On the 30th of December 2002 I packed my worldly posessions into my newly purchased '98 Citi Golf and drove the Garden Route to Cape Town, leaving my parent's house behind me to start my first job in an unfamiliar city. The car wasn't very full. January 2003 was spent sleeping on the floor of a rented bachelor flat. My first paycheck arrived on the 25th and because the World Cup was around the corner I bought a television and stood it against the wall on top of the box it came in. In February I watched the Proteas knocked out of the tournament, and slept on the floor for another month.
Graeme Smith and I are just about the same age. I remember being struck by this when he was first drafted into the side in 2002. The other cricketers in the national side at the time were clearly older guys than myself. But Smith wasn't. Suddenly growing up didn't seem that far away. Except for my lack of any actual skill at playing the game - a pesky detail that many sports fans must face - I was able to look at him and said to myself "that could be me".
Later in 2003 I remember evenings spent at my flat window, beer can in my hand, looking out over the shadows lengthening over Rondebosch and listening on the radio (or following on cricinfo, I forget) as Smith, now captain, piled up the runs against Nasser "what's-his-name" Hussain's England. The poms burgled a drawn series there, but Smith claimed the first of his three English captain scalps as Hussain resigned.
South African cricketers will always be divided into two groups for me: pre-Smith and post-Smith. Those before him belong to my father's sporting generation. I remember seeing them on TV from the vantage point of his couch or with him in the stands at St Georges Park, watching the isolation era Currie Cup and then later as Kepler and Hansie led the return to international cricket; the memories of scholar and a student. My memories of Proteas cricketers from Smith onwards are from a different city, with different company and part of a different life.
My second last year renting that bachelor flat in Rondebosch was 2006. On the same television, still sitting on it's box, I remember watching the 438 game. Most of the Australian innings was spent not watching the set, but the same can't be said for the three hours after that. Gibbs rightly gets remembered for his batting that day, but Smith's rapid-fire batting first up is what set the pace and made us all believe it was possible. It seldom gets the credit it deserves (and neither does van der Wath's manic 30 in the dying overs of the chase).
I suspect that history will largely remember Graeme Smith for the last five years of his captaincy. The Proteas team that he led from 2008 to 2013 dominated home and away, failing only to bring home any ICC silverware. His record as a batsman will always fall just slightly short of the greats, especially after a year of poor form at the tail end. Despite that he still rates as the greatest opening batsman South Africa has produced. If his feats as a captain outshine those as a batsman it is only because the former are so memorable.
I will remember Smith as the sportsman who divided my childhood from my adulthood. Eleven years after I watched him take Jonty's place in the 2003 World Cup squad, we both have young families and different priorities. The world has moved on from the days of our youth. Good luck and godspeed where ever life takes you from here Graeme. Thanks for all the memories.
Sunday, March 9, 2014
Sunday, March 2, 2014
On Statistics And This Blog
As I type the rain is falling in Cape Town and there's only one team that can win the deciding Test from here. Clarke and his top order have picked the right game to get their act together. I don't expect many more interruptions of play, so a result is entirely possible. We'll need to see what the next nine sessions bring, but a post on whatever those events are will have to wait a little longer.
While we all wait for the start of play at Newlands (10am tomorrow folks), it's time to deploy one of my designated backup pieces: the place of statistics in this project of mine.
Along with a love of cricket I'm equally unashamed to admit a love for statistics. It was my second major at university. While that isn't much of a claim to fame, it is enough to know my correlation from my causation.
Statistics and cricket are usually thick as thieves. The nature of the game leaves much (but not enough) that can be quantified and lots of time (in hindsight) to analyse the data. It's almost an unwritten convention that no cricketing opinion should offered but that it is backed up by some or other statistical snippet.
Despite all this, you will not find many numbers quoted or stats expounded here. This might seem a strange choice and so here, for the record, are my reasons:
Time. Did I mention that I don't have much free time? Compiling accurate and enlightening stats to back up my points takes time - time that I don't have. Where I feel it matters I will usually fact check my statements. Please to go over to Statsguru and check up on me.
Redundancy. The truth is that there's nothing much that I can add to the field. Well, there may be - I have some interesting ideas for cricket stats that I'd like to see - but not without a significant investment of my time. The pages of cricket writing both online and offline already include greater volumes of commentary on and creation of cricket statistics than, frankly, is sensible or decent. I especially direct those looking for a fix of cricket statistics to the excellent writings of Kartikeya Date and Anantha Narayanan.
Lies. And damn lies, and statistics. I may not be the sharpest tool in the statistical shed, but I know enough to understand how the numbers can be shaped to support the most subjective arguments. I would rather not be part of that.
Subjectivity. Because at the end of the day these are opinion pieces. I don't want it to feel like this is a lecture hall where assertions are carefully laid out on a chalk board, explained and proven. No sir, coming here should feel like getting trapped with me against the bar of a busy pub and having to listen while I bend your ear over a couple of pints about the game that we both love.
While we all wait for the start of play at Newlands (10am tomorrow folks), it's time to deploy one of my designated backup pieces: the place of statistics in this project of mine.
Along with a love of cricket I'm equally unashamed to admit a love for statistics. It was my second major at university. While that isn't much of a claim to fame, it is enough to know my correlation from my causation.
Statistics and cricket are usually thick as thieves. The nature of the game leaves much (but not enough) that can be quantified and lots of time (in hindsight) to analyse the data. It's almost an unwritten convention that no cricketing opinion should offered but that it is backed up by some or other statistical snippet.
Despite all this, you will not find many numbers quoted or stats expounded here. This might seem a strange choice and so here, for the record, are my reasons:
Time. Did I mention that I don't have much free time? Compiling accurate and enlightening stats to back up my points takes time - time that I don't have. Where I feel it matters I will usually fact check my statements. Please to go over to Statsguru and check up on me.
Redundancy. The truth is that there's nothing much that I can add to the field. Well, there may be - I have some interesting ideas for cricket stats that I'd like to see - but not without a significant investment of my time. The pages of cricket writing both online and offline already include greater volumes of commentary on and creation of cricket statistics than, frankly, is sensible or decent. I especially direct those looking for a fix of cricket statistics to the excellent writings of Kartikeya Date and Anantha Narayanan.
Lies. And damn lies, and statistics. I may not be the sharpest tool in the statistical shed, but I know enough to understand how the numbers can be shaped to support the most subjective arguments. I would rather not be part of that.
Subjectivity. Because at the end of the day these are opinion pieces. I don't want it to feel like this is a lecture hall where assertions are carefully laid out on a chalk board, explained and proven. No sir, coming here should feel like getting trapped with me against the bar of a busy pub and having to listen while I bend your ear over a couple of pints about the game that we both love.
Sunday, February 23, 2014
One All
Despite a slow track, Smith's continued lack of form, being one bowler down (dammit Parnell!), being without a specialist spinner and a day five rainstorm literally looming on the horizon the Protea's rose to the occasion and handed out a lesson on what it takes to be number 1. Not for nothing have they held that rating fo the past 18 months.
There's lots that could be said, but to paraphrase cricinfo commentor SurlyCynic I think that the comments posted all over by Aussie fans pretty much sum it up:
Before the Test: "It doesn't matter what the pitch is like, Johnson will destroy you!"
After Day 1: "Pitch doctoring! This is the perfect anti-Mitch pitch! - slow and low, totally unlike the usual PE pitch which is... erm, slow and low."
After Day 2: "SA got lucky wickets. Aus will recover to make 400. AB is the world's most boring batsman to watch"
After Day 3: "Rain is forecast for day 5!"
After Day 4: "We were screwed by the umpiring decisions!"
Further commentary from me will wait until after the deciding Test at Newlands. It doesn't look like I'll be getting there in person, but you never know....
There's lots that could be said, but to paraphrase cricinfo commentor SurlyCynic I think that the comments posted all over by Aussie fans pretty much sum it up:
Before the Test: "It doesn't matter what the pitch is like, Johnson will destroy you!"
After Day 1: "Pitch doctoring! This is the perfect anti-Mitch pitch! - slow and low, totally unlike the usual PE pitch which is... erm, slow and low."
After Day 2: "SA got lucky wickets. Aus will recover to make 400. AB is the world's most boring batsman to watch"
After Day 3: "Rain is forecast for day 5!"
After Day 4: "We were screwed by the umpiring decisions!"
Further commentary from me will wait until after the deciding Test at Newlands. It doesn't look like I'll be getting there in person, but you never know....
Sunday, February 16, 2014
Capitulation
The last five years have been a golden age for South African cricket - clearly the best since readmission and certainly among the best of our cricketing history. In one week, on and off the field, we've seen the first glimmers of the future. It ain't pretty.
In the board room, CSA's troupe of administrators surrendered to the will of cricket's Big Three. They were bought for depressingly little. I wish I'd been wrong, but it was an easy call to make. With CSA on board, the BCCI and it's two brides got their way and everyone else began their new lives as official lower caste citizens in the cricketing world. The last hold outs, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, abstained. I wish them luck with their continued resistance and would like to apologise on behalf of all South Africa to their fans for our bungling bureaucrat's abject surrender. Time will tell whose path was the right one to choose.
With that last sad act the saga of the ICC restructuring came to an end and there was a gap for actual cricket to take center stage. The Proteas duly followed their board's lead by throwing in the towel against a red hot Australian team. Gaps and weaknesses that have been slowly appearing in Graeme's Smith's team were rapidly wrenched open and it wasn't long before the wheels came off completely. There are two Tests to go but there needs to be a whole lot of improvement if we're going to save the series from here. We got out of jail against Pakistan and India, but I don't know if we can hope for a third such result in a row.
In the board room, CSA say that they have been promised more fixtures for the national team. We will know more once the Big Three finalise their bilateral agreements. No prizes will be awarded for predicting who such agreements will be arranged to suit. Those of us in the lower caste of cricket playing nations will just have to wait and see how the scraps of the rich are divvied out.
On the field, the Proteas will have better days than last week. We might even pull off another miraculous series rescue against these rejuvenated Australians, and even if we don't we will still be ranked #1. The golden era will continue for a while; AB, Dale and the others will fight the dying of light for some time yet. But our first post-Kallis Test has shown us that nothing lasts forever, especially not sporting success.
The wheel always turns, but this time there is a difference: the hand spinning it is the BCCI, ECB and CA. Power in the board room might not directly project across the boundary, but control over the flow of money and the scheduling of fixtures sure doesn't hurt your teams chances. The Proteas of the 2010's could be the last team outside this Big Three to dominate Test cricket.
In the board room, CSA's troupe of administrators surrendered to the will of cricket's Big Three. They were bought for depressingly little. I wish I'd been wrong, but it was an easy call to make. With CSA on board, the BCCI and it's two brides got their way and everyone else began their new lives as official lower caste citizens in the cricketing world. The last hold outs, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, abstained. I wish them luck with their continued resistance and would like to apologise on behalf of all South Africa to their fans for our bungling bureaucrat's abject surrender. Time will tell whose path was the right one to choose.
With that last sad act the saga of the ICC restructuring came to an end and there was a gap for actual cricket to take center stage. The Proteas duly followed their board's lead by throwing in the towel against a red hot Australian team. Gaps and weaknesses that have been slowly appearing in Graeme's Smith's team were rapidly wrenched open and it wasn't long before the wheels came off completely. There are two Tests to go but there needs to be a whole lot of improvement if we're going to save the series from here. We got out of jail against Pakistan and India, but I don't know if we can hope for a third such result in a row.
In the board room, CSA say that they have been promised more fixtures for the national team. We will know more once the Big Three finalise their bilateral agreements. No prizes will be awarded for predicting who such agreements will be arranged to suit. Those of us in the lower caste of cricket playing nations will just have to wait and see how the scraps of the rich are divvied out.
On the field, the Proteas will have better days than last week. We might even pull off another miraculous series rescue against these rejuvenated Australians, and even if we don't we will still be ranked #1. The golden era will continue for a while; AB, Dale and the others will fight the dying of light for some time yet. But our first post-Kallis Test has shown us that nothing lasts forever, especially not sporting success.
The wheel always turns, but this time there is a difference: the hand spinning it is the BCCI, ECB and CA. Power in the board room might not directly project across the boundary, but control over the flow of money and the scheduling of fixtures sure doesn't hurt your teams chances. The Proteas of the 2010's could be the last team outside this Big Three to dominate Test cricket.
Sunday, February 9, 2014
Here Come The Aussies
When I started writing here I thought it was going to be about cricket. Instead for a month it's been mostly ranting about ICC politics. This hasn't been helped by my relative lack of interest in the Ram Slam T20, the Big Bash or Sri Lanka v Bangladesh.
Well it's time to change that. Hot from thrashing the old enemy, Australia have landed in the Republic and they're here for the serious business of three Tests (plus some T20's that nobody will remember).
Let's see what the series will be all about...
~
Fast Bowlers
Because while Nathan Lyon will take some wickets and Robbie P will score some runs, in any Oz-SA series it's gotta be all about the quick men
The pre-series hype is naturally focused on Mitchell Johnson. He's fast, he's mean, he demolished the English and he has a good record against South Africa. He's broken Smith's hand twice and he's blooded Kallis. Pictures from OR Tambo suggest he may have even regrown his Ashes 'tache, but that may just have been shadows from the long haul flight.
Now Mitch is pretty fierce, but my money is on Ryan Harris as the danger man. He's class act whose career has been held back only by injury. Like Australia's version of Shane Bond, when Harris plays Australia look like a different team. Axeman Siddle will toil effectively and Mitch may or may not pitch, but a key battle of the series is between Harris' deadly swing and seam and the Protea's Kallis-less top order.
As always at home, if Steyn, Philander and Morkel stay fit enough to play all the games the Proteas will probably win. No doubt the Aussie "best attack in the world" bluster has got them suitably fired up. Who backs them up will be interesting too, which leads us to...
Jacques Kallis
Or rather, the lack thereof.
This is the series where South Africans will first confront the post-Kallis future. Word seems to be that the strategy will be to move Faf to number four, to keep AB keeping at five (making him effectively the replacement all rounder for JK) and play one of McLaren or Parnell as a bowling all rounder at seven.
However you slice it the Proteas will be playing with one less batsman than for the last decade. At the same time this depleted lineup are up against the best bowling lineup they've faced for a while (Pakistan fans may disagree). The likes of Alviro Petersen, Faf du Plessis and arguably JP Duminy are never going to be more than average Test batters, so the seniors in Smith, Amla and de Villiers are going to need to collectively make up the extra man.
There's no way to replace a player like Kallis. How South Africa deal with his absence will be crucial to the teams fortunes for the next few years, starting now.
The Aussie Batsmen
Because they've been pretty rubbish for a while now.
Clarke is world class and will get some runs, but the rest were poor at home against a wonky English attack. That Brad Haddin was the stand out in the lineup shows up how bad the rest were. BJ is a good keeper-batsman but he can't be saving the day every time around.
Of the rest, I've always rated Warner and Spud Smith. The rest are a mix of overrated senior pros and unproven rookies. Not too many remain from the lineup that was smoked for 47 at Newlands last time they were here, but this lot are going to need to be on top their game to avoid a similar fate.
Trash talk aside, the Proteas attack have been the scourge of all comers for years now. Whether or not the Aussie batsmen can scrape together enough runs for their bowlers to defend may well decide the series.
Tail Enders
Because it's going to be carnage at the top of the order.
This might not be everyone's pick, but my feeling is that tail end runs are often a vital difference between two sides with strong bowling attacks.
Both tails look reasonably strong. Johnson, Harris, Siddle and Lyon stack up pretty well against Peterson, Philander, Steyn and Morkel. With Watson at three Australia will probably have an extra batsman at seven, where the Proteas look like they'll make do with McLaren or Parnell. Still this one is anyone's race.
After the dust has settled and the shine has worn off the ball the runs those names can put on the board will make a big difference to the series result.
~
And finally...
Sledging
Premature bravado from the Aussie players in advance of the series has only been matched by Aussie fans on the forums rudely predicting a certain whitewash in favour of their team. As usual on cricinfo I'm genuinely puzzled by how such one eyed semi-literate rants get posted and my insightful and balanced comments are always moderated away.
Anyway. Posturing and online flame wars aside, it'll be a close series. The Proteas are starting favourites and I'm calling a 2-1 score line in their favour. Now to see if I can make a plan to get down to Newlands for at least some of the deciding Test...
Well it's time to change that. Hot from thrashing the old enemy, Australia have landed in the Republic and they're here for the serious business of three Tests (plus some T20's that nobody will remember).
Let's see what the series will be all about...
~
Fast Bowlers
 |
| ht: The News |
Because while Nathan Lyon will take some wickets and Robbie P will score some runs, in any Oz-SA series it's gotta be all about the quick men
The pre-series hype is naturally focused on Mitchell Johnson. He's fast, he's mean, he demolished the English and he has a good record against South Africa. He's broken Smith's hand twice and he's blooded Kallis. Pictures from OR Tambo suggest he may have even regrown his Ashes 'tache, but that may just have been shadows from the long haul flight.
Now Mitch is pretty fierce, but my money is on Ryan Harris as the danger man. He's class act whose career has been held back only by injury. Like Australia's version of Shane Bond, when Harris plays Australia look like a different team. Axeman Siddle will toil effectively and Mitch may or may not pitch, but a key battle of the series is between Harris' deadly swing and seam and the Protea's Kallis-less top order.
As always at home, if Steyn, Philander and Morkel stay fit enough to play all the games the Proteas will probably win. No doubt the Aussie "best attack in the world" bluster has got them suitably fired up. Who backs them up will be interesting too, which leads us to...
Jacques Kallis
 |
| ht: India Times |
This is the series where South Africans will first confront the post-Kallis future. Word seems to be that the strategy will be to move Faf to number four, to keep AB keeping at five (making him effectively the replacement all rounder for JK) and play one of McLaren or Parnell as a bowling all rounder at seven.
However you slice it the Proteas will be playing with one less batsman than for the last decade. At the same time this depleted lineup are up against the best bowling lineup they've faced for a while (Pakistan fans may disagree). The likes of Alviro Petersen, Faf du Plessis and arguably JP Duminy are never going to be more than average Test batters, so the seniors in Smith, Amla and de Villiers are going to need to collectively make up the extra man.
There's no way to replace a player like Kallis. How South Africa deal with his absence will be crucial to the teams fortunes for the next few years, starting now.
The Aussie Batsmen
 |
| ht: Zimbio |
Clarke is world class and will get some runs, but the rest were poor at home against a wonky English attack. That Brad Haddin was the stand out in the lineup shows up how bad the rest were. BJ is a good keeper-batsman but he can't be saving the day every time around.
Of the rest, I've always rated Warner and Spud Smith. The rest are a mix of overrated senior pros and unproven rookies. Not too many remain from the lineup that was smoked for 47 at Newlands last time they were here, but this lot are going to need to be on top their game to avoid a similar fate.
Trash talk aside, the Proteas attack have been the scourge of all comers for years now. Whether or not the Aussie batsmen can scrape together enough runs for their bowlers to defend may well decide the series.
Tail Enders
 |
| ht: Cricket Dawn |
This might not be everyone's pick, but my feeling is that tail end runs are often a vital difference between two sides with strong bowling attacks.
Both tails look reasonably strong. Johnson, Harris, Siddle and Lyon stack up pretty well against Peterson, Philander, Steyn and Morkel. With Watson at three Australia will probably have an extra batsman at seven, where the Proteas look like they'll make do with McLaren or Parnell. Still this one is anyone's race.
After the dust has settled and the shine has worn off the ball the runs those names can put on the board will make a big difference to the series result.
~
And finally...
Sledging
Premature bravado from the Aussie players in advance of the series has only been matched by Aussie fans on the forums rudely predicting a certain whitewash in favour of their team. As usual on cricinfo I'm genuinely puzzled by how such one eyed semi-literate rants get posted and my insightful and balanced comments are always moderated away.
Anyway. Posturing and online flame wars aside, it'll be a close series. The Proteas are starting favourites and I'm calling a 2-1 score line in their favour. Now to see if I can make a plan to get down to Newlands for at least some of the deciding Test...
Sunday, February 2, 2014
Everyone Has A Price
The ICC revamp: everyone knows that it's all about the Benjamins. Much more money for the BCCI specifically. The BCCI have stated that they're totally ok with getting more money. Well thank goodness then, happy days.
The original idea seems to have been to get the three biggest kids in the playground to work out some rules for everyone. But that worked out about as well as throwing a dead cow to three sharks and asking them to arrange servings for all the other fish in the sea. Before long it became all about how the biggest shark could get the biggest chunk of meat.
To do that the BCCI needed CA and the ECB to cooperate. Their prices were easy to settle on - deep down both England and Australia feel entitled to more money and the power to arrange their own itinerary (i.e. avoid pesky tours against anyone they don't want to play). England got the extra promise of (maybe) hosting the ICC office instead of Dubai. And so then there were three.
To achieve this goal - loads more cash for the BCCI, and some more it's co-conspirators - a plan was created. No other sane Full Member board would vote for such a proposal, but the Big Three knew that each in turn would have it's price. The draft that they came up with contained carefully planned clauses aimed in specific directions. Along with some hard negotiating, each Full Member would fall.
For good measure the BCCI went all in and put their participation in ICC events on the table, conditional to the draft being approved. Nobody has yet dared to call their bluff.
Zimbabwe needed little more than a vague promise some money and the even vaguer carrot of bilateral tour agreements. They were never really in the game.
The price for West Indies and New Zealand were a series against India each (as an added bonus for the BCCI those matches came at South Africa's expense) and the promise of bilateral tour agreements. These boards folded on the blind, without even waiting to see how serious the bilateral promises were.
Bangladesh got the stick. The threat of a two-tier Test system which would inevitably set them up as the first Full Member relegated out of Tests was a gun to their heads. In due course this clause was dropped and the BCB came on board without much more fight.
That's where we stand today. South Africa, Sri Lanka and Pakistan are holding out for "more time" to "consult their boards". This can probably be read as "more time to negotiate for more concessions".
Cricket South Africa's price may well turn out to be eligibility for payouts from the new Test Cricket slush fund and a seat on the all-powerful ExCo. The slush fund is a monetary pittance compared to what's moving around in the Big Three's orbit, but the ExCo seat is a big one. Our bureaucrats have small minds and large egos, so I expect little argument.
I'm not certain of Sri Lanka's position. Like CSA, I think they will be bought by a little bit of money and a seemingly significant slice of political power. Maybe the promise of more games against opposition other than India. Perhaps the power to decide not to play Test cricket if they don't feel like it.
That leaves Pakistan. The PCB has little love for the BCCI and seem to be playing the hardest to get. But if the others fall into line the BCCI doesn't need them, and that's what I think will happen. An organised and united Pakistan would be the nearest rival to India in terms of population and potential cricket revenue so the BCCI will have no problem with shafting them however possible.
This hand of cards has just about wrapped up. No doubt the phone lines are alive to the sound of concessions, and bilateral tour agreements are being bought and sold like packets of crack on a street corner in downtown Baltimore. Once the dust settles the little people will all feel like they've protected their own interests, and the BCCI will get the fat paycheck that it feels that it deserves.
The original idea seems to have been to get the three biggest kids in the playground to work out some rules for everyone. But that worked out about as well as throwing a dead cow to three sharks and asking them to arrange servings for all the other fish in the sea. Before long it became all about how the biggest shark could get the biggest chunk of meat.
To do that the BCCI needed CA and the ECB to cooperate. Their prices were easy to settle on - deep down both England and Australia feel entitled to more money and the power to arrange their own itinerary (i.e. avoid pesky tours against anyone they don't want to play). England got the extra promise of (maybe) hosting the ICC office instead of Dubai. And so then there were three.
To achieve this goal - loads more cash for the BCCI, and some more it's co-conspirators - a plan was created. No other sane Full Member board would vote for such a proposal, but the Big Three knew that each in turn would have it's price. The draft that they came up with contained carefully planned clauses aimed in specific directions. Along with some hard negotiating, each Full Member would fall.
For good measure the BCCI went all in and put their participation in ICC events on the table, conditional to the draft being approved. Nobody has yet dared to call their bluff.
Zimbabwe needed little more than a vague promise some money and the even vaguer carrot of bilateral tour agreements. They were never really in the game.
The price for West Indies and New Zealand were a series against India each (as an added bonus for the BCCI those matches came at South Africa's expense) and the promise of bilateral tour agreements. These boards folded on the blind, without even waiting to see how serious the bilateral promises were.
Bangladesh got the stick. The threat of a two-tier Test system which would inevitably set them up as the first Full Member relegated out of Tests was a gun to their heads. In due course this clause was dropped and the BCB came on board without much more fight.
That's where we stand today. South Africa, Sri Lanka and Pakistan are holding out for "more time" to "consult their boards". This can probably be read as "more time to negotiate for more concessions".
Cricket South Africa's price may well turn out to be eligibility for payouts from the new Test Cricket slush fund and a seat on the all-powerful ExCo. The slush fund is a monetary pittance compared to what's moving around in the Big Three's orbit, but the ExCo seat is a big one. Our bureaucrats have small minds and large egos, so I expect little argument.
I'm not certain of Sri Lanka's position. Like CSA, I think they will be bought by a little bit of money and a seemingly significant slice of political power. Maybe the promise of more games against opposition other than India. Perhaps the power to decide not to play Test cricket if they don't feel like it.
That leaves Pakistan. The PCB has little love for the BCCI and seem to be playing the hardest to get. But if the others fall into line the BCCI doesn't need them, and that's what I think will happen. An organised and united Pakistan would be the nearest rival to India in terms of population and potential cricket revenue so the BCCI will have no problem with shafting them however possible.
This hand of cards has just about wrapped up. No doubt the phone lines are alive to the sound of concessions, and bilateral tour agreements are being bought and sold like packets of crack on a street corner in downtown Baltimore. Once the dust settles the little people will all feel like they've protected their own interests, and the BCCI will get the fat paycheck that it feels that it deserves.
Monday, January 27, 2014
The Next Sobers
A lotta guys have, at one time or another, been branded the greatest thing since Garry Sobers. 'The next Sobers' or some variation on that is staple fare for over-excited commentators and press.
Let's take a look at how some of these fellows have fared...
 |
| Image from Sporting Life |
Stuart Broad
"He's a wonderful player. There's a little bit of Sobers in him," gushed none other than that old card Geoff Boycott in July 2008, provoked to such an unusual level of excitement by Broad's tail-end batting and bowling in the second Test against South Africa.
Five years and 60-odd Tests later, 2010 runs at 24.21 and 238 wickets at 30.31 suggests that Stuey is rather more like the next Heath Streak.
Yuvraj Singh
After Yuvraj nailed a young Stuart Broad for six sixes in an over in the T20 World Cup, Pak batting legend Hanif Mohammed was moved to haul out the Sobers comparison. "For a moment, I thought that Sobers was batting,"said he.
Now I've always rated Yuvraj highly but with 1900 Test runs at 33.92 and 9 wickets at 60.77, Sobers he ain't. Even if we charitably look at his 8329 ODI runs (at 36.27) and 111 wickets (at 38.18) the best one can do is hail our boy Yuvvie as the next Aravinda de Silva.
Shaun Pollock
Now Polly was a fine bowling all rounder, no doubt about that. I hope to have more to say on the subject in due course. But in 2001 when the late Bob Woolmer wrote for cricinfo that "Shaun could easily become the next Garry Sobers" he was letting his enthusiasm get the better of him.
When Polly looks back on his stellar Test record of 3781 runs at 32.31 and 421 wickets at 23.11 even he will be force to agree that Woolmer should have hailed him as, at best, the next Richard Hadlee. No mean act to follow, but no Sobers.
Colin Miller
Now there's no doubt that Miller was a handy bits n pieces all rounder, but in 1998 when Agnew accused the Aussie press of "building Miller up to the realms of being the next Garry Sobers", there was surely an element of cognitive dissonance somewhere.
With 174 Test runs at 8.28 and 69 wickets at 26.15, Miller would have been better described as the next Roy Tattersall. Yeah, I had to look him up too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)