What a final! And India won! A bowler called Sharma bowled a ball with Pakistan requiring 5 to win .... and he got the Pakistani batsmen out. How about that for erasing some past demons :-) India had actually won a major multination tournament outright. How long have we waited for that?

The hyper-celebrations reflected a nation thirsting for success. I found it amusing that some writers thought the celebrations were over the top and that somehow we should have just all gone home the next day. They are entitled to their opinion but am not sure why they care. Our team won the world cup so we will celebrate the way we want to. What is even more hilarious is Andrew Symonds saying the celebrations motivated him for the ODI series. Heck, wasn"t being knocked out by India enough motivation -- why did the celebrations jar him more than the loss. Seems like a clear case of sour grapes to me.

I was a cynic when the T20 WC started. I had only seen a few T20 games and they had mostly been one sided slam-bang contests. But the WC was different. The bowlers flourished in a format that was supposed to be their graveyard. Quite a few of them won Man of the Match awards. The format brought more parity between the teams and it was refreshing to know that no team was the clear favorite.There was action every ball and that kept me on the edge of my seat. I am now converted and am a staunch supporter of the format.

I just hope the next few months of cricket are as interesting and exciting as the T20 tournament was.

Whoever is responsible (read, the BCCI honchos) for the way the latest hunt for the next Indian coach was handled needs to be sacked immediately. It is not yet clear exactly why Graham Ford rejected the offer but the manner in which the BCCI and its seven-man committee have gone about selecting the coach has been just plain shameful. A brief summary of the timeline:



April 4th -- Chappell quits.


April 4th -- Whatmore announces his interest.


May 20th -- BCCI speaks to Whatmore.


June 3rd -- Ford expresses interest.


June 4th -- Whatmore out of favor because he is "too keen".


June 5th -- Emburey becomes a contender.


June 9th -- Ford and Emburey give their presentations. Ford is finally offered the role.


June 11th -- Ford rejects the offer.



Notice that there was no formal announcement or advertisement made by the BCCI that they were looking for a coach. There was the stop-gap arrangement with Shastri for the Bngladesh tour. But, ofcourse it is not in the BCCI's interest to arrange for the coach ASAP even with the ODI series with SA and England tour coming up from June 23rd!! Yes, the BCCI may just kindly allow the coach to pack his suitcases in time before the flight to Ireland and England. The BCCI is the filthy rich emperor that likes to give orders from its throne. People should come begging to the emperor and ask him whether they should formally submit an application and ask details of the process. Then, the emperor will make an offer that cannot be refused to one candidate: Dance according to the emperor's tunes for a fat sum of money...coaching and other responsibilities can take a back seat. All hail the emperor for bringing prosperity to the kingdom of Indian cricket!

Travis Basevi has added in another awesome feature to Cricinfo. You can now search for specific matches using this tool. I think they should call it Matchguru. Very cool tool for the cricket geek!

Search for Adelaide 2003 or Kolkata 2001 to find a classic game. :-)

India managed to scramble home despite an ordinary bowling and fielding performance. The top order batting crumbled again but Dhoni & Karthik got India home although there were a few close moments.

The nature of the win just verified what that India are a very ordinary ODI team at the moment. Harsha's latest article provides an insight on some of the issues behind the team's mediocrity.

Apparently Shastri thinks otherwise. I am not as confident but am hoping that some of the below-par performances were because of the long break before this game and the bowlers get some rhythm going as the series progresses.

At least Karthik and Dhoni (well Yuvraj really) ran the singles and twos and did not have to hit a lot of boundaries. Lets see if this trend continues ...

Indian cricket is facing another big scandal. The match fixing scandal turned away a lot of fans and the recent revelations about infighting and factions within the team are sure to turn away another generation.

I have been reading quite a lot (blogs, newspapers, etc.) and reading the comments sections on the electronic media brings up a couple of interesting points:

1. The general person/fan has chosen sides.

People have their favorite player(s). If their favorite player is criticized or accused, be prepared for a vehement rebuttal and a request for fairer and more balanced treatment of their favored star.

2. The same set of folks are more than willing to sling mud on the supposed "other side".

What this means is that there are very few who are willing to be critical of their own heroes and be balanced about players/coaches they don't agree with.

It seems like a clear case of misplaced loyalty. Indian cricket fans should have their loyalty to the Indian cricket team first and the individual players second. Seems obvious but somehow most folks seemed to have just missed this.

For a long time success of the big 3 (Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid) & perhaps Laxman (in test matches) was directly related to the success/failure of the team. Somewhere along the road fans started supporting the players instead of the team and the whole controversy around dropping Ganguly and Chappell's antics just polarized the fan base.

Today, most fans have tunnel vision in which their personal hero is faultless while the other players/coach are to blame.

I think its time for the fans to take a step back and look at the team and decide what is in the team's best interests. Then decide whether the players (big, small, or upcoming) fit into the team goals.

Once you approach the problem from the team perspective and personal loyalties to a player become secondary, we should see a more balanced and logical discussion on how and where we want the Indian team to go.

Roger Federer is on track to win another Grand Slam title and the sun still rises in the East. Nothing's changed. I guess the only interesting point is to see whether he can win it in three sets...that would make him the first person to win a Grand Slam title since Bjorn Borg did it in the 1980 French Open. I understand that every sport has its share of glorious uncertainties and ofcourse Gonzalez is going to play the final for a victory...but that's how good Fed-Ex is...there's an air of inevitability about it. And on Sunday, the sun will still rise in the east...

So, India have pulled away to an unbeatable 2-0 lead over the West Indies. Two games left and according to this report, Yuvraj Singh, Pathan and Kumble come into the squad and replace Joginer Sharma and RP Singh. Interestingly Sehwag has not been selected inspite of a fine performance in the only Ranji trophy game he played. The youngsters Raina and Uthappa look certain to play the Chennai ODI and with Dinesh Karthik on the verge of cementing his place in the ODI team, Raina needs to put up a stellar performance with the bat if he intends to challenge Karthik. With Pathan, I feel the team should play him as a pure bowler and go into the game with 6 batsmen, Dhoni and 4 bowlers. Pathan's batting contributions weren't really in doubt; the real issue was his bowling performance had dipped alarmingly and that is what the team needs to really test.

Before you read the remainder of this post, I'd like to ask the reader to think to himself on these questions:

How far does does modern hard-nosed professionalism in cricket infringe on the "Spirit of the game"? Does it have bounds? Should the players alone be responsible for setting an example? Or should umpires, match referees and other administrators overlooking the players' conduct during a game have the power to try and keep things in check?

The answers (or opinions) to these questions was something I expected former cricketers, commentators and writers to address after the recent run out involving Muralitharan. But the response to this incident has been low-key and the only article that I found trying to address this issue in the 'global' sense, rather than the incident in isolation, was one by Tony Cozier.

His sports editor, Michael Donaldson, had no such qualms. He blamed Muralitharan. "Muttiah Muralitharan was a fool," he charged. "He more than anyone knows that cricket is a ruthless game for professionals hell-bent on winning and you cannot give anybody an inch lest they run you out by a mile."

Former New Zealand wicketkeeper Ian Smith, now the foremost television commentator here, suggested that such issues could be diffused by more common sense umpiring. "At moments like this and in the spirit of the game, wouldn't it be better if umpires stepped in and asked captains: `Are you really keen to keep this appeal going? Is your appeal to have that man run out serious?' ", he wrote.

"That would put it back on the captains." For those defending McCullum's action, Geoff Longley posed a significant question. "It is interesting to speculate what the reaction would have been if the roles had been reversed," he wondered in the Press of Christchurch. It was a question that needed no response for the answer was obvious — and embarrassing.

After completing the historic win in Johannesburg a week ago, the selection for the 2nd Test has been focussed on the opening combination and Munaf Patel's fitness. Wasim Jaffer has not had a memorable tour so far and after his failure in the game against the KwaZulu-Natal Invitation XI, his place in the final XI has come under serious scrutiny. At the same time, Gambhir had an impressive outing and made a strong case for his inclusion ahead of Jaffer. However, as the last bits of information come to the media, Gambhir has been left out of the final 12. Munaf Patel's inclusion is still uncertain while Jaffer will certainly open the innings with Sehwag. And after reading the views of Dravid and Chappell, it seems to make sense that the team management has taken that step since Jaffer has failed in only one test after a very good tour of the West Indies. The only concern has been that Jaffer has not spent enough time in the middle and a couple of his dismissals have been a bit soft. Therefore, to make a fair judgement of whether he can strike form soon, the team management should (and probably would) have looked closely at his frame of mind in the net sessions. A failure in the 2 innings at Durban would probably see him out of the 3rd Test. However, if he and Sehwag can provide a soild start or two then that gives the middle order some breathing space to build upon. Often such small successes can lead to a chain reaction of successful events and then who knows what kind of history lurks around the corner?

After witnessing the hilarious incident involving Sreesanth and Nel, I did a quick search on Youtube for funny sledging videos. Turn on the volume and enjoy!

Boucher has a "quiet" word with Taibu

Sangakkara has a go at Shaun Pollock

Flintoff gives Bravo the treatment

A classic moment from the 3rd Ashes Test 2006

So, it's official now. Shane Keith Warne is going to retire in Sydney after the 5th Ashes Test. After about 15 more days, the fabulous bowler will no longer be seen bowling ripping leg-breaks, appealing in his unique style or celebrating a crucial wicket with his typical clenched fist "Yeaaahhhh!!!". Nor shall we see that ex-pression of shock when an umpire turns down an appeal or the cherubic smile needling and reminding the batsman of his lack of ability to play the game. Everyone who has followed the game over the last 15 years will have an image of Warne and inevitably that image will be linked to the countless times Warne has raised his game to turn a game in Australia's favor. But apart from being a magnificent bowler and a match-winner, he had a certain flamboyance that forced itself on the cricket field and charmed the audience. He has been quite a controversial figure too but that alone should not decide his place in cricketing history. At this moment, he should be celebrated for his achievements on the field and in that respect it will be mighty difficult, perhaps impossible, to find a genius, entertainer and top-class achiever all moulded into one.

In its 10th Test match on South African soil, India claimed its 1st Test match victory in SA by 123 runs! On a Wanderers track which had everything every seam bowler dreamed of, this Indian team turned the tables on SA's pace battery and batsmen more accomplished and suited for these conditions. India put up a fighting total in the 1st innings and then the bowling (especially Sreesanth) made optimum use of the conditions to give India a lead of a 165 runs. With that lead, India needed to put up at least a 150+ score to really press for a victory. India managed 236 and then dismissed SA for 278 as the track eased out on the 3rd and 4th days. Apart from VRV Singh's important cameo of 29 off 19 balls in the 1st innings and Sehwag's 33 off 29 balls in the 2nd innings, it was interesting to note that the Indian batsmen quickly shelved their flamboyant strokes and decided to be very, very selective in their shot making. The batsmen really did the hard yards in terms of applying themselves and gritting it out. Zaheer and Sreesanth bowled with great discipline and stuck to their plans. They were the stand-out bowlers by a long way and Kumble picked up 5 wickets in total while effortlessly slipping into the support role once Zaheer and Sreesanth had set up the match. VRV Singh did a reasonable job as support seamer even though he only took 1 wicket. And the bowlers success would not have been possible without good support in the field. The catching was excellent while the ground fielding did a fair job too.

In all, India outplayed SA in all 3 departments producing a thoroughly professional performance and deserved to win by the big margin of 100+ runs.

Imagine if you were ever given a chance to bowl to world class batsmen in a net session, how would you react? You have a cherry in your hand and padded-up 22 yards away is any world class batsman you like...Lara, Tendulkar, Inzi, Ponting, Pietersen, Jayasuriya or Kallis? or maybe you want to turn back time and have a go at someone from some previous generation like the Waughs, Viv Richards, Clive Lloyd, Gavaskar, Aravinda De Silva? How would you go about the business of trying to make your first (and probably last) impression on these top-notch batsmen?

Eduan Roos, a journalist, got a chance to bowl at an Indian net session and shares his experience.

An interesting article from Cricinfo Magazine. Long, but makes some pertinent observations:

Terrorism has ripped holes in the delicate fabric of Kashmir's beauty. It has dried up investment and employment opportunities that may otherwise have come the state's way. That India is taking its place as a global economic power is not lost on young Kashmiris, who are ready to take risks to better their lot.

Sher-i-Kashmir continues to languish: the wicket lies barren; the stands are the ones that were installed for the first time in 1983; the scoreboard is lost among the branches of the beautiful Chinar trees that circle the ground; there are no toilets or drainage facilities, no dressing room for the players, no showers. The B ground adjacent to the main one has two practice wickets, but both of cement.