The shine on show, and the sixth-bowler advantage

From Ashwin’s technique against spin to the drawback of Rashid’s run-up, Aakash Chopra examines the technical talking points from day four in Rajkot

Aakash Chopra12-Nov-2016The pitch
Indian pitches with relatively bigger spaces between cracks don’t crumble; this pitch has proved that theory right, once again. While the cracks have become wider and the edges have become a little loose, the deterioration isn’t something worth losing sleep over if you’re a batsmen.The Stokes factor
England’s resources allowed them to play six bowlers and that has put them in an envious position. Reverse-swing is at its best when the ball moves late in the air, that happens only when you have extra pace, and for that you need to be reasonably fresh. You can’t expect a bowler to be really sharp if he has already bowled 30 overs. Stokes had bowled only 10 overs at the 126-over mark and that allowed England to have a fresh bowler at such a late stage in the innings.Pitch map: Amit Mishra and Adil Rashid to right-hand batsmen in Rajkot by the end of day four (white=wicket; red=dot ball; blue=1-3 runs; yellow=boundary)•ESPNcricinfo LtdRashid v Mishra
If you were to err as a legspinner, you must err on the fuller side. The moment you allow the batsman to play off the back foot, you make his job a lot easier. Barring a freak hit-wicket dismissal, you aren’t likely to get many batsmen out off short-pitched deliveries. Adil Rashid’s pitch-map suggests that he has bowled shorter a bit too often and the reason for that, in my opinion, is his delivery action. All spinners are told to have a “pause” before delivering, for that allows you more control. Rashid runs through the crease. Amit Mishra, on the other hand, take a fraction longer than Rashid from the time he lands his back leg in his delivery stride to the time he releases the ball. While this affects his consistency, it does give him fizz off the surface.Does nobody hide the shine anymore?
As a batsman, you rely on spotting the shine to play reverse-swing. If you’re able to see it, you plan your response well in advance. You stay inside the line for the balls coming back in and leave the balls that are expected to go away. In the ’90s Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis wrecked havoc with reverse-swing for a few reasons: they were sharp in the air, they maintained the ball better than many and, also, they were able to hide the shine on most occasions. While the ball has been reverse-swinging in Rajkot, nobody has tried to hide the shine. In fact, it is not limited to just these two teams and Rajkot; hiding the shine of the ball seems no longer in vogue. I wonder why.R Ashwin the batsman puts spinners on the back foot with his back-foot play•Associated PressAshwin on the back foot
Batting against spin becomes easier if you get to play it off the back foot. Ashwin has the unique ability to play perfectly good-length balls, ones that others lunge forward to, off the back foot. This approach to spinners forces them to bowl even fuller and he is equally adept at driving off the front foot.Haseeb Hameed’s adjustmentHow do you judge a developing career? The best way is to look for evolution, if there’s any. In the first innings, Hameed was trapped leg-before by Ashwin, when he went around the wicket, with the front foot landing pretty straight. In the second innings, when Ashwin tried the same ploy, Hameed had a different plan; he stood on middle stump instead of on leg stump and then shuffled a little too. Therefore, when he got beaten the same way in this innings, the ball was missing the stumps. He has shown the awareness to address a concern, and the aptitude to make an overnight adjustment.

India learn the value of the dead bat

Given the choice, India prefer to be aggressive and take their chances with a fourth-innings target. In Rajkot, however, led by Virat Kohli’s excellent balance, they acquainted themselves with the art of batting for time

Alagappan Muthu in Rajkot14-Nov-2016″Maybe in the last session we can score around 200 runs, we can go for it. May be an interesting game ahead”That was M Vijay after the fourth day in the Rajkot Test. His crystal ball wasn’t entirely off. India needed 261 runs in a minimum of 31 overs in its final two hours of play. And some of the shots the batsmen used did not entirely suggest they like scrapping around.It can be pleasing to know that the team you support does not give up despite mounting odds. It can be uplifting, as is the case in India, who have had occasion to envy their opponents showing off such resolve to win matches. And it has been the case more often than not with Virat Kohli at the helm. All that’s needed to understand how he has moulded the side in his image is to look at India. Lean, mean and steadfastly avoiding the shaving cream.But a different kind of skill was required at the Saurashtra Cricket Association Ground. The skill of saving a Test match. India haven’t had to do such a thing at home since 2012.On Sunday, everything they would dish out to the opposition was stacked against them. Gentlemen, we’ll start you off with some stiflingly hot scoreboard pressure, then a rich assortment of spin with a side of all the peppy close-in fielders and, oh, look your goose is cooked.India didn’t have too long to survive. A minimum of 49 overs. They were up against a set of spinners who were playing their first Test in this country. Kohli and his men shouldn’t have cut it so close.That they did was possibly because they didn’t have much experience batting time. It requires good technique and a great trust in it. You have to pick the ball out of the hand, read the length as early as possible, go forward or back with purpose and use your hands to adjust if the bounce is variable. A few boundaries help. And yes, it never quite seems like such a grocery list out in the middle. So the fact that India drew a match with only five batsmen – a match they had chased all five days – was quite commendable and a very important step in their evolution.Of course, it was not without incident. On the final day, even a decent pitch would break up with the batsman and blatantly show off its love for the bowler. Rajkot was particularly fiendish. There was one delivery from left-arm spinner Zafar Ansari that pitched on a good length and reared away past Virat Kohli’s head, prompting the Indian captain to insist it be called one bouncer for the over.In such circumstances, you have to either trust your defence or resort to something that you know would be equally effective. Something that has worked for you before. Your natural game. Kohli is a vociferous proponent of it. Only, blindly following it has some risk.

The fact that India drew a match with only five batsmen – a match they had chased all five days – was quite commendable and a very important step in their evolution.

Ajinkya Rahane tried to cut Moeen Ali against the turn and was bowled off the pad. India had less than two hours to survive and that wicket meant England were through to the allrounders. R Ashwin, who has grown into the batsman he always threatened to be and who was instrumental in securing the draw, bashed three fours in the over before he spooned a catch to cover – one of few fielders on the off side. Had either batsman been a bit more prudent, the Test would have had a smoother and earlier finish.But that is how India play now. Given the choice, they prefer to be aggressive.”When things get heated out there when there’s a lot of pressure on the batsman, it’s very important to have the intent of scoring runs,” Kohli said. “Because as an opposition you know that the ball is going to go to the boundary as well, you got to take more time to recover it. The bowlers panic, the opposition panics, the captain panics. At the same time, the score keeps ticking as well.”So that was the whole idea – to have the intent to score runs also, because that way you’re looking forward to playing the ball, you’re nicely on top of the ball, your head is on top of the ball. If you’re only looking to defend, sometimes your weight can be back and if the ball is turning even a little bit, the close in fielders come into play. So it was very important to keep intent onto the ball to control it better with your hands. That was the whole idea about being a bit positive as well.”Kohli was excellent in balancing between attack and defence, and was the prime reason England couldn’t upset India. His footwork was precise and his concentration was such that he was often ready for the bowler while he was still walking back to his mark. While there was the odd whip against the turn, it was his ability to keep the good balls out and remain unbeaten that determined India’s eventual position of safety.There seems to be a growing tendency to think that playing defensively is a sign of weakness.Michael Atherton played one of the greatest innings in the history of the game to save a Test for England away from home. Facing spin on a final-day track in India is no more cumbersome than having to make peace with becoming target practice for a frothing Allan Donald armed with the Wanderers’ bounce for nearly 11 hours. AB de Villiers, this generation’s most versatile batsman, felt confident about his game only after he perfected the block. The longest innings anyone has ever played in Tests was to draw a game from a hopeless situation, Hanif Mohammed, the man who was responsible for it, was called the Little Master.Their exploits and many more suggest the dead bat isn’t a nuisance in cricket. It’s the essence of it.

Disjointed Karachi Kings doing the job

They might not look like a well-oiled unit. They might not even be playing good cricket. Yet, importantly, Karachi are winning just when they need to

Osman Samiuddin in Sharjah02-Mar-2017As a general rule, batting out two maidens to start an innings is not the best approach to winning cricket matches. For T20s, it’s almost a non-starter. That’s 10% of your innings gone in dot balls upfront. This is a format of cricketing austerity, where what you do with every single last ball has to be accounted for. Of the four times it had happened before this game (for which games ESPNcricinfo has ball-by-ball records) only once had the team batting out the maidens gone on to win.But then to fall apart over the last ten balls of the innings, losing five wickets for four runs: What’s worse? Losing five wickets in those ten balls, or just scoring four runs in those ten balls? And to leave two balls unused at the end – in all that’s 24 balls out of an innings of 120 that have gone to complete waste.Karachi Kings did all of this. They also dropped their opponent’s opener, who turned out to be the highest scorer, and still won by 44 runs, having bowled them out with nearly five overs to spare. Islamabad United were truly abject with the bat, but the nature of this win spoke more of Karachi than it did of them.It has been that kind of campaign for Karachi. They have individuals who we can say make for a decent enough side, or at least one that can compete. Mohammad Amir is one. Babar Azam is the brightest thing in Pakistani batting and just maybe is beginning to show signs that he could get the hang of this format. Usama Mir is one of the league’s success stories. Ravi Bopara was last year’s man of the tournament. Shoaib Malik led one of the most successful T20 sides known to cricket. Kieron Pollard needs no introduction. Given the of Test bowler that he is – fuller lengths, not quick, reliant on swing – Sohail Khan is a better T20 bowler than you might at first think. And Imad Wasim is hot property right now.But here’s the strange thing. Of all the franchises in the league, they feel least like a team, or at least a team with some kind of identity. Lahore Qalandars were abysmal last year, but with Brendon McCullum leading them this time, they had all clearly bought into the way he wanted them to play. It mattered that the product was a dud in these conditions, but it also mattered that you could identify Lahore through it, come boom, come bust.Peshawar Zalmi were a brand before they even actually came into being. The totemic Shahid Afridi helped, but even Darren Sammy has come to represent something of Zalmi, and likewise Zalmi some of him. Breezing through the league and choking in the playoffs might be their thing but at least they have a thing.

“This kind of win [against Islamabad] and the way we beat Lahore, that really lifts the game and team spirit. If you win a match like this, your morale really gets high.”Imad Wasim

Islamabad United are a Misbah side through and through, in their successes and their foibles. They were, until tonight, the defending champions and they had some of the sympathy vote this season, having lost Andre Russell and Sharjeel Khan.Quetta have Viv Richards, Kevin Pietersen, Moin Khan, and are led by the man to soon be – most likely – Pakistan’s captain in all three formats. And they represent the most continually neglected province in the land. It would be difficult to create something endearing and distinct out of that mix.Karachi? What are they, other than a loose collection of players, gathered together for, well, what purpose? They were a mess last year, and this time, for a while, looked to be going the same way. They still look more wrong than right. They have persisted with Chris Gayle for longer than has been sensible; this year, as a spectacle, he has looked and felt like that one tour too many undertaken by the Rolling Stones.There is, what really should be, a fatal sameness in the strike rates of the meat of their batting. Babar is developing, but he, Sangakkara, Malik and Bopara have strike rates ranging from 100 to 122 this season. Pollard and especially Imad have not faced as many balls as men with their striking capabilities should; the latter has played 43 deliveries in seven innings. They haven’t needed him as much but Bopara has bowled only twice in nine matches – this the man who was their highest wicket-taker last season. They lost a promising young mystery spinner to a back injury two games into the season.Here they are though, the form side among those left, and the only one now to have won three games in a row this season. Collect enough good players and at least the chances of good things happening rise. Pollard has won them one – what may be the decisive one that turned their campaign, against Lahore, with two sixes off the last two balls; even Gayle came good in another; they have both the tournament’s top-scorer and top wicket-taker so far; and the bowling is rounded, with right-arm fast, left-arm fast, a legspinner and a left-arm spinner.They may not look like a team, but all it takes is one win and then it doesn’t matter what they look like, it only matters that they keep finding ways to win. As Imad said: “This kind of win and the way we beat Lahore, that really lifts the game and team spirit. If you win a match like this, your morale really gets high. The way we won, the combination is really good now.”Not looking like a team, losing games, doing things wrong but then coming good at just the right time? Sounds familiar doesn’t it?

Bangladesh need to look after Mushfiqur's fitness

With Mushfiqur Rahim gradually entering a stage of his career normally considered the peak of a batsman, Bangladesh have to wonder if relieving him of his keeping duties might help bring out his best with the bat

Mohammad Isam in Hyderabad12-Feb-20173:59

#AskSanjay: Should Shakib and Mushfiqur bat higher up the order?

One aspect of Mushfiqur Rahim’s batting that stood out during his 127 in Hyderabad was his judgement outside the off stump. He is one of the few Bangladesh batsmen, among current and former players, who is not tempted by deliveries on fourth stump and can accurately leave the ball. Muscle memory, from hours of honing skills, and a phlegmatic temperament give him an edge over other batsmen in the line-up.The period leading to this innings was a tough one for the Bangladesh captain. His leadership wasn’t up to the mark as India’s batsmen, led by Virat Kohli, put on a massive first-innings score of 687. His wicket-keeping also drew criticism. Not long into the third morning, Mushfiqur strode out with his team in trouble. That he could lengthen his stay in the middle is down to the fact that he is as fit as any top wicketkeeper-batsman.Mushfiqur’s fastidious nature means that he does his homework well and doesn’t leave anything to chance. He picks the bowlers to attack well and, over two centuries in consecutive Tests in Wellington and Hyderabad played in vastly different conditions, he has shown that his technique is adaptable to the situation he faces.In his previous Test in Wellington, where he scored 159, it was easier to leave deliveries because the bounce was truer. So he rode it well and got plenty of runs punching the ball on the off side and timing the ball well while leaning into drives. He picked the right time to lay into the New Zealand bowling and in the second innings, before he was struck by a Neil Wagner bouncer, he looked in most control for Bangladesh on the juicy surface.In Hyderabad, he was cautious against Bhuvneshwar Kumar and Ishant Sharma but attacked the spin duo of R Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja more confidently. Against Umesh Yadav, who posed a threat on the third day, he was mostly calm and made sure the rampant fast bowler was nullified in later spells.Mushfiqur also had to forge partnerships with the lower order in Hyderabad and found an able ally in Mehedi Hasan, who scored his maiden international fifty. Once Mehedi fell on the fourth morning, however, Mushfiqur had to farm the strike. While Taijul Islam, Taskin Ahmed and Kamrul Islam Rabbi were willing to stick around, Mushfiqur had to protect them and tackle the bowling. India bowled well to him, never letting him cut loose like he did against New Zealand last month.His centuries in Wellington and Hyderabad showed how adaptable Mushfiqur Rahim’s technique is•AFPLooking at his figures, it is easy to understand why he is rated so highly as a batsman: four of his five hundreds have come abroad. Tamim Iqbal and Mohammad Ashraful have three each. In his current role as captain and wicketkeeper-batsman, he is the only player to have scored four hundreds abroad. Andy Flower, Adam Gilchrist, Percy Sherwell and Tatenda Taibu have made one century each away from home in the same roles.But it is hard to see him bat above No. 6, because he keeps wicket. In Hyderabad, for instance, within minutes of becoming the last Bangladesh wicket to fall, Mushfiqur walked out with his keeping pads on and for the next two hours, his job was to be the focal point of a fielding unit. He has been doing this kind of quick turnaround for a long time but, as his career gets into the stage that is usually considered the peak of a batsman, and the frequency of his big scores rises, it will be necessary for the team to look after his long-term fitness.If the management have plans to give Mushfiqur the best preparation to bat, in other words more time to relax between innings, they have to select a specialist wicketkeeper. This will be a difficult call between Nurul Hasan and Liton Das. Currently, Liton seems to be ahead, although the selectors did think two months ago that Nurul could fit in the role.If, for example, Liton is included, it could give Mushfiqur more flexibility to bat from No. 4 to 6. Apart from his wicketkeeping, another factor in Mushfiqur batting at No. 6 is the thought that young players like Sabbir Rahman and Mehedi, who bat below him, need protection. But since they are good enough to be playing Tests, they will not necessarily need a senior batsman with them all the time.So imagine, in a parallel universe, that Mushfiqur, having batted for most of the third afternoon and fourth morning to get to his fifth Test century, has the luxury to stroll around when taking charge of the field in India’s second innings. He would still be in the in-field but would be able to sneak in some stretches to get his limbs moving, take a sip of water, or even take an over or two off and sit in the dressing room, giving him enough time to recover from his first batting stint and freshen up for another long day, this time to save the game.

The man who breathed cricket

If you ever wonder what Pakistan might do without Misbah, the reverse is a more frightening prospect: what will Misbah do without the game?

Osman Samiuddin14-May-2017It seems so long ago now, but it was only New Year’s Day, a Sunday – Morrissey’s Sunday, silent and grey. The weekend was at an end and a dream had curled up and away like smoke, so that it was impossible to know whether it had even been there in the first place. Actually it had ended on Friday, the last day at the MCG, when Pakistan ran into the impenetrable walls of history. Friday had been too much for Misbah-ul-Haq. By its end he was questioning his own mind, and it left him on the verge of leaving the very thing that keeps him alive, that which he breathes every passing second, that which he cannot help but think or talk about for as long as is a piece of string.On Sunday he and his team – family he calls them – were at Waqar Younis’ Sydney home for dinner. New Year’s Eve, with the team in his hotel room, had lightened his mood a touch. Now at the dinner he looked to be… slightly less inclined to retire, I want to say, but how do you ever know how Misbah is feeling just by looking at him?This being a social occasion, it seemed impolite to ask him outright whether he was going to retire (whispers already were that he wouldn’t). So a more roundabout approach: are you satisfied with what you have achieved?The really short answer, which, being Misbah, he didn’t give, was yes, just about. He recognised he had overseen a special time, something with enough force of its own to wake him up in these forthcoming mornings, when he will have fewer reasons to wake up than he has had for years. The long answer? Let’s just say there are umpires out there for whom the cold stare of Misbah was never as benign and dead of feeling as it was for the rest of us. The most winning Test captain in Pakistan history cannot forget decisions that have incorrectly gone against his side, and cost, by his reckoning, five or six more wins. He remembers each umpire and, with a fair degree of accuracy, the scores of the batsmen and team at the time. It’s not malice, just deep frustration.He sidestepped into an obligatory fret about domestic cricket, as a function of his helplessness: the national side has had success, but as far as deeper change goes, he knows this was phlegm trying to put out a fire. He had no idea how painfully well that point would be illustrated a month later with the PSL spot-fixing scandal: cleaning up after the mess of one when he came in, leaving amid the mess of another.Still, don’t file it away alongside the standard gripes of other former players – Misbah knows the domestic game at a level of intimacy and familiarity that escapes most. It is a by-product of his complete devotion to the game. As recently as last month he was leading Faisalabad to the Grade II Quaid-e-Azam trophy. We are in a time in Pakistan where jokers on the fringes of national selection find ways to avoid playing domestically and Misbah happily leads a side at a level first-class. On becoming Pakistan captain, not only did Misbah not abandon domestic cricket, he seemed to immerse himself deeper into it. He made sure he played as many domestic first-class games as he could: 14 doesn’t sound a whole lot, but to name but two prominent, long-serving captains, Inzamam-ul-Haq played six and Wasim Akram two.

Given how Pakistan had lost in Melbourne, cricket might reasonably have been the last thing he’d want to talk about. Yet cricket was his salve to the wound cricket had inflicted in the first place

And he gave it value by relying on players who had toiled in it as long and hard as he had, not ones who had been fast-tracked parallel to it. Subsequently their successes were proof that the system Misbah had come from wasn’t in as much disrepair as it was thought to be. As for how it is functioning now – you know what, Misbah has plenty of time on his hands now, and he’ll happily take appointments and talk you through it.He reminisced the rest of evening away, as you might do about the homeland when you’ve been away too long or can never go back. He did it happily, glumly, indifferently, but he did it unfailingly. Those days when he used to bowl “finger” in tape-ball cricket or legspin on cement tracks; or, when he chose to bowl medium pace, how much he could swing it. One day he got the yips, couldn’t work out why and gave it up. Once, he bowled offspin to Imran Farhat in the nets. In Misbah’s telling, he bowled him twice and drew an edge twice more. Another time, Taufeeq Umar was short on confidence facing Graeme Swann, so Misbah and Mohammad Hafeez bowled to him in the nets. In a short while, Umar packed up and left, lower on confidence. Misbah looked warmly at an old match ball on display in Waqar’s dining room and then had the room in fits talking about the many you-know-whats on it.It’s not unusual that he only talked shop. But given how Pakistan had lost in Melbourne, and the impact it had on him in the immediate aftermath – and we were only two days out of it – cricket might reasonably have been the last thing he’d want to talk about. Yet cricket was his salve to the wound cricket had inflicted in the first place. Without complaint or frustration, he even defended those plans for Yasir Shah. Too soon Misbah, too soon.Except not for him, because what else is there? If you ever wonder what Pakistan cricket might do without Misbah, console yourself with the thought that the reverse is a more frightening prospect: what will Misbah do without cricket? He’ll find a role, of course. Commentator, coach, director, something will come up. But what will he do off the field, without a helmet on and an attack to defy, or under the white floppy, with spinners to deploy, not bringing all his ice to the inferno of professional sport?

****

They didn’t exactly sell the captaincy to Misbah. It was offered to him in October 2010 in a small clerk’s room in Gaddafi stadium. The board wanted to keep it so secret, they couldn’t even arrange the meeting in the chairman’s room. Misbah was told there were no other options, which tells us Ijaz Butt’s negotiation skills were not so sharp. Misbah kept it secret from everyone, even his family, for a week. It was as if everyone was embarrassed about what was happening.He doesn’t remember the team talk he gave on his first morning as Pakistan captain. He thinks he probably left it to Waqar, once his captain, then his coach. Imagine that dressing room, like a hastily arranged get-together at fresher’s week: only two of the XI who played in that Test had played with Misbah in his last Test then, in January that year; only four of the XI had played in Pakistan’s last Test, one in August.Kardaresque: Misbah built his side from scratch and it was as much a nationalist project as a sporting one•PA PhotosWhat he does remember is his unbeaten, final-day 76, which, along with Younis Khan’s hundred, saved Pakistan. In the memory that Test passes mistakenly for a bore draw, and from a distance of over six years, it is easy to forget why he puts such great stock in the innings. The draw wasn’t actually a foregone conclusion, not until the last hour, and there was something in that Dubai surface that day, some rough for the spinners, some reverse for an old ball. There was plenty of heat from an opposition expert at cranking up those pressures a new captain might be under. Misbah survived, in a style that would quickly become familiar – poker-faced, a whole heap of forward defensives, a close call or three, in constant motion against spin, in steady repose to pace.Just imagine, though, that he had failed, and/or Pakistan had lost. Pakistan had been through four captains already in a year – what price a fifth? So what he did with that innings was to put in place the first, most crucial pillar of his captaincy: runs. To those who scoffed at the appointment? Runs. For those who didn’t know who he was? Runs. To those who thought him ill-equipped to lead? Runs. For a side in trouble? Runs. For a side in control? Runs. Win, lose, draw, bore, thrill, dawn, dusk – runs, runs, runs. Seven fifties and a hundred in his first 11 innings as captain and just six months in, Misbah had set like cement. The runs never really stopped. Over 4000 as captain, an average over 50, and a clincher: until last winter’s slump down under, the longest stretch he went without a fifty was four innings. He was never out of runs long enough to be challenged.For a long while, this was the metaphor: Misbah saving Pakistan with the bat, Misbah saving Pakistan in toto. It was neat if dramatic and lazy, and it did him a disservice. Because once you peeled away the runs and all the stuff about his dignity and MBA, or his calm and stabilising influence, underneath it all was the man’s fascination – nay, obsession – with the actual game. Every little challenge it threw at him on the field – trying to remove a set batsman, getting a field just right, tweaking an angle of attack, dousing the fire of an opposition bowler; these, rather than some grander diplomatic mission to right Pakistan’s name, drove him.After years and years – maybe, in fact, a lifetime – of discourse on Pakistani captains centred around personality traits, or imprecise diktats on how to play, here was sweet relief. Misbah could, and often did, break down in great detail his on-field moves, or the technique of a player, or just a particular passage of play. Just recently, in fact, in praising Younis’ 177 in Pallekele, he pointed out the slight technical adjustment Younis had made – something even Younis has not spoken about. One day he may choose to make public his irritation with a coach who regularly encouraged the team to go and play positive: sure, Misbah would think, we all know to do that, but isn’t it your job to lay out how, practically, we do that? If there was an “i” left undotted or a “t” uncrossed, you weren’t in Misbah’s world.Pragmatism was a hallmark, not only specifically in the kind of batsmen he preferred but also in going all in with spin when pace resources were thin. Patience, too; in instilling the virtue into his side but also in working away at the lack of it in opponents. The Misbah choke was an acquired taste, lost on the more impatient, or to those obsessed with fancy, showy captaincy. But its subversiveness was grand – he was using the modern game against itself.Dismiss all this as geek love, but put Misbah’s sides up against any Pakistan side from history and nobody, not even the most casual follower, could fail to recognise it. Some appreciated how it was, some didn’t, but this much is inarguable: that only the most influential captains can hope to imprint themselves so indelibly on a group of men that they are, unmistakably, his men.

****

The late twist though, because, this being Misbah, we cannot end without it. It has been the detail to so many of his innings, as well as the broad stroke of his career. Now his captaincy too: seven defeats in Pakistan’s last eight Tests – including home and away to a West Indies side that would struggle to compete with their predecessors this century, let alone those of last century – is a twist as much as a twist is strictly interpreted as a downward spiral.

This much is inarguable: that only the most influential captains can hope to imprint themselves so indelibly on a group of men that they are, unmistakably, his men

Mark some of it as the inevitable comedown post England and the No. 1 ranking. That kind of high knows only a down. The rest has been life reminding us that it is real and not fairy tale, and that it creeps up on us before, one day of its choosing, boom, it is all over you. And then, the core inside men that makes them what they are starts to flicker and fade. Convictions shrink into doubts. Strengths betray you and turn up as weaknesses. Judgements become clouded. Decisions gain an unbearable weight, because their consequences mean more. The end, you can see, is a question mark, not a full stop. And if it brings relief, accompanying it is fear and uncertainty.Life happened to Misbah in Australia, in the most crushing way imaginable, because it was the one that had come to mean the most. He made a series of bad calls with the bat. In the field he was a guitar out of tune, not by much, but enough. His sense of caution, usually well calibrated, now ate him whole, most visibly in his use of Yasir. How could he – of all people – have used spin so poorly?No doubt it soured the taste a little. It was the gentle smudging of the ink at the bottom of a letter otherwise impeccably handwritten. He knows it too. And the question now is the question that has always been, first formed that day at the Wanderers. Are we to define Misbah by the scoop into Sreesanth’s hands, or by the innings that preceded it, that breathed the life in the first place so that it could be eventually sucked out?Me? Time will wash away the last six months. An Australian whitewash is part of the Pakistan constitution; New Zealand barely mattered, it happened so quickly; West Indies? Shit happens.And then it will become clear that what he accomplished was a task similar in nature to the one that confronted AH Kardar, of building a side from scratch orchestrating a nationalist project; that he then acquired the gravitas of Imran Khan, through results, individual performances, and from his effect on his side; that he even brought the sharpened game sense of Mushtaq Mohammad and Javed Miandad, but thankfully none of the annoying Karachi traits; and that he did it with a giant handicap none of them faced.Forget that question. The answer is, he stands tall and proud, unbowed, undaunted and undimmed in any company of leaders we could wish to put him in.

Elgar's fight can't make up for Philander gamble

It was not Vernon Philander’s fault that South Africa were badly beaten at The Oval with the batting, especially, under scrutiny

Firdose Moonda at The Oval31-Jul-20172:40

Moonda: SA batting not stepping up

Vernon Philander was properly ill. Not just a little under the weather, not just a sniffy nose and sore head, not just a I’d-rather-stay-in-bed-than-go-to-work-today attitude, but properly, properly ill. So ill that he spent the best part of two days in the toilet and then a night in hospital hooked up to a drip. A person that ill should probably not be playing an international match.But South Africa had no choice. Philander was their two-in-one and if they had to go in without him, they would have to make major adjustments to the XI which would probably have meant bringing in both Theunis de Bruyn and Duanne Olivier and sacrificing the spinner Keshav Maharaj. De Bruyn and Olivier have only played two Tests each, the pitch had a bit of juice in it and there was generous overhead cover so you can understand why South Africa wanted Philander. Even at 50%.Faf du Plessis explained that Philander half-fit “would still be better than most people” and South Africa had a plan to manage him. Bat first and bat big, so that Philander would have the day to rest and by the time he was needed, he would be feeling better. The plan backfired.When England won the toss, it turned out they also wanted to bat first so Philander, with an empty stomach and light head, not only had to get on the field but had to be at his best immediately. He delivered four overs of perfection upfront and that was all he could muster. And so it went.Philander would spend most of that day and the next off the field, even though he was able to return for three more spells. He bowled 17 overs in total, nine fewer than Kagiso Rabada, 11.2 fewer than Morne Morkel, and he still took two wickets and cost the team only 32 runs. If only he could have done more, thought du Plessis. “England scored 100 runs too many. It was a case of Vernon not being there and our other bowlers not being good enough.”By the time Philander was hospitalised, South Africa actually needed him to bat. They were 47 for 5 when he should have come in and 161 for 9 when he did. He had been given a conditional discharge from his sick bed, having been diagnosed with a viral infection. South Africa’s gamble to include him had not paid off and over the next two days, it was only going to look like more of a mistake.Philander soon needed to bowl again and though he beat Keaton Jennings’ inside-edge three times and had him dropped once, he was obviously not at his best. His six-over spell cost 30 runs.ESPNcricinfo LtdSouth Africa expected Philander’s condition to have improved significantly by the second day but on the fourth, he was still struggling. At one stage, he stopped mid-pitch, hands-on-knees, doubled over in pain. His face was twisted into an expression that said, “Get me out of here.” He finished the over but then slowly he took his jersey back from the umpire, walked towards long-on where he was supposed to field and realised he couldn’t. He gestured to the change-room. Aiden Markram bounded back on the field for the umpteenth time and gave Philander a friendly bump on the shoulder. Philander looked as though he would collapse from the blow.This is the same Philander who was last week talking about a maiden Test hundred “hopefully” being around the corner. There wouldn’t have been a better occasion for him to do it than in the second innings here and he been in full health, who knows what he may have been capable of. He has scored two impressive half-centuries on this tour already, has earned a promotion to No.7 and has become a player South Africa cannot replace, even if they have to.It’s not Philander’s fault that the attack conceded over 300 in bowler-friendly conditions in both innings of this match. It’s the rest of them that are to blame. While Morkel sent down some of the best spells of his career, Rabada still lacked rhythm and Chris Morris, who is only in his fourth Test, needs to find consistency. Sans Dale Steyn South Africa’s attack is still finding the best combination. All it really knows is that cannot function without Philander, ill or not, and that is not an uncomfortable place to be.**On the third evening South Africa’s assistant coach Adrian Birrell was giving de Bruyn a net as the last session was washed out. Birrell estimates that he throws between 50 and 70 overs per practice as he tries to prepare South Africa’s batsmen for their time in the middle. That’s between 300 and 500 balls. In this Test, only two South Africans faced more than 100 deliveries. You can understand why Birrell may be a little exasperated.Still, he was in good spirits that evening even though he was obviously concerned with the way the team had performed. His worry was the bowling, Morris in particular, but he still thought South Africa could salvage something. Asked if he was going to be the one talking to the press afterwards, he laughed. “I only talk to the media when we’re…. oh yes we are in the shit,” he joked. “Anyway, it’s not me today.”It was Temba Bavuma who had to explained how, yet again, he had kept his head when all around him others were losing theirs. He did it in his usual calm way and showed no signs of the slightest annoyance. He wasn’t getting the support he wanted but he hoped in time it would come.Twenty-four hours later, Bavuma was in exactly the same situation. He was batting with Dean Elgar, South Africa were in real trouble and it was Birrell’s turn to speak.It was a battle throughout for Vernon Philander•Getty ImagesOn his way to the press room, Birrell had walked past Elgar and saw him with one of his fingers in a cup of ice water. Birrell didn’t bother to look at which finger or ask how it felt. “Even if its broken, he will bat tomorrow,” Birrell said. “It doesn’t matter which finger it is.”It wasn’t broken, just bruised and Birrell wasn’t the only one who took such a casual approach. Asked after the match if he was considering having an x-ray on the finger before the Old Trafford Test Elgar dismissed it as a “waste of money.”He had been hit when bowling – yes, bowling because South Africa had run out of answers – by a Jonny Bairstow straight drive and then hit a few more times while batting but he was battling on. Elgar’s technique is not the smoothest, he can flashy outside the off stump and has the Graeme Smith style of slashing balls in an ungainly manner into the leg side. Now he may be starting to emulate Smith’s attitude in second-innings situations.Elgar’s hundred at The Oval was only his second in a second innings but both have come in the last nine months. In that time, he has also scored four of his eight hundred. South Africa have only managed 13, and just five by members of the current squad. Stephen Cook and JP Duminy, who are not playing in this series, have two centuries as do Quinton de Kock and Faf du Plessis and Hashim Amla has one. That leaves Bavuma as the only member of the top five who has not scored a century but we’ve already documented the situations he has found himself in. The bottom line is that South Africa don’t have enough Dean Elgars.They don’t have enough players who are able to tough it out in what they have all described as some of the most difficult conditions they have had to bat in against a high-quality attack and they have their reasons. Heino Kuhn is in his first series, Amla’s form has waned and waxed and waned again, de Kock is an x-factor that may or may not come off at No. 4 and now, South Africa are carrying a long-ish tail. But those reasons just don’t seem satisfactory enough to explain why South Africa have only scored two hundreds in their last six Tests, both of them by Elgar.Du Plessis admitted they are all a little to blame. In this Test, he was one of the worst offenders. Out leaving the ball twice, he acknowledged that, “the first rule of batting is to use the bat,” but didn’t say whether watching replays of his own dismissals made him feel as ill as Philander felt. That may have because Birrell let out that du Plessis hit the gym, and maybe a few things in it, in frustration shortly after his second innings lbw.”Bye, bye,” the assistant coach cheerfully said as he left the room on the penultimate night of the match, having said the team was “not overly expectant but still had hope” of doing something special to save the game. “I’ll see you all when we’re in trouble again.”South Africa will hope that’s the last time Birrell had to be put in front of the mic.

The many BCCIs and their many problems

There has been very little clarity around the situation that has led from Anil Kumble’s sacking as India coach to Ravi Shastri’s appointment to the position, suggesting the BCCI is still averse to transparency

Sidharth Monga12-Jul-20175:30

Kalra: Apparent disagreement among panel on Shastri’s appointment

Hours before the cricket advisory committee (CAC) arrived at a decision, one TV channel jumped the gun and announced Ravi Shastri as the new India coach. At that point, the BCCI was in a meeting at Taj Mahal hotel in central Delhi. This meeting – originally called to find some sort of consensus on adopting parts of the Lodha Committee reforms – had lost all value once a few state associations decided to boycott in protest. It was just a glorified tea party now.When the “news” broke, phones started ringing inside the meeting, letting the BCCI know that the BCCI had announced a new coach. In a different scenario, the BCCI might have taken this seriously, even issued a rejoinder perhaps, but on Tuesday, one member inside the meeting room joked, ” BCCI [Which BCCI made the announcement]?” And, as they sipped on their tea, everybody laughed.Had this not been real, it could have been a scene straight of , the legendary film and razor-sharp satire on Indian politics and power. The camera zooms out, the laughter slowly fades away, and the next scene begins with the narrator asking: “Which BCCI indeed?”The BCCI of its CEO Rahul Johri, who was caught napping or chose to sleep as the trouble between Virat Kohli and Anil Kumble kept on brewing? The BCCI of the Committee of Administrators (CoA), who can choose to ignore problems by arguing their mandate is to impose reforms, and can pick and choose issues to meddle in? The BCCI of acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary, who couldn’t see any smoke when the house that Kumble built was being burnt down? The BCCI of the Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC), which is riddled with conflicts of interests, granted an ambiguous power to recommend a coach but with no responsibility to try to make it work? Or the BCCI of Kohli, whose wish finally prevailed in getting Shastri as the coach?Whichever version it might be, the BCCI has slowly slipped back to having no accountability, doing away with press conferences to announce squads or coaches, and dealing in releases as clear as the water that collects on Indian roads during the monsoon.The BCCI were caught napping by the dispute between Anil Kumble and Virat Kohli•AFPFor example, in its official world, the BCCI still wants everyone to believe that it was Kumble who decided to leave even when the CAC had “endorsed” an extension for him, as its release dated June 20 and titled “Anil Kumble withdraws” says. What it won’t tell you is that the extension was only for the West Indies tour, and even that was yet to be accepted by the BCCI, and more importantly, Kohli. In other words, they tried to say Kumble was leaving and they were helpless, whereas, in fact, Kumble jumped before he would have been pushed.No one in the CAC thought it fit to clarify. This is the committee that couldn’t find the time, will or wherewithal to sit alone with Kumble and Kohli during the Champions Trophy: just the cricketers sitting down and trying to resolve an issue between a coach that three legends had subverted process to appoint less than a year ago, and a captain they have faith in. Through the whole fiasco, there was not one meeting between just the five of Kohli, Kumble, Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman.You live, you learn, you’d think. Perhaps the lesson was learnt. The same CAC now wanted to sit down with Kohli and tell him, in the words of one of its members Ganguly, that he “needs to understand how coaches also operate”. Perhaps someone in the committee wanted to let Kohli know he wasn’t being granted his wish because he can’t so openly choose the coach; a wish that one of the aforementioned BCCIs had already started fulfilling by extending the deadline for applications.This, according to the board, was being done to encourage those who didn’t apply because of Kumble’s presence in the process because he seemed certain to get another go. A more laughable reason could not be possible; everybody knew Kumble was not going to continue from the day the BCCI began the smear campaign against him through selective leaks.Be that as it may, it seemed the CAC now was going the independent way. Ganguly suggested, a day before the eventual announcement, that there was disagreement over the coach, and that they needed time to thrash it out with Kohli, that there was still time, and that they were happy to wait for Kohli to come back from his holiday and make up their collective minds. And then suddenly, the CoA got into action, and asked the board – as various officials confirmed – to announce the coach “as soon as possible”.Sourav Ganguly, VVS Laxman and Sachin Tendulkar, who make up the Cricket Advisory Committee, appointed Rahul Dravid as batting consultant on overseas toursWhy didn’t the CoA react with similar alacrity to the issues that Ramachandra Guha, a former member, kept raising? Why is the CoA not consistent about what its priorities are? What was the blinding hurry, as if in a pre-GST discount sale, to get a new coach? Or was it that a member of the CAC sought help from the CoA because he feared his favoured candidate could miss out if time passed?And how obediently have the BCCI and CAC listened to this order from the CoA, even though their other directives regarding reforms have been brazenly ignored. In the end, the pre-fixed result was arrived at. But, like parents who might let their stubborn little one on an adventure ride provided they had adult supervision, the CAC went ahead and appointed two more men as support staff, two men they played their cricket with.Since when did it become the mandate of the CAC to choose the new coach’s support staff? If the CAC was going to choose, would it not have been ideal to invite applications for the bowling coach? You wonder what responsibility Shastri is left with now, apart from what Kohli likes him for. An unwritten convention is to give the coach the first right to recommend the support he wants to work with, so that you know in no unclear terms who is at the wheel. So many superstars in one leadership team – and a big one at that – is recipe for disaster. The CoA has patted the CAC on its back instead of asking them why there was no process followed in selecting the support staff.Since we began with political satire, it is only fair we go back to the greatest political satire written in India, . In this novel, a records clerk and a villager fail to agree on the amount that should be the bribe for a document the villager needs. Personal insults follow. Eventually the clerk turns all honest, “Now I don’t need a bribe. Whatever has to happen will happen through the due process.” The villager ultimately never gets that document because nobody other than the clerk knows the process.In the village of Indian cricket, “process” is a similar well that those inside draw from. If Kumble has to be appointed to keep Shastri out, it is done through a process. If Kumble has to be kicked out, the BCCI does it through a process. When the captain is asked about it, he hides behind a process, knowing well that his previous coach Duncan Fletcher got an extension without a process. If a pre-fixed coach has to be appointed, the BCCI alters the process. If the team loses on the field, it focuses on the process and not the result. Not wanting to follow the Supreme Court order too is a process. In the process the BCCI has even out-processed the CoA, one of whom has dabbled successfully in Indian bureaucracy, where all processes come to worship.

England's biggest total without a century

Stats highlights from the fourth day’s play in Headingley, including the cost of the 10 dropped catches in the match

Bharath Seervi28-Aug-20171 – England’s 490 for 8 declared is their highest total in Test cricket without any of their batsman making a century, bettering the 477 they had made against South Africa in 1994, also at Headingley, with Mike Atherton’s 99 being the highest score. Overall, there have only been five bigger totals that did not include a hundred and the best among them is the 524 that India made against New Zealand in 1976.1 – England also recorded the highest total in the second innings of a Test match without a ton. The previous record was held by Australia, who had made 476 against England in 1911-126- Fifty-plus scores by England’s batsmen in the second innings. Only once have they managed more – seven against Australia in 1934.2011 – The last time England made a bigger total in their second innings of a Test – they had amassed 544 against India at Trent Bridge. At Headingley, this is England’s highest second-innings total and the third-highest for any team.1948 – The last time a target of 322 or more was successfully chased at this venue – 404 by Australia. There’s been only one other successful 300-plus chase here, by England against Australia in 2001 Ashes.3- Instances of five of the six batsmen between Nos. 4 and 9 scoring 50-plus runs for a team. England joined the list with Joe Root (72 at No. 4), Dawid Malan (61 at No. 5), Ben Stokes (58 at No. 6) and Moeen Ali (84 at No. 8) contributing. Mark Stoneman also made 52, but he opened the batting.10- Catches dropped by both the sides across the first three innings – seven by West Indies and three by England. The amount of runs scored by the batsmen after they were dropped adds to a whopping 351.2 – Instances of Stokes scoring a century and a fifty in the same Test. He had hit 92 and 101 against New Zealand at Lord’s in 2015 and 100 and 58 in this match. Since his debut, only Root (twice) and Alastair Cook (once) have done this for England.

India's seven-batsman army didn't work

Aakash Chopra on the talking points from Australia’s victory in the second T20 international in Guwahati

Aakash Chopra11-Oct-20170:58

Pitch was perfect for Behrendorff – Bhuvneshwar

The pitch at the Barsapara stadium
The surface in Guwahati had a deep-brown look that suggested a lot of moisture. There was also an even covering of grass, which allowed the ball to grip the pitch and move laterally. The toss was critical and Australia did the right thing by choosing to field, after which Jason Behrendorff proved the value of a left-arm seamer. His natural angle – moving away from the right-hand batsman – accounted for Manish Pandey, and deliveries that came in got Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli. Behrendorff reaped rewards for his fuller length.India’s shot selection
In the first ODI, Pandey had fallen for a duck, nicking a full ball from Nathan Coulter-Nile. In Guwahati, Pandey stayed deep in the crease and was fortunate that Coulter-Nile rarely pitched full. Behrendorff, however, did pitch full and Pandey’s front foot went down the pitch instead of towards the ball. He reached out for it with his hands and edged behind. Shikhar Dhawan had spent all but one ball in the first three overs at the non-striker’s end, giving him ample time to assess the conditions. So the shot he played to fall to Behrendorff – an attempted chip over the infield – was careless.Dhoni’s footwork
The moisture in the pitch ensured the ball gripped and turned for the legspinner Adam Zampa. MS Dhoni tried to counter this threat by stepping out: in the over that he was eventually dismissed, Dhoni stepped out to Zampa five times. The idea was to force the bowler to shorten the length, which would allow Dhoni the freedom to stay in the crease and score off the back foot. It was interesting that Dhoni chose to step out – sometimes only to defend – to five consecutive balls without waiting on the back foot even once.Seven-batsmen army
India have been picking seven batsmen in recent limited-overs games, the idea being to have extra firepower to set above-par totals or chase huge targets. It is also insurance against a collapse. The strategy hasn’t always worked in ODIs with scores of 300, and even in Guwahati having Hardik Pandya at No. 7 did not prevent India from being dismissed in 20 overs. Playing the extra batsman also leaves you a bowler short, leaving no insurance for a bowler having a bad day. With the kind of batsmen India have, playing five proper bowlers is a tactic worth trying.The Warner-Finch dismissals & Henriques’ promotion
Most of the runs scored on this pitch were off the back foot and that led to Australia’s openers being a little too eager. David Warner and Aaron Finch went back to balls that weren’t short enough and paid the price. Australia were smart to promote Moises Henriques to no. 3, ahead of Glenn Maxwell. The conditions demanded a more technically sound batsman.India’s bowling plans
Travis Head and Henriques went after the left-arm wristspinner Kuldeep Yadav and medium-pacer Hardik Pandya. Every time Kuldeep pitched full, which is his strength, both batsmen went really hard at it. He was forced to bowl shorter and, on a slow Guwahati pitch, the ball sat up to be hit. The experience should encourage Kuldeep to expand his repertoire. From time to time, the situation will arise where he needs to bowl quicker and with control.It was interesting that Kohli did not bowl Bhuvneshwar Kumar or Jasprit Bumrah in the middle overs despite Kuldeep going for plenty. Yes, it would have meant not having their overs at the end, but the only way to fight back was to break the Henriques-Head stand and take more wickets. As it turned out, with Australia winning in the 16th over, neither Bumrah nor Bhuvneshwar bowled their full quota.

Game
Register
Service
Bonus