Ugly might be an understatement to describe events on the final day in the SCG. A potentially cracking Test match was botched, an open series was all but shut and the beautiful scenes that the game produced were forgotten

Siddhartha Vaidyanathan at the SCG06-Jan-2008

Rahul Dravid’s stoic innings was abruptly ended when he was given out to a doubtful caught behind decision © Getty Images
Ugly might be an understatement to describe events on the final day in the SCG. A potentially cracking Test match was botched, an open series was all but shut and the beautiful scenes that the game produced were forgotten. This was a record-equalling Test containing contrasting centuries on all five days. But it ended bitterly.These are the sort of losses that can hurt. Tension enveloped the ground during the final stages as Australia packed close-in fielders around the bat. Anil Kumble, who produced one of his finest innings, battled gutsily and Australia’s part-time spinners fizzed it off the rough. Spectators prayed before every ball and cheered lustily after each. This was a cracking match played on a fine pitch. But it was tarnished.Rahul Dravid, out of sorts recently, appeared to be finding his groove. His 61-run partnership with Sourav Ganguly seemed to have eased the nerves, his positive attitude was just returning, the cover drives were being struck crunchily, a corner was being turned, and a game was being saved. And he was robbed.Ganguly flowed gracefully, counterattacking with gusto. So gorgeous were the three consecutive fours he struck off Andrew Symonds that the frames could be pasted on a picture postcard and sent back to Kolkata. He didn’t hold back against the faster men, trying to show that draws and style can go together. Until he was done in.These are the sort of abrupt endings that ruin a day’s cricket – competent batsmen suffering incompetent umpiring. When it happens in the second match of a series, with the scoreline reading 1-0, it is worse. When it happens against two of your best batsmen, it’s frustrating. And when the wickets change the complexion of the match, it is disturbing.Neither team seemed to agree on the legality of catches, despite an unwritten pact agreed upon before the series. Ricky Ponting couldn’t understand what all the fuss was about – he even scowled when someone questioned him claiming a catch after appearing to touch the ball to the ground. Anil Kumble didn’t need to say much more than one line – “Only one team is playing in the spirit of the game”, a statement bringing back memories of Bill Woodfull in the infamous Bodyline series.

Yuvraj Singh’s fourth successive failure was a reflection of the team’s flawed batting line-up © Getty Images
Amid this nobody should forget the hard facts. India failed to survive 72 overs in the second innings, a couple of batsmen played injudicious strokes and a few others felt the heat. Wasim Jaffer’s expansive drive just before lunch was reckless and Yuvraj Singh’s fourth successive failure was a reflection of the team’s flawed batting line-up. Has Jaffer been given a long enough rope? Does Yuvraj deserve a spot? These are hard questions that mustn’t be buried under the controversies. “It’s a bit of a concern,” said Kumble, “and we’ll address them in the practice game in Canberra. Those who haven’t got a chance will get a knock.”Australia’s tactics were simple: declare only after you ensure against defeat. They wanted India to go in with an intention to draw and choke them. No dangling carrots, no tempting targets. Bat them out and try to close the game. India would have known that, yet the runs were being leaked generously. Wasn’t this the best chance to dry up the runs and delay the declaration? Were they too lax in conceding 119 in 24 overs on a fifth-day pitch? Often they appeared to be waiting for the declaration, when, in fact, there was still a chance to win.Teams have their own ways to battle for a draw. Some attack as if it was the first day of the match, other sit on their haunches and prod. India needed to only look back to July last year to see they had got through more than 90 overs in the final innings at Lord’s. Mahendra Singh Dhoni was at the centre of that draw and should have known better than to shoulder arms to one that came in, on a pitch where the ball wasn’t rising much.India will also remember that they saved that game thanks to rain and a small matter of an umpiring decision. England had reason to complain that day but had they lost, a fuse might have well blown out. Umpiring decisions matter, context even more so. It was heartening to see Kumble maintain his composure at the end of the day to say “it’s a game after all”. It was a reminder of what a fine Test match it could have been.

Two hundreds would have been preferable, but there were none, and for all the brave effort in getting as close as 87 runs, 475 was always going to be out of reach for West Indies. By Tony Cozier

Tony Cozier17-Jun-2008
Dwayne Bravo made 69, but it was not enough for West Indies© Getty Images
If it was ever to be scaled, the mountain peak that was West Indies’ goal at Kensington Oval yesterday required at least one “big hundred,” as Chris Gayle succinctly put it. Two would have been preferable. There was none, and, for all the brave effort in getting as close as 87 runs with one main batsman hobbled by a seriously damaged ankle, 475 was always going to be out of reach.Ramnaresh Sarwan and Shivnarine Chanderpaul were the three-figure men in West Indies’ record 418 for 7 at the obliging Antigua Recreation Ground in the final Test the last time Australia were in the West Indies, four years ago. In contrast, the major contribution to West Indies’ effort at Kensington Oval was Xavier Marshall’s 85.Sarwan and Chanderpaul, along with Gayle, were the only survivors from the memorable match. Both figured once more as the keys to an unlikely chase. They brought runs and confidence into the match and the experience of having done it before against the same opposition. Chanderpaul had something even more vital, concentration and determination.They had also combined to win the Queen’s Park Test against Sri Lanka in April and to draw the Antigua Test in this series two weeks earlier. But it was a bit much to expect them to carry the load every time.Sarwan’s error in going back to Michael Clarke’s arm ball on the previous afternoon ended his involvement, but the presence of Chanderpaul on resumption and, as those responsible must have noted, the reduced prices, brought out the highest attendance of the match.Chanderpual was again in fixed mode, observing what should be the first maxim of all batsmen: “don’t get out.” He and Dwayne Bravo, rattled by Brett Lee’s fearsome bouncer barrage but ever quick to counter-attack, batted through the first hour and 40 minutes, carried their partnership to 122, the total past 300, and reduced the deficit to 172. With every run, optimism grew of a miracle in the making. In the space of three balls, it was shattered. First Bravo, and then Chanderpaul, were gone and so were the hopes.The manner of Bravo’s dismissal was an anti-climax. He had taken to the offerings of Beau Casson with relish, hoisting him for three sweet sixes and deliberately unsettling him. With the new ball due, Casson went from over to round the wicket and, in spite of the pasting, placed a silly point under Bravo’s nose. Almost instantly, an over-cautious defensive prod popped a catch into the fielder’s hands. It was the crucial break.Ricky Ponting took the new ball and Stuart Clark’s second delivery pinned Chanderpaul on the backfoot. With Clark’s height, the hardness of the ball and the bounce in the pitch, it looked to be too high for an lbw verdict. Hawk-Eye confirmed the naked eye’s first impression, but umpire Mark Benson’s decision was swift and decisive. It would hardly have changed the outcome for only the fragile tail and the injured Sewnarine Chattergoon, with a runner, remained to be Chanderpaul’s partners.Where the match was lost was in the first innings, when the batting could not capitalise on dismissing Australia for 251. It was then, as much as now, that a “big hundred” was needed. The truth is that, at present, Sarwan and Chanderpaul are the only ones capable.

Two hundreds would have been preferable, but there were none, and for all the brave effort in getting as close as 87 runs, 475 was always going to be out of reach for West Indies. By Tony Cozier

Tony Cozier17-Jun-2008

	Dwayne Bravo made 69, but it was not enough for West Indies © Getty Images

If it was ever to be scaled, the mountain peak that was West Indies’ goal at Kensington Oval yesterday required at least one “big hundred,” as Chris Gayle succinctly put it. Two would have been preferable. There was none, and, for all the brave effort in getting as close as 87 runs with one main batsman hobbled by a seriously damaged ankle, 475 was always going to be out of reach.Ramnaresh Sarwan and Shivnarine Chanderpaul were the three-figure men in West Indies’ record 418 for 7 at the obliging Antigua Recreation Ground in the final Test the last time Australia were in the West Indies, four years ago. In contrast, the major contribution to West Indies’ effort at Kensington Oval was Xavier Marshall’s 85.Sarwan and Chanderpaul, along with Gayle, were the only survivors from the memorable match. Both figured once more as the keys to an unlikely chase. They brought runs and confidence into the match and the experience of having done it before against the same opposition. Chanderpaul had something even more vital, concentration and determination.They had also combined to win the Queen’s Park Test against Sri Lanka in April and to draw the Antigua Test in this series two weeks earlier. But it was a bit much to expect them to carry the load every time.Sarwan’s error in going back to Michael Clarke’s arm ball on the previous afternoon ended his involvement, but the presence of Chanderpaul on resumption and, as those responsible must have noted, the reduced prices, brought out the highest attendance of the match.Chanderpual was again in fixed mode, observing what should be the first maxim of all batsmen: “don’t get out.” He and Dwayne Bravo, rattled by Brett Lee’s fearsome bouncer barrage but ever quick to counter-attack, batted through the first hour and 40 minutes, carried their partnership to 122, the total past 300, and reduced the deficit to 172. With every run, optimism grew of a miracle in the making. In the space of three balls, it was shattered. First Bravo, and then Chanderpaul, were gone and so were the hopes.The manner of Bravo’s dismissal was an anti-climax. He had taken to the offerings of Beau Casson with relish, hoisting him for three sweet sixes and deliberately unsettling him. With the new ball due, Casson went from over to round the wicket and, in spite of the pasting, placed a silly point under Bravo’s nose. Almost instantly, an over-cautious defensive prod popped a catch into the fielder’s hands. It was the crucial break.Ricky Ponting took the new ball and Stuart Clark’s second delivery pinned Chanderpaul on the backfoot. With Clark’s height, the hardness of the ball and the bounce in the pitch, it looked to be too high for an lbw verdict. Hawk-Eye confirmed the naked eye’s first impression, but umpire Mark Benson’s decision was swift and decisive. It would hardly have changed the outcome for only the fragile tail and the injured Sewnarine Chattergoon, with a runner, remained to be Chanderpaul’s partners.Where the match was lost was in the first innings, when the batting could not capitalise on dismissing Australia for 251. It was then, as much as now, that a “big hundred” was needed. The truth is that, at present, Sarwan and Chanderpaul are the only ones capable.

The Women’s World Cup witnessed several statistical highlights. Cricinfo looks at some of the interesting numbers from the tournament

Cricinfo staff24-Mar-2009England’s win against New Zealand was among the closest in the history of women’s World Cup finals•Getty Images

4

England women beat New Zealand women by four wickets, the second-closest margin of victory in terms of wickets left in a women’s World Cup final. Australia women beat England by three wickets in 1982. The closest final in terms of runs was played in 2000, when New Zealand beat Australia by four runs.

223

The fifth-highest margin of victory in terms of runs in a women’s World Cup. Pakistan were bowled out for 150, in response to a mammoth 373 for 6 – the third-highest total in the tournament’s history – posted by New Zealand in their Super Six match in Sydney. Pakistan were also at the receiving end of the biggest defeat in women’s ODIs, against New Zealand in 1997 in Christchurch, where they lost by 408 runs.

262

Suzie Bates and Haidee Tiffen were involved in the second-highest partnership in women’s ODIs, and the highest in a women’s World Cup. The stand – in the Super Six match against Pakistan – set up a massive win

8.6

Fast bowlers conceded almost nine runs more per wicket on average than spinners in this tournament. Of the 316 wickets to fall, fast bowlers bagged 148, while spinners finished with 151. However, their averages mark out who were more effective: spinners averaged 20.78, and fast bowlers 29.40

21.53

The average runs-per-wicket in the tournament. However, England exceeded that mark by a significant margin, averaging 35.02 each wicket. Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies and South Africa were largely responsible for the relatively low overall average, pricing each wicket at under 15.Haidee Tiffen and Suzie Bates added 262 for the second wicket against Pakistan to help New Zealand achieve the third-highest total in the tournament’s history•ICC

13

Of the 25 matches in this tournament, 13 were won by the side batting first. The side winning the toss opted to bat on 17 occasions, but won only eight of these games.

1.88

West Indies limped to 84 all out in 44.4 overs against India in Sydney, scoring at the lowest run-rate in this World Cup in a completed innings. The lowest run-rate in a completed innings in a women’s ODI is 0.73, when Netherlands ground out 54.2 overs to reach 40 all out against New Zealand in 1993.

11

In 30 completed innings in the tournament, sides managed to score 200 or more on 11 occasions. The side batting second managed to score 200 or more only twice, and successfully chased a 200-plus target once.

32.10

The average runs per wicket for the second wicket, which was the highest partnership among all wickets. Only the first two wickets managed over 30 runs on average, while the others struggled. The last six wickets didn’t go past 20. The figures for the second wicket received a massive boost as a result of the 262-run stand between Bates and Tiffen against Pakistan.

47

The number of sixes hit in the tournament – the highest for any women’s World Cup. The figure marks a stark contrast to the 15 sixes hit in the previous World Cup in South Africa, and eight in New Zealand in 2000-01 where more matches were played. In a match that witnessed several records being broken, the New Zealand batsmen struck nine sixes against Pakistan, the highest in an innings in women’s cricket.

Stats preview to the fifth Test between West Indies and England in Port of Spain

S Rajesh05-Mar-2009After the mountain of runs that were scored in the fourth Test in Barbados, fans of Test cricket – and especially those of the England team – will be desperately hoping that the Queen’s Park Oval in Port of Spain lives up to its recent reputation. If it does, they can gear up for a cracking Test match, with sub-300 scores, plenty of wickets for fast bowlers, and a victory for the visiting side. For those have been the norms in the last 11 years – and 10 Tests – at this venue.Trinidad used to be a venue which was good for batting, helped spinners, and produced plenty of draws, but that was in a different era. Overall, 20 out of 55 matches here have been drawn, but the last ten Tests have all ended decisively, with West Indies losing seven of those. In fact, there was a stretch of eight Tests when they lost seven, with the lone win coming against Zimbabwe. But the last time West Indies played here, they notched up a memorable win against Sri Lanka, with Ramnaresh Sarwan and Shivnarine Chanderpaul combining to help overhaul a potentially tricky target of 253.England’s recent memories of this venue will be pleasant as well – they’ve won their last two Tests here, including the one in 2004 by seven wickets, when Steve Harmison returned a match haul of 7 for 101.

Tests in Port of Spain

TeamPlayedWonLostDrawnWest Indies – overall55181720England – overall18675West Indies – since 199810370England – since 19983210As mentioned earlier, low scores have been the norm here, thanks to the pitches which have offered assistance to the quick bowlers. Over the last ten Tests, only in the first innings does the average runs per wicket touch 30; in the other three innings, it hovers in the mid-20s, which suggests a fascinating tussle between bat and ball. Only 15 centuries have been scored during this period, which is another indication of how difficult batting has generally been here. There has been one total in excess of 410 during this period, when Australia amassed a mammoth 576 for 4 declared in 2003, with Ricky Ponting, Darren Lehmann and Adam Gilchrist all getting hundreds. West Indies replied with 408, but ended up losing by 118 runs. (Click here for an innings-by-innings list of scores in the last ten Tests in Port of Spain.)The other fascinating aspect is how even matches have generally been after the first innings: the average first innings difference is 68.4, and on six occasions the lead has been less than 60, setting up the second half of the match perfectly. In the last ten Tests, the lead has been shared equally by the team batting first and the team batting second – five times in each instance.

Innings-wise runs per wicket in Port of Spain since 1998

1st innings2nd innings3rd innings4th innings30.4527.4524.6225.27Among the West Indian batsmen in the current squad, four have played here before, with mixed results. Sarwan is the only one to have consistently delivered the runs – his last three innings read 107*, 57 and 102, the last effort winning West Indies the Test and him the Man-of-the-Match award. Given the form he is in now, there’s a good chance he’ll add substantially to his aggregate of 514. In fact, he was remarkably consistent in his first seven innings as well, except that it would have been infuriating for his team-mates – he didn’t score less than 21, but didn’t exceed 41. The scores read: 34, 39, 35, 41, 26, 34, 21.For the rest of the batsmen, this venue has produced forgettable results: Chanderpaul averages only 34.50 despite an unbeaten 86 in that Test against Sri Lanka, while Chris Gayle has a highest of 62 in 12 innings.

West Indies batsmen in Port of Spain

BatsmanTestsRunsAverage100s/ 50sRamnaresh Sarwan651446.722/ 1Shivnarine Chanderpaul741434.500/ 2Devon Smith311322.600/ 0Chris Gayle627122.580/ 2Fast bowlers have been far more effective at the Queen’s Park Oval over the last decade – in ten Tests they’ve taken 13 five-fors, and average an impressive 25.37. Curtly Ambrose leads the way in terms of wickets taken during this period – his 28 in four Tests have come at a ridiculous average of 9.71. England have had several heroes too: Angus Fraser’s 20 wickets in two matches have come at a cost of 9.50 each, while Steve Harmison and Simon Jones enjoyed themselves on their last visit in 2004. (Click here for a full list of fast bowlers here since 1998.)Spinners, on the other hand, have had a barren spell, with just 50 wickets at an average of 37.72. The most successful spinner during this period has been Gayle, with ten wickets at an average of 14.10.

Pace and spin in Port of Spain since 1998

TypeWicketsAverageStrike rate5WI/ 10WMPace29125.3756.113/ 3Spin5037.7293.01/ 0With fast bowlers ruling the roost, it isn’t surprising that partnerships for the early wickets haven’t been prolific. The average first-wicket stand has been 30.62, with only three century partnerships in 40 attempts, though one of them was by Gayle and Smith, the current West Indian opening pair, against England in 2004. The average for the second wicket is even lower. The middle order has done much better: the average stands for the third and fourth wickets are significantly higher than for the first two.

Wicket-wise average partnerships in Port of Spain since 1998

For wicketInningsRunsAverage stand100/ 50 p’shipsFirst40122530.623/ 6Second41112728.171/ 9Third40204752.486/ 8Fourth38149540.405/ 7Fifth3797727.911/ 5Sixth3596527.572/ 3Seventh3580523.001/ 5

Celebrating wickets, dropping catches, slipping in unnoticed and getting a hit on the boot, all part of the action from the first day

Sidharth Monga04-Jul-2009Start as you mean to go on
What’s common to Ravi Bopara and Malinda Warnapura? They are Mohammad Aamer’s first wickets in two forms of international cricket, both in his first overs. The sun had just started beating the clouds, the crowds had not even settled down, when Aamer went into his celebration, part-Shoaib-part-Bravo, not as fiery as Shoaib not as smooth as Bravo, still arms spread like wings, and running towards slips. Going by early indication, Warnapura could be the first of many to come.Bad old Akmal
His glovework in the World Twenty20 had surprised everybody, but Kamran Akmal today raised suspicion it might just have been one blip in an otherwise glorious career behind the stumps. Today a sitter dropped, and an odd unclean collection even without there being an edge, added another twist to the Akmal story just when his fans thought “c Akmal b anybody” might stop being one of the more unfortunate forms of dismissal. Mahela Jayawardene hadn’t opened his account when dropped, and went on to score 30.Size doesn’t matter
Not with the advertising stripping on the ground, between the stumps and the sightscreen. If you are used to seeing those giant paintings, or rugs nowadays, come to Galle. The Mobitel logo is not even as broad as the pitch, perhaps just a shade over two sets of stumps. Surprise, surprise, you can still read the sponsors’ name.Son of the soil
During the first drinks break, from the terrace, a man could be seen walking towards the stadium. He wore a striped t-shirt, untorn jeans, slippers, and no shades, hats or earphones. The walking public didn’t notice, the security guards didn’t even acknowledge that one of the more exciting fast bowlers in international cricket was walking past them. Thus entered Lasith Malinga.Malinga’s next spotting, though, was when he was being mobbed by kids circling him, asking for autographs. Not an official in sight. Malinga signed every paper, not looking in any hurry, not showing for a moment that he didn’t want to be there.Fast bowlers get frustrated…
… and show it too. Tharanga Paranavitana irritated Pakistan fast bowlers today. He kept getting lives, and he kept creaming boundaries. Not until Umar Gul let one go at him after having fielded it in the follow-through. Hit on the boot, the batsman let go off his bat immediately and looked in pain. But going by the true Pakistan-Sri Lanka cordial spirit, Gul was quick in going up to him, apologising to him, and patting him on the shoulder, and not leaving until Paranavitana had indicated it was all right.The golden arm – and mind
Coming into this match, Younis Khan had taken two wickets in Test cricket. So it was a surprise when he brought himself on, with the pitch still doing something, in the 19th over. Even more surprising was that he gave himself a second spell. And with the second ball of his second spell, he got Thilan Samaraweera, with a delivery that landed on the seam and moved away. Hardly a surprise then that he came back for a fourth spell, when Nuwan Kulasekara and Rangana Herath had frustrated Pakistan to add 26 run for the ninth. And just as routine was another wicket, again in the first over of his new spell.