diverse media that has in the past trumpeted the claims of dozens of players simultaneously: remember the summer of five captains in 1988, or the confused debacle of 1989 that saw the selectors choose no fewer than 29 players? How many times in the 90s were Hick, Ramprakash and Crawley picked, then dropped? Under Miller, no matter the quality available at his disposal, you know that that will never happen. And while it makes the life of the jobbing journalist considerably harder, it is reaping dividends on the field.

When I suggest that he is perhaps

fortunate to be presiding over a time of relative strength in the English game, Miller is quick to explain what he sees as the fundamental difference between now and earlier eras. “We’ve set up a rigorous performance programme and established the Lions squad,” he says. “Now players don’t just come straight up from the counties. They develop mentally and physically. It’s not accidental; it’s all been worked on because it’s a necessity.”

It is through the performance programme that inexperienced players understand the criteria they need to fulfil to make it into the full England team, and by playing for the Lions the selectors can assess how a player will respond to the increased pressure of being on the fringe of the senior side. “It is a step up. It allows us to find out whether a player can cope with the intensity, and the proof of the pudding was in the Ashes triumph, which had been in the planning for 18 months.”

Indeed, it is the lack of an established Lions programme to which he attributes the one strikingly anomalous selection of his entire reign, namely that of Darren Pattinson at Headingley in 2008. “We had to bring in cover for Jimmy [Anderson] because he had a slight side strain,” explains Miller. “Pattinson had outbowled everybody else that season by a mile, and because we didn’t have the Lions and the performance programme up and running, we had to make a snap decision. It did open a few eyes because it went against the policy of consistency.

But it was a decision taken with logic and after analysis. However, it didn’t go with the usual pattern of selections.

Unfortunately [because the decision was taken so late in the day] I didn’t have a chance to talk to Darren beforehand.

Then during the game the press, media, commentators and public put him under enormous pressure. It may not have worked as a selection but it was taken for the right reasons. It wouldn’t happen now with the Lions programme established. But he didn’t actually bowl any worse than anyone else in that game.”

And this is the key to Miller’s approach. The mistake with Pattinson wasn’t in the logic of the selection but rather that they hadn’t had the chance to see how he would perform on a bigger stage, they hadn’t had the opportunity to assess how mentally ready he was for international cricket. The upshot of this approach is that players will only be called up to the senior team after they’ve AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 23

SPIN 23

25/07/2011 14:40

28 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 28

25/07/2011 14:40

SERVICE Graeme Swann talks to SPIN’s chief writer George Dobell about how to motivate young cricketers and what makes him really mad…

How had the England dressing room changed from your first experience of it in 1999 to your return eight or nine years later?

It had changed massively. We’re much more together now. Back then, there was quite an insular, selfish feel to the team.

There were cliques. It wasn’t 11 guys playing for one another. It was six or seven guys playing that way and four or five playing for themselves. Look, I could be wrong. I was hardly in the dressing room back then. I was an outsider and I’m just giving you my impression. But I was quite surprised by it at the time.

I came back in eight years later and it felt different. It’s hard to put your finger on what has changed. Central contracts have made a big difference. So has the policy of continuity of selection, as guys aren’t looking over their shoulder all the time.

But one way or another, things feel much more united now. The sad thing is that many of those guys playing in 1999 would probably have performed really well if they’d come into this set-up. They’d have found it a much better environment.

I don’t know if you recall, but I was asked to write your tour diary in 1999-2000.

What would we have put in it?

Ha! It would have been like Paul Merson’s How not to be a professional footballer, wouldn’t it? Yeah, we could have called it How not to be a pro cricketer.

Murali has said England missed out on

not selecting you in those intervening years. But had you changed, too, or was it just that the England environment had changed to welcome characters like you?

Oh, there are myriad reasons. It was probably a bit of both. But I had improved by the time I was recalled. It’s only natural that you evolve as you play more. I know I had improved as a bowler, but it’s hard to say to what extent. I just felt I knew what I was doing more. But it’s true that the environment had changed, too.

“I can bowl the carrom ball, but it’s just not me. I’m a traditional off spinner. You wouldn’t ask Usain Bolt why he doesn’t run marathons, would you?”

Was the turning point in your own career moving from Northants to Notts at the end of 2004?

Yes, probably. It was a case of moving or giving up cricket. I wasn’t enjoying it at all and it had got to the stage where I was dreading going to work in the morning. I didn’t have a plan to do anything else, but I couldn’t have gone on like that. Then Mick Newell [Notts’ director of cricket] came along. He just asked me to come to Trent Bridge and enjoy my cricket again.

He said he wanted me to play with a smile on my face and be myself. As those were

qualities that were actively discouraged at Northants at the time, it was a chance I leapt at. It was lovely.

How do you feel about Northants now?

I’m still very fond of Northants. I check on their results and I still want to see them do well. It’s the club where I grew up and that I supported as a kid. I’m really happy to see they’ve started the season so well and I hope they go up. I know that will surprise a few of the people who gave me a hard time when I left, but hopefully they now understand there was a problem there and the reasons behind my decision. At the time, I seem to remember some of them calling me a quitter. Looking back, I still can’t believe that Northants didn’t win more trophies. They had some amazing players.

I have a theory that young cricketers would benefit if, alongside going warmweather training in South Africa or playing Grade cricket in Australia, they spent a few weeks each winter working in a call centre or the club office so they realise how good they have it and to focus their minds on the alternatives. What do you think?

I love it! It’s a great idea. But don’t let them work in the club offices; that’s too soft. Young cricketers should be made to do National Service. Or labouring. Look, we’ve got the best job in the world. It’s brilliant. We travel around the world, staying in great hotels, and we play cricket.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 29

SPIN 29

25/07/2011 14:40

THE KINGS VERSUS THE PRETENDERS HOW ENGLAND CAN WIN India are the best side in Test cricket right now. That isn’t as imposing as it’s been in the past. When the West Indies and Australia were the leading sides, it meant teams were playing them for nothing more than a chance of a moral victory. That India are number one says more about the state of Test cricket. Australia have spent three years imploding. Statisticians thought South Africa were the number one side but couldn’t beat Australia to prove it. Sri Lanka have hovered around the top for a while, but they don’t play enough Tests or have any bowlers left.

India have beaten Australia in their last two series (both at home), beaten England at home, drawn with South Africa twice, and beaten Sri Lanka at home and drawn away. They’ve been really good rather than terrifyingly awesome, more foo fighters than nirvana. With a batting line up of Sehwag, Tendulkar, Laxman, and Dhoni they have matchwinning batsmen. In Dravid and Gambhir they have those that can save matches as well. Add to that the best flat pitch bowler on earth, Zaheer Khan, their emotional talisman Harbhajan Singh, Praveen Kumar, who is made for English conditions, and their comeback kid Ishant Sharma.

But there are weakness England can exploit as Jarrod Kimber explains.

ENGLAND MUST CAPITALIZE ON INDIA’S FIRST TEST SYNDROME There are few decent sides that start series as poorly as India. Against good opposition India almost routinely go 1-0 down, so England must be aware of this and come out all guns blazing at Lord’s. In their past eight test series, they have won the first Test only three times. Two of those wins were against the West Indies and Bangladesh, the other a one-wicket victory over Australia that they probably should have lost. It goes back further than this. If India are sluggish, England must leave Lord’s ahead. It may not guarantee victory, because India tend to improve as a series progresses, but England would fancy themselves to repel an Indian comeback.

1

STOP ZAHEER KHAN It’s impossible to overstate how important Zaheer Khan is to India, However, let’s try. Zaheer Khan is as important, if not more so, than Sachin Tendulkar. Sachin finds himself in one of the greatest batting line-ups in history, making his contribution less significant. Zaheer’s ability to start collapses in the opposition on the flattest tracks make him the best bowler in Test cricket. Without him, India would have had to work 25per cent harder to win the World Cup and, simply, would not be top of the world rankings in Test cricket While most bowlers on a flat pitch will slow down, find that safe shortof-a-length place to try to dry up runs, Zaheer just bowls faster and fuller. I once referred to Khan as a budget Wasim Akram, but with a similar ability to make something happen on the deadest of pitches, he has earnt the right to be mentioned in the same breath as the great Pakistan pace

2

bowler. England must practise facing very quick full balls in the nets when they’re tired or first walk in. Having normal net bowlers bowl a standard length won’t be enough. Zaheer is not a normal bowler. In the middle, England must show him the same respect that good Indian and New Zealand teams gave Glenn McGrath: playing few attacking shots and leaving anything that won’t get them out. If Zaheer gets cheap wickets, he can monster new batsmen with late movement.

KEEP HARBHAJAN SINGH OUT OF THE GAME Harbhajan is nowhere near the best spinner India have ever had, even with 400 wickets under his belt. He’s clever and skilful but, outside his home country, lacks the tricks to consistently take Test wickets. But it’s his personality that is most valuable to his team. He is their braggart and cheerleader and the man who lifts them up when the team really needs something. If Harbhajan is taking wickets or making runs, India are tough to beat. He’s their Australian mongrel. Every sucessful team needs a player who is not afraid to lose a few friends for a win.

3

His Test batting average is a little under 19 and although by no means an all-rounder, he often scores runs when India really need them. In the recent series against the West Indies, for example, in which India had a decidedly a second tier batting line-up, he rescued them from 85 for six with a rapid 70 that helped them to 246, enough to beat the hosts on a low-scoring pitch. He scored successive hundreds against New Zealand batting at number eight, one from the perilous position of 65 for six. And his unconventional technique can

34 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 34

25/07/2011 14:40

bring him very quick runs at times. So England must stop him getting on a roll. If he does, every wicket or run he is involved with becomes worth double. If England can keep his bravado from inspiring his colleagues, they will have gone some way to winning the series.

BE PATIENT The Indian batting line-up is so good that it’s hard to believe it could have any weaknesses. But it does, occasionally, collapse. While Sehwag and Sachin are busy embarrassing the opposition, those lower down the order sometimes drift off, thinking the work is done. And when a wicket does come, ending a painfully quick 300-run partnership, India often fold. They don’t do too many 600 for one declarations. They get bored and get bowled out. This should suit a bowling attack like England’s, which needs restless opponents. They’re a patient, hardworking unit, so even if India get to 400 for two, they should know that if they stick to their game plan they might still

4

bowl them out for 450. It will be important to remember this, because over a four-Test series India are going to make a couple of big scores.

PRODUCE PITCHES HELPFUL TO THEIR BOWLERS India are susceptible to the occasional heavy loss.

In Tests since 2008, India have lost four by an innings, three of them against South Africa. Dale Steyn has ripped through them in more than one instance, taking 25 wickets in those three matches. England may not have a bowler of Steyn’s talent, but they do have a high-class bowling attack that as a whole is better than South Africa’s.

Now all they need is some helpful pitches, and their batsmen to give them some totals to bowl at.

5

CONCLUSION As a former governor said once, if it bleeds, we can kill it. And India bleed.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 35

SPIN 35

25/07/2011 14:40

INDIA’S SUPERMEN WITH INDIA TOURING, WE HAVE WHAT MAY BE THE LAST CHANCE TO SEE SOME OF THE MOST BRILLIANT PLAYERS OF THIS GENERATION IN THE FLESH. ED MALYON AND VITHUSHAN EHANTHARAJAH REFLECT ON THEIR CAREERS.

SACHIN TENDULKAR A certain level of fame and achievement ensures that you are known simply by simply your first name.

Say the name Sachin and only one person springs to mind.

He has scored more runs in Test cricket than anyone else in the history of the game. He has scored more runs in oneday international cricket than anyone else. He has also scored more centuries than any other batsman in both forms.

Quite simply, one of the best batsman the game has ever seen.

One of the few remaining Test players to have made their debut in the 1980s, in the 22 years of international cricket that Sachin Tendulkar has played, he has broken numerous records, even in an era when he would regularly have to face two of the most successful bowlers that the game has ever seen in Shane Warne and Muttiah Muralitharan.

At just 16, Tendulkar played in his first Test series, and was struck in the face by a Waqar Younis bouncer. As blood streamed from his nose and mouth, he refused assistance and continued to bat in a heavily-stained shirt.

This gritty determination in an apparently quiet and gentle man seems to be part of the reason that he is so popular in India. An all-round batsman,

but also an all-round character who has received adulation previously unseen in the history of the sport. The phrase “cricket is my religion and Sachin is my god” may sound excessive, but it describes the frenzied and complete obsession with Tendulkar in his homeland with alarming accuracy.

It is fairly difficult to even broadly break

UNFORTUNATELY FOR SACHIN TENDULKAR, HE WAS NEVER DESTINED TO BE NORMAL his career down into stages. There was some early acclimatizing to international cricket needed as he averaged 40 in his first year of Tests but only 21 in one-day internationals. In his early years he lacked consistency, scoring brilliant hundreds, such as the unbeaten 119 that saved a Test against England, only to follow that up by scoring no more than 21 in any of his next five knocks.

After overcoming this youthful unpredictability though, his improvement was remarkable and with consistency came quite brilliant results.

From 1993-96 he averaged a shade under 60 but was still not at his peak.

When he reached that zenith of his career, he became undoubtedly the best player on the planet. With his strength all around the wicket, his picture-perfect drives down the ground, there was seemingly no chink in the armor. From 1997-2002, Sachin scored 21 centuries in just 59 Tests, averaging more than 63 every time he stepped to the crease.

Scoring nearly 20 per cent of India’s runs over this eight-year period, he also gained notoriety for the way he dominated the greatest side of a generation.

His demolition of the legendary

Australian side was unprecedented, a team containing the Waugh brothers, Shane Warne, Allan Border and Glenn McGrath was routinely found wanting when faced with the genius of the 5ft 5in batsman from Mumbai. In the 1997/98 series he averaged a barely credible 111.

All these years later and having broken virtually every record worth breaking he still goes on.

As a person, he has attempted to keep his private life under wraps – no easy task in a country whose population is devoted to him. When asked who his idol was, he named his father. Understated and humble, his wife didn’t recognise him when she first met him, no doubt an attractive quality for a man who has admitted to wearing disguises and leaving the house at night in a desperate bid to be normal.

Unfortunately for Sachin Tendulkar, he was never destined to be normal. There is little doubt that he is the greatest cricketer of the modern era. Sir Donald Bradman seems likely to be forever considered the greatest cricketer of all time but of course in an entirely different époque. The fact that the little master’s style has been compared to Bradman, and even recognized by the man himself, speaks volumes more than bare stats can.

Team-mate Virender Sehwag claims that Tendulkar’s batting game is the most rounded there is but particularly his ability to pick a ball early. He told cricinfo in 2009 that “he is virtually ready before the ball is bowled” and that by playing every ball with soft hands, he times the ball better than any other.

The fact that he has only once been crowned Wisden cricketer of the year (in 1997) may surprise most, but with the plaudits he’s received elsewhere, it pales into insignificance. Quite simply, the best cricketer on the planet; see him while you still have the chance. ~ Ed Malyon

38 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 38

25/07/2011 14:40

VIRENDER SEHWAG Virender Sehwag is quite simply box office. Described by the Wisden Almanack of 2005 as the “most exciting opener in the world” he is also the most exciting opener in other worlds, his batting style is one of the most watchable in world cricket. There are plenty of batsmen in world cricket who can score runs - it’s kind of their job - but to score them quickly has become something of increased importance over the last decade, and it could be argued he’s contributed to this shift.

Totals that previously would have been impossible to chase in a day or innings are now plausible. He’s a player that can give such impetus with his ‘zen master’ style, that it changes the face of a game in no time at all.

On his international debut, he was distinctly unimpressive; one run from five balls, and then had his three overs of bowling distributed around the park for 35. His first decisive performance didn’t come until two years later in 2001, when his contribution with bat and ball ended the run of ten consecutive one-day international wins for a remarkable Australian side.

He broke into Test cricket that same year and never looked back following a debut century. In the next ten years, his uncomplicated approach would get him a whole heap of runs, with little regard for the consequences of his attacking attitude.

To demonstrate this, there is no better example than travelling back to 2004: Multan, the first Test against Pakistan.

Just two Tests before, he’d attempted to bring up what would have been his first double-century with an almighty smash over mid-wicket and was dismissed, so faced with the similar dilemma just short of a maiden triple, most players would play safe.

razor-sharp eye begins to go with age, his technical issues may resurface.

Considering that the biggest perceived weakness of his footwork is against the swinging ball in English style conditions, it could be a year or so too far for him.

Not Viru.

The stats do back up this school of thought, his career average dipping from 53 to 31 when he steps foot on English soil but the stats also tell plenty of other, more positive stories about Sehwag.

But that’s the point.

He obliterated the ball for six and chalked up an incredible 300. Since then, he’s got another, the quickest in Test match history.

Like many heroes, he is imperfect. His seeming disregard for footwork is a flaw that has accounted for the Test career of many a batsman. India’s former coach Greg Chappell dropped Sehwag in 2007

LIKE MANY HEROES, HE IS IMPERFECT for this reason, only for him to come flying back into form and into the side.

He accused Chappell of trying to change his style, but he never gave in. In his view, it’s a lack of footwork that is more than compensated for by a ludicrously quick eye and sublime judgement, and you could say history sides with him on that one.

Whilst he remains one of the world’s most destructive batsmen, it is entirely feasible that this summer will be his last tour of England. Whilst he wouldn’t be excessively old by the next one, if his

Ǧ any Test batsman; only Shahid Afridi and Adam Gilchrist have scored runs quicker. Ǧ Indian. Ǧ consecutive centuries into scores of 150+.

A frankly ridiculous 11 times. Ǧ consecutive double-century partnerships in a single Test innings, and he’s done it twice. Ǧ scored in a day by an Indian, and then broke it again, because he could. Ǧ Ǐ world in 2008. And then in 2009.

There are more, but these give a feel of the sort of player he’s been. One that’s broken records, one that’s batted in an irresponsible manner, but who’s somehow made that into one of the most successful styles on the planet. It’s these reasons, and many more, why the newest cricket religion, Sehwagology, was invented. ~ Ed Malyon

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 39

SPIN 39

25/07/2011 14:41

ARE INDIA DESTROYING WORLD CRICKET?

44 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 44

25/07/2011 14:41

MATTHEW ENGEL, A FORMER EDITOR OF WISDEN ALMANACK, MAY HAVE OPENED A PANDORA’S BOX WHEN HE ASKED A QUESTION ON THIS TOPIC DURING THE LAUNCH OF THE 2011 EDITION. ONE NEW ZEALAND LEGEND ARGUED THAT IT WAS TOO EDGY A QUESTION TO ASK, WHILE OTHERS SUGGESTED IT WAS INFLAMMATORY, CAME WITH RACIAL OVERTONES, OR WAS A GENERATIONAL ISSUE. WHATEVER, IT HAS BECOME CLEAR THAT INDIA’S INFLUENCE HAS GROWN EXTRAORDINARILY IN RECENT YEARS, SO SPIN DECIDED TO PUT THE QUESTION TO SOME OF THE GAME’S MOST INFLUENTIAL THINKERS AND WRITERS GEORGE DOBELL – SPIN CHIEF REPORTER No, of course it isn’t. Even if India’s influence on cricket was negative – and I don’t think it is – there’s no way it could ever destroy world cricket. I actually admire the way the Indian authorities protect and market their own game. I wish the ECB would take note. It’s not that the Indian board is the only one that is avaricious and self-interested; it’s just they’re better at it. Perhaps the Indians could wield their power with a little more delicacy – they may, for example, come to regret preventing their players from participating in other nations’ domestic competitions (such as the SLPL) while expecting everyone to be available for the IPL – but these are minor details. On the whole, the enthusiasm and money pouring into the game from India should be viewed positively. It’s probably worth remembering that List A and T20 cricket were both born in the county game. India may have added some glitz to the product – the IPL is just the FLT20 with balloons – but the roots of the game we all love were planted in England.

There’s surely far more that continues to unite us – be we Indian, English, Pakistani or Australian - than divide.

TONY COZIER – WEST INDIAN CRICKET COMMENTATOR WEST INDIES have more awareness than most of India’s growing influence. As their seasons coincide, the IPL has posed the most high-profile West Indians the dilemma of choosing between the six-figure payouts of a brief domestic T20 tournament and the still fulfilling, but appreciably less lucrative, honour of national representation. Chris Gayle and Dwayne Bravo are the first caught up in the predicament; they are unlikely to be the last.

Nor is the lure of the rupee confined to the players. Through television and other marketing rights, an Indian visit earns more for West Indies cricket than any other. Each Indian Test of the recent series was reportedly worth US$40 to the board. So, to fit three into the tight schedule, the Kingston Test ran (for the first time ever) from Monday to Friday, Bridgetown’s from Tuesday to Saturday. Not surprisingly, the turnouts were sparse but gate receipts were hardly a factor. And ground perimeter advertising, scattered at other times, filled every space, almost AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 45

SPIN 45

25/07/2011 14:41

A NEW BREED OF BATSMAN Tasmania and Australia A opener Ed Cowan argues that the techniques of Virender Sehwag and his ilk must be the result of a viral mutation Charles Darwin wrote about evolution: “In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment.” Although not entirely sure as to whether he preferred batting to bowling or the forward prod to the late cut, his theory has been incredibly malleable through the ages of the game.

If you look back at footage of yesteryear, the game in parts is unrecognisable. When you hear the Neil Harveys of the world go into another diatribe about how cricket “was better in their day” and have to stop

yourself from choking on your skimmed caramel latte, you wonder exactly how much peyote the old man must have had to come to that conclusion. What you forget is that the evolution of technique to the modern day has not only been a slow process but that it has been by and large a product of environment in which cricketers of the day have lived.

Throughout the early years of the modern game, when the wickets were uncovered, rollers hand pushed and the bats wafer thin, batsman were reluctant to play many shots off the front foot. The slow,

popping bounce of most surfaces made scoring down the ground nigh on impossible, and the cover drive a stroke for drought-ridden towns only. The conditions dictated that to be successful, batsman needed to rely on deflections and deft touches off the back foot. The late cut was the ‘ordre du jour’.

As curating became more of a science and wickets around the world quickened up, batsmen started arriving at the crease in Robocop-style helmets. Slowly, but ever so surely, as a result the pull and hooks shots became more the defining feature.

48 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 48

25/07/2011 14:41

We now live in an age dominated by the ‘corporate Test match’. Administrators with dollar signs in their eyes have tried to ensure games go for the full five days to maximize revenue. Their main weapon in the battle against an even contest of bat and ball has been the docile featherbed that is now a feature of almost every ground around the world. With it, the species of batsman known as the ‘flat track bully’ became the alpha male, beating his chest with his oversized willow after every straight drive on the up or pull shot off a length. Those that played with the traditionally straight bat and even temperament still prospered, but just like a viral mutation, so have evolved batsmen of quality that, technically, are train wrecks.

It is almost as if you can see the speech bubble above his head: “Hold… hold … hold, unleash hell” To counter flat wickets, bowling attacks in their endless meetings now rely heavily on the theme of “patience” and the unsung plan of ‘‘top of off, with the occasional bouncer’’.

Almost knowing the general vicinity of where the ball is going to be, batsmen have emerged for whom the bail of the imaginary fourth stump is in fact exactly the worst place you can possibly bowl to them. While the technically minded may choose to leave or defend such a delivery, a Sehwag will flay you over point for four with his eyes closed, an Amla will whip you through mid-wicket or glide the ball with ease through gully, a Tamim might hit you over your head, a Hughes will most certainly try to cut it, a KP in his pomp will stand tall and punch you through the covers, while Dilshan might scoop it over the wicketkeeper. Let it be known, the age of the anti-technique has arrived.

That is not to say these guys are any worse or less effective than your technically minded Dravid, Hussey or Sangakarra. They have just evolved an approach that would not have been conceivably possible in another era of cricket. Their respective output however, can be devastating, or quickly run cold.

That is the risk that is run with such processes. It will always be harder for them to ‘get in’ when they arrive at the crease.

When they do, however – look out.

Virender Sehwag is perhaps the finest case in point. To the naked eye, it seems he is all hands and no feet, but that perhaps does not do his batting the justice it deserves. He gets into position early primarily because he does not move as far as his peers – allowing him to be completely balanced when his hands flash through his impact zone at the speed of

Darwin is disappointed after Virender Sehwag has holed out light.

The key when playing at his best is how late he plays the ball. It is almost as if you can see the speech bubble above his head: “Hold…hold… hold, unleash hell”. Despite physically setting himself up to thrash the ball through the offside, he is by no means a one-trick pony and his resurgence has been heavily reliant on being able to get off strike when bowlers stray on to his pads or hip. Not being able to build any pressure with their plan A of starving his strengths, bowlers become at a loss as to where to direct their attention. Invariably they go back to the perceived “avenue of apprehension” that is so often talked about; this has been renamed by Viru “the avenue of acceleration” and like a spider trapping a fly, he has cornered his prey.

That is his beauty in a nutshell, to be able to manipulate the bowler to bowl to his strengths. To add to this dilemma, the perception that someone has bowled decently is dismissed when they look at the scorecard.

I am sure there are many bowlers who have felt powerless in his presence. That is not to say he is unstoppable – like all fragile techniques, his minimalistic footwork can get him in trouble when there is sideways

movement off the wicket, or he is up against a tall quickie who can aggressively get into his ribs and front armpit.

What these unorthodox players all do have in common, is incredible mental clout

Let it be known, the age of the anti-technique has arrived and resilience. What they lack in technical nous, they make up for with a deep knowledge of their own game, its weakness and, most importantly, their devastating strengths. Growing up, there is little doubt they would have been told they would not make it into the big time batting the way they did. In response to constant criticsm, they have admirably stuck to their own convictions and as a result have a deeprooted self belief.

This is one thing that has remained constant through the ages, regardless of the changing environment. Mental discipline still remains the most important ingredient in scoring runs consistently.

Survival of the fittest indeed. Charles Darwin would be proud. Except for Sreesanth’s necklaces. Nobody could be proud of those.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 49

SPIN 49

25/07/2011 14:41

24 SPIN 2011 2011 54 SPIN JUNE AUGUST

SPIN_August_Online.indd 54

25/07/2011 14:41

WE USED TO BE INDECISIVE BUT NOW WE’RE NOT SO SURE… The Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS) was modified recently at the Hong Kong ICC Annual Conference at the request of the Indian cricket board. It will now make use of Hot-Spot technology but do away with the Hawk-Eye balltracker, meaning lbw decisions will not form part of the system, due to make its debut in this summer’s series between England and India. But, as Nick Sadleir points out, it seems to be a case of one step forward, one step back from the game’s world governing body As any cricketer knows well, losing your wicket pains you so much that it is hard to imagine a worse feeling that doesn’t involve the death of a close relative. And while being dismissed through one’s own fault or a bit of bad luck is one thing, being given out unfairly can be cause enough to incite murder on the pitch. Similarly, bowlers don’t much fancy hearing a nick and then turning around to see the umpire shaking his head. But more than how incorrect decisions make individual players feel is the fact that one shocking decision can be enough to change the result of an entire Test series.

A certain degree of human error is part of cricket and it always has been so, but the more we can do to eliminate it the better, and the UDRS that has been used in various guises at many Test series over the past few years and in the 2011 World Cup has made significant strides towards making the game a fairer one.

But there has been one major obstacle to UDRS implementation and development

and that, surprise surprise, is the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), whose officials and players have been adamantly against the use of technology., despite it being a system under which they won this year’s World Cup. The mandate of any review system is to eliminate the howlers – those decisions that are plainly, terribly, awfully wrong. Doing so surely makes everyone happier. The Federation of International Cricketers’ Associations (FICA) recently surveyed a host of international players and 82 per cent of them said that they believed the UDRS made for better decision making at the 2011 World Cup. A total of 97 per cent of those surveyed would support UDRS being made compulsory in all Test Matches.

Fairer equals better and, although it wasn’t perfect, UDRS at the World Cup was a step in the right direction.

The UDRS has its fair shares of supporters and critics. Muttiah Muralitharan, Rudi Koertzen and Ricky Ponting are understood to be supporters of it while Indian captain

MS Dhoni has called it an “adulteration of human decision making and technology”

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 55

SPIN 55

25/07/2011 14:41

58 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 58

25/07/2011 14:41

RELIGHTING THE FIRE

How do you rebuild a fallen empire? Listen to those who helped create it… Fire in Babylon, the documentary on the cricketing and social significance of the greatWest Indies sides of the 1970s and ’80s, has been gracing theatres across the world for the past nine months. Much of the talk surrounding the film has been concerned with the idea that it could elicit a much needed resurrection of West Indies cricket, which has been on a downward spiral since an era of dominance in which the side remained unbeaten for 15 years. SPIN’sVithushan Ehantharajah caught up with four of the main protagonists in the film – Michael Holding, Colin Croft, Joel Garner and Gordon Greenidge – to discuss the problems facing cricket in the Caribbean, and whether there is a remedy for deep-rooted idiocy and mediocrity…

When you were approached for Fire in Babylon, did you think it would be something that could help turn the tide in West Indian cricket?

Colin Croft: Well I hope so, but I see it as more of an education. This film itself can be used as a literature piece in the sense that you could look at it and study it.

Gordon Greenidge: I’m not sure that it will.

If they watch it and understand what West Indies cricket was all about back then, then maybe it would. But that is only if they show that sort of appreciation for it. Even when we started, and after we had our period in the 70s and 80s, you wanted to rub shoulders and be in the company of the previous group of players who played West Indies cricket. You wanted to learn from them and the other side of the coin was that you wanted to teach and inform them. I’m not certain that most of the present day players are interested in that.

Joel Garner: While doing it I wasn’t too sure what to expect. I mean, you do the interviews and you reminisce about how things were back then, and you want to put that across. Sure, we were good, very good, but there is a side you didn’t see. You didn’t see how hard we worked every day of the week; the amount of hours that we went through in terms of training and preparation to get to the point where you were almost perfect at executing any plans.

Instantly. Sure we had the talent, but we were well drilled and efficient.

Are you startled by the decline in West Indian cricket? The future looked bright after the solid foundations that your side had built.

Michael Holding: I can’t say I’m too surprised. I think there are a few players in the ’90s who thought that, after the period of the ’70s and the ’80s, they could rest on their laurels and the world would bow before them. They thought because they played for the West Indies, they would be playing for a winning team. I don’t think the current players feel that, but if they look at the people that were before them, they would see a group of players who stagnated and didn’t fulfil their potential. They will see a side who thought they had everything, but achieved nothing.

Croft: When you look at the likes of Curtly Ambrose, Courtney Walsh and Ian Bishop, they would have been directly influenced by the likes of Holding, Garner, Roberts, Croft.

The problem is that influence seemed to stop after that particular crop of players.

Do you think players felt there was too much pressure, being judged by the high standards that you had set? As if they would always be in your shadows?

Greenidge: Well if they feel like that, then they will be! Even then I don’t even think they’re in our shadows – that gives the AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 59

SPIN 59

25/07/2011 14:41

Taking it to the

MAX

Described by one of its creators as ‘Gladiators meets cricket’, The Titans of Cricket show is coming to a stadium near you this autumn. George Dobell spoke to former West Indies captain JimmyAdams about the event – and of his hopes for the future of Caribbean cricket

GB: Tell us about The Titans of Cricket project.

JA: It’s sports entertainment. It’s an indoor event – so you take the weather out of the equation – featuring all the best bits of the game of cricket compressed into two hours.

It will feature some of the best players in the world competing against each other in tests of speed, power and placement. We’ll be testing their bowling speed and accuracy as well as how far and how powerfully they can hit the ball. There will be events such as Ultimate Fielder and players from all the main Test nations will be representing their countries. We know lots of people like the sport, but they can’t give a whole day to go and watch it. I think these events will really capture the public imagination. They’re going to be huge.

GD: Tell us about the players who will be participating this time?

JA: Sehwag has committed to it. Flintoff has committed. Adam Gilchrist; Wasim Akram; Marcus Trescothick; Steve Harmison: they’ve all committed, too. Then there’s Paul Collingwood and many more. We’re hoping to agree terms with Chris Gayle and Fidel Edwards, so they can represent the West Indies. These are serious players. It

wasn’t a hard sell, either. We’re going to have huge crowds and this is a great opportunity for these guys to show just how good they really are and to entertain people.

“We’re just in a period now where both sides need to cool off a bit” GD: What’s your role?

JA: I’m the technical director. I’ve been advising on issues around speed and distance. There’s no chance I’ll be involved.

I’m far too old. You know, all my life I felt I was playing cricket in a two-by-two box.

There was an attitude of ‘this is how it’s done; this is how it’s always been done.’ But they guys who thought up this project – Matt and Nick – they are two guys who think outside the box. They’ve found a way to grab the public attention GD: Could the Titans project attract new followers to cricket?

JA: For sure. Just like T20 cricket has done.

And people can think what they like about T20, but anything that attracts a new

generation of followers to cricket is OK by me. You know, there are things that happen in cricket that very few people see. Amazing things. Maybe we only see them in practice when people are really stretching themselves, but those are the things we’re going to show people. The shows will be televised, too, so we’ll be taking the game to a big audience. It’ll open their eyes to the sport. There will be kids at a crossroads and, because of this show, they’ll be attracted to a lifetime’s love of cricket. That’s one of the main reasons I wanted to get involved: anything that brings cricket to a new generation of followers will always have my support.

GD: Has West Indies cricket turned a corner?

JA: Well, I’m going to cautiously say that it has. But people have been saying that for a few years and they’ve been wrong. Maybe things have changed now, though. At last, the people in administration realised that, whatever raw talent we may have, it’s not developing in the right way. When people graduate to the full international side, they’re often found wanting.

The answer was never just going to be changing the captain or the players. It was more fundamental. Finally we have an academy up and running. The rate of change might not be as fast as we want, but at least

64 SPIN AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 64

25/07/2011 14:41

things are in place now that should lead to long-term improvement.

GD: Has it been hard watching the West Indies of late?

JA: No. There’s still gold in the ground, you know. As long as that’s the case, I’ll remain optimistic for the future. By that, I mean we’re still producing the talent. We have phenomenal talent.

GD: I saw you take a terrible blow in the face – probably the worst I’ve seen - playing for the West Indies against Somerset. Did that have any long-term effects?

JA: No, no. It probably looked worse than it was. I was lucky in that the guy who patched me up knew what he was doing and, six weeks later, I was fine. Bones heal.

It was the only time I’ve been hit in the face and I’ve been playing all my life. It was just one of those things.

GD: Does Chris Gayle have a future in the West Indies team?

JA: Oh, yes. He’s only 30. He has lots more to give West Indies cricket. We’re just in a period now where both sides need to cool off a bit. He’ll be back.

GD: What did you think of Fire in Babylon?

JA: I thought it was… entertaining. I enjoyed the music the most. I’m a big reggae fan. I’d seen all the footage and I knew the story and all the characters very well. But maybe they over-politicised it a bit. There’s some revisionist history in there. But basically they portrayed the story pretty well. It was entertaining.

Visit: www.titansofcricket.com for more details. The Live Titans of Cricket events will be staged in Manchester (MEN, October 2), Birmingham (NIA, October 5) and London (O2, October 8). Tickets from £25.

AUGUST 2011

SPIN_August_Online.indd 65

SPIN 65

25/07/2011 14:41

SURREY’S BRAVE NEW

NEON WORLD

SPIN’S fashionista Katie Walker salutes Surrey’s decision to go all futuristic and finally dismisses the theory that their shirts were stolen off the security guards before the game. As told to Daniel ‘party shirt’ Norcross.

SPIN_August_Online.indd 70

25/07/2011 14:42

THE CUT OF THE KIT IS A BIT LESS ACI I I I I ID, AND A BIT MORE GAY DISCO Let’s be clear, all T20 kits are a bit of a style travesty. Conventional cricket whites are sportswear at its finest, and if it ain’t broke, why fix it? But if the powers that be are determined to ditch what’s classy and classic, then Surrey have come up with the only dignified response: neon green. If you’re going to mess with tradition, and a sublime one at that, the only way to maintain some kind of stylistic integrity is to think like an insurrectionist and go radically futuristic.

You know it’s a bit like trainers - if you’re not wearing Dunlop Green Flash or Stan Smiths, you’ve got to choose some metallic Nike creations with little windows in the heel to show off the air bags.

Anything in between is half baked or wannabe.

Beyond cricket, neon has great fashion éclat right now. In the world of expensive prêt a porter, everyone’s fallen for the flouro since Christopher Kane

SPIN_August_Online.indd 71

paired it with lace in his big-fashionmoment-of-a-Spring Summer 2007 show.

And last Autumn in Paris, Vogue identified some flashes of flouro on the front row of the shows - usually a helpful heads up for big trends to come. On the street, neon is a staple of Nu Rave style which revives the acid house look of the late 80s, (it’s sort of a shame Surrey didn’t run with the trend a bit further and think about a glow stick bat handle or SURREY SAYS RELAX on the shirts).

The cut of the kit is a bit les Aciiiiiiiid, and a bit more gay disco: the clingy tight sleeves and no collar are both very himbo. There’s a ton of clever creative flourishes designed to flatter. The black inserts on the shirt do the job of a male corset, creating the illusion of an impossibly slim waistline and superimpressive pecs. The combination of bright top and jet black bottoms is an old trick

which any girl will tell you flatters their figure.

But the masterstroke has to be the yoke line across the butt. This clever fat-busting device shapes the fabric around the butt, instead of letting it hang loose. Surrey have shown some serious silhouette shrinking savvy by not only using this old tailor’s trick, but highlighting it with a contrasting neon green piping.

Other details of note: The lining in the trousers is sophisticated to say the least. At the top, there’s a kind of fishnet mesh, and from the thigh down, an extraordinarily sensuous faux silk

fabric, all of which is finished very neatly, not an overlocked stitch in sight. No mistake, this is luxury so many designer clothes no longer bother with lining of any description.

The cap is a strange mix of the uninspired and the wacky. On the one hand, it’s a black baseball cap with a boring stripe pattern which suggests the designer was short on creativity on that day, (I mean why didnt he/she go for zigzags or even smiley faces in keeping with the Nu Rave look?)

But then it seems he/ she had a huge rush of untrammeled inspiration, as the back of the cap consists of insubstantial nylon, and basically looks like

a Do Rag, seen more often on Snoop Dog or Busta Rhymes than Surrey cricketers.

Excellent lack of logos - only three including the club crest (a charming if slightly out of place fleur de lis).

But the Kia is pretty ugly. Red is simply wrong against the neon green, I wish they’d been more daring and gone for a neon alternative. The placement too is poor.

Any predominant shirt emblem should sit higher up, not across the ribs, but just a comfortable space below the collar bone, that way nothing looks as though it’s going southwards, or drooping a bit.

FACTS Colour: Neon a triumph in bravura

10/10

Logos: fantastically few, but main logo not pretty

7/10

Finish: Hem line impressive, lazy to dispense with collar on shirt

8/10

Cap: see above, don’t want to think about it again

1/10

25/07/2011 14:42