India’s captain has always been an old-school player, firm in the belief that actions speak louder than words. How does he deal with a side where, increasingly, the players feel the need to wear their attitude on their sleeves?

Sambit Bal14-Feb-2008
“Some days you win and some days you lose. But at the same time, if you have really fought hard and lost the game, then you don’t really feel that bad about it” © Getty Images
The compulsion to provide sound bytes is so overwhelming that posturing has become a professional obligation for modern sportsmen. For cricket captains, it is almost a daily chore. But when I asked Anil Kumble a good three weeks after it was all over, if he had believed India could win in Perth, he looked me in the eye and said without hesitation, “Yes, 100%. It [the belief] was there, and it was there evenbefore we left for Australia.”Kumble doesn’t mess about. It’s obvious that these are words spoken with a conviction not granted by hindsight. The Sydney saga is too fresh to warrant retelling, but it would not have been a surprise if India had disintegrated after that. In fact, nothing else was expected. From that low to fashion a win at a venue where India had been expected to be blown away took, of course, an immense amount of skill; and an even greater amount of strength of mind. And no one supplied it in a greater measure than the captain.Kumble has been a pillar of Indian cricket for close to two decades. But in that hour of darkness, he stood like a tower and a beacon. As always, he was strong. But even more importantly, as fires raged all around him, he stayed calm and alert. He spoke the right words, to his team-mates behind closed doors, and in public. Where Ricky Ponting appeared glib and confused in turns, Kumble came across as a senior statesman. The coup de grace came with this statement, delivered at the post-match press conference at Sydney: “Only one team was playing in the spirit of the game.”From someone else, it would have sounded melodramatic, perhaps, even cheesy; the force of Kumble’s personality made it the defining word on the matter and shifted public opinion India’s way. It would be fair to say that Kumble was one of the few people to have emerged from the sordid affair with his dignity intact.Some saw the invocation of the iconic Bodyline quote as a calculated masterstroke designed to hit a raw nerve. But Kumble insists that it came at the spur of the moment. “I didn’t go in there thinking I would say that,” he says, “I was asked the question – ‘Ricky Ponting said that both teams played in the spirit of the game, so what do you have to say to that?’ And it just came out.” “Cricket should talk. I have always believed that, no matter what, cricket should talk. If we had not won the Perth Test and played the way we did in Adelaide, then it would have been a disaster”Kumble claims he was only vaguely aware of something of the sort having been said during Bodyline, and he was certainly surprised by the response. “It was only pertaining to that particular game, and it was not meant in any other way. People probably went back in history.”****We are sitting in the gazebo overlooking the swimming pool at the Karnataka State Cricket Association. To my shame, I have kept him waiting. But there is not a trace of annoyance. He greets me with a smile and a firm handshake. It’s been four years since I interviewed him last – in his hotel room in Sydney on the penultimate day of the final Test of the 2003-04 series. He had then hinted that it could well be his last tour to Australia. But he has taken over 200 wickets since, and has gone on, against everyone’s expectations, including perhaps his own, to lead India. It is a job he has performed so admirably that it has left everyone wondering why it came to him so late.Kumble makes no bones about having wanted the captaincy. How important was getting the job? “Very important,” he replies unhesitatingly. “It’s the ultimate honour for a cricketer, and I always thought I had the qualities required to lead.” Did it come too late? “It was not in my control,” he says, betraying no bitterness. “And I always took it in my stride. I was dropped also, and I took that my stride too. I never questioned why I was dropped, but went back to working on getting my game better. I think when it finally came, it came at the right time to ensure that my career goes forward. It was great motivation for me, a big challenge.”Leading the most-followed cricket team in the world hasn’t changed him as a person. “I have always tried to take a balanced view of things and tried never to go overboard with either success or failure.” It’s an outlook that has helped him stay controlled and focused on the job in hand. “I have always analysed things and taken the best step,” he says, “whether it’s my personal interest, or when I had to take a decision on behalf of the team.”

‘I have always tried to take a balanced view of things’ © AFP
It was likely that Kumble would have remained the best man to never have captained India had Rahul Dravid, Kumble’s predecessor and good friend, not relinquished the job abruptly. Though Dravid hasn’t yet discussed his reasons, it was clear he was being weighed down by the off-field aspects of the job.”We are passionate,” Kumble says when I ask him about the lack of proportion from the fans and the media, “very passionate.”I am someone who has always taken a very balanced view of whatever happens. You can’t really control the emotions of a billion people. You just try and ensure that you try your best and put in your effort as sportsmen. Some days you win and some days you lose. But at the same time, if you have really fought hard and lost the game, then you don’t really feel that bad about it.”But how easy is it to insulate yourself from what’s being said about you? “You try and insulate yourself, otherwise it affects your own decision-making,” he says and goes on to use the example of Sydney. “It was important for me to stick to what I felt at that time was right and try and keep to what I was thinking. At the same time, I wanted to keep all these non-cricketing issues out of the dressing room. Otherwise it starts affecting your performance on the field. So in that sense it was a bit tough. But the way the team rallied around was really amazing.”****Kumble belongs to a generation of cricketers who didn’t need to be ugly to show they were tough. Through his career he has been a warrior of a bowler, but barring a couple of exchanges of angry words with Inzamam-ul- Haq once (which were smoothed over with a friendly arm around the shoulder at close of play) and Mohammad Yousuf in the last series against Pakistan, Kumble has generally dealt in stony stares and a quick return to the bowling crease, ready to send the next ball hurrying down. For a big part of his career, he has had alongside him players like Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman, who haven’t felt the need to talk the talk.But Kumble now leads a team that also contains a breed of cricketers that believes in giving as good it gets and then some. But the other side of this coin is that some of these players – Harbhajan Singh and Sreesanth in particular – are walking targets for teams like Australia.To begin with, Kumble is phlegmatic about the issue. “It’s an individual thing,” he says, “if the individual feels that it can bring the best out of him, it is fine.” However, his personal view on the matter is clear. “It’s okay if one person thinks it helps him. But if the whole team is doing it – I am not really sure, because that is definitely not an Indian way of playing.””Cricket should talk,” he emphasises. “I have always believed that, no matter what, cricket should talk. If we had not won the Perth Test and played the way we did in Adelaide, then it would have been a disaster. Kumble belongs to a generation of cricketers who didn’t need to be ugly to show they were tough. Through his career he has been a warrior of a bowler, but barring a couple of exchanges of angry words with Inzamam-ul- Haq once and Mohammad Yousuf in the last series against Pakistan, Kumble has generally dealt in stony stares and a quick return to the bowling crease”At the end of the day you want to be remembered for the number of wickets and the number of good spells that you bowled, and not what you did when you got a wicket and not what you told the batsman when he got out. People understand that, and if they don’t understand, then they understand it the hard way.”He provides an interesting perspective on what encourages on-field antics. “It’s a lot to do with the media coverage of such things. I think if you start paying attention to non-cricketing things on the cricket field, then it will remain. The moment you back off and say that we don’t care what you do on the field, it doesn’t really matter to us whether you jump or whether you scream, at the end of the day we are going to discuss how much cricket you are playing and what performances you have had on the cricket field … then it will tone down.”I have never been aware or conscious about who is watching when I am playing cricket. I don’t really care, and I hope and pray that everybody else also believes that. I never played my cricket thinking that there was a microphone on, or selectors watching, or there is somebody else in the press box watching – just go and play your cricket”As a bowler, Anil Kumble has always belonged to a rare kind; alarmingly, his kind of cricketers are becoming even rarer.

Michael Hussey must be the most calculating batsman in the game

Ali Cook10-Oct-2008
Michael Hussey’s driving on the off side was exact throughout © Getty Images
Michael Hussey must be the most calculating batsman in the game. When he goes out he carries a protractor in his mind along with an unbending desire. He thinks in degrees for runs and has proved the method works all over the world.In Hussey’s autobiography he reveals he writes lots of lists. At the crease his duties are on a sheet in his brain.Anil Kumble is bowling mostly googlies
There’s an eight-metre gap between cover and mid-off
If he pitches up, hit it through 78 degrees
Full face, don’t try to smash it
So Hussey was prepared when Kumble skipped in and delivered a fuller ball around off stump. He took a big step, checked his drive and stroked it with such superb timing that he pierced fielders who could almost touch each other. The boundary moved him to 82. While most of his team-mates had to wrestle for their returns, Hussey had the ability to glide.One of the few times his precision left him was when Ishant Sharma forced an inside-edge that went for four and raised his ninth century in 26 Tests. It is an incredible record built on the adding-machine properties made famous by Bradman. Hussey now averages 70.60, sitting high above Graeme Pollock and near the feet of The Don.His driving on the off side was exact throughout, but he was not content waiting for the opportunities to play a big shot. With India unable to force the wickets that were expected initially on a pitch offering more uneven bounce, he toyed with them by varying his speed like an all-stops train. Accelerate with a four, slow for a well-placed single, stop, let out a deep breath, start again.After drinks in the second session Harbhajan Singh was operating, very briefly, without a man on the boundary in front of square leg, trying to force Hussey into a mistake. Only Hussey doesn’t take unnecessary risks. When he decides to do something he has already considered the dangers and deemed them too small. If his mind was a guide for race-horse punters none of them would be in debt.With the off side packed, he stepped back to the first vaguely short offering and pulled a boundary in front of square. Later in the over he slog-swept a six to long-on and quickly judged it time to slow down. His constant contributions eased the demands on his partners. He must be a fabulous man to bat with; solid and dependable yet always ticking things over.After the valuable stand of 91 with Brad Haddin ended he conducted a fruitful partnership of 59 with Brett Lee. One of the concerns for Australia heading into the series was that the lower order would collapse in the unfamiliar conditions and the handy runs usually expected of them would evaporate.Hussey was able to delay the fall until Zaheer Khan lined up Lee and Mitchell Johnson in a couple of overs after tea before focusing on the main man. Hussey knew time was running out when Lee departed, so he altered his thinking and embraced more unconventional means. A reverse-sweep was successful but soon he was facing the suddenly nasty swing of Khan. An inside-edge toppled his middle stump and, last man out, he scurried off with 146.It was an ugly end but it was not a stain on a consummate performance. Ponting is undoubtedly the best batsman in the team, but Hussey will be his greatest ally during this series. Nothing flusters or hurries him. Not the heat, or the noise, or the bowling.Only the sight of no more batsmen in the dressing room could force him into a lethal error. In such a taxing and distracting environment he is Australia’s most valuable player.

With eight wins in ten games, Rajasthan Royals are sitting pretty at the top of the table, but as things stand after 40 games of the IPL, there’s still a chance that they won’t make the semi-finals

S Rajesh18-May-2008

With eight wins in ten games, Rajasthan Royals are sitting pretty at the top of the table. In all probability they’ll seal a place in the top four, but as things stand after 40 games of the IPL, there’s still a chance – however slim – that they won’t make the cut. Here’s one scenario which explains how they might still miss out on a semi-final slot:

Cathryn Fitzpatrick looks back at the fifth women’s World Cup

10-Mar-2009

1993, England
Cathryn
Fitzpatrick
Well I was really more of a spectator in this World Cup, having played just three
matches. Most of my time was spent watching the matches, which were 60 overs. Teams
would score around 160 or so, which was enough back then. My approach was a lot
more aggressive and it was frustrating watching from the stands. But we had really
good players, so honestly I wasn’t good enough to play.Most of my memories from the tournament are, sadly, off-field ones. We went sightseeing in London and listened to a lot of music – 4 Non Blondes were big in England then. Otherwise we spent a lot of time travelling to venues – hour-and-a-half from where we were based, in Reading – and caught up on sleep in the bus.I spent most of my time bowling in the nets to our batsmen, but it
couldn’t have been very good since we came third in the round-robin!The World Cup was memorable in that I made my one-day debut there, after being dropped for a year following my Test debut. Did I get any words of advice from my captain before
my first game? Well Lyn Larsen’s nickname was “Whisper:, so if she said something, I
certainly didn’t hear it!

With the Mumbai atrocities still fresh in the mind, the incredible chase, and Tendulkar’s fourth-innings century made everybody smile – and not just Indians

17-Dec-2008

Finally Tendulkar slays his fourth-innings demon © AFP
“My dream has come true. I have won a Test for India with Tendulkar.”
Yuvraj Singh has played 222 ODIs, scored 10 centuries, won 17 Man-of-the-Match awards, but came of age in this Test“I’ve scored a hundred in the second innings, but to actually win a match, play the winning shot, that was something I wanted to do. This makes it really, really special.”
Times”Make no mistake, this will be a bitter pill to swallow.”
“At this stage, when the whole country was demoralised after what happened in Mumbai, India needed something symbolic to lift their spirits, and this wonderful victory will make everybody feel a little better, although the wounds of Mumbai won’t heal completely.”
Sunil Gavaskar, another Mumbaikar, on what the victory means to India“Ravi Shastri interviewed Tendulkar and Yuvraj after the match was over, and Shastri said Tendulkar’s hair was standing when he said he did this for Mumbai … Cricket has been a terrific healer – ask the 35,000 people who were in the ground today.”
David Lloyd is wide-eyed with wonder“Yuvraj played his perfect part, but the day, the match and the country demanded it belong to Tendulkar. It could not have been scripted more perfectly: a boundary to win the match and complete a century. It had to have been preordained. Had to be.”
Some things are just meant to be, Mike Selvey says“This Test was a great advertisement for Test cricket. It is probably the best possible time that we could have had a Test like this. As you can see, a Test win is somehow more memorable than a Twenty20 or one-day international win.”
“The humdinger of a match […] embodied the essence of cricket, maybe of all sport.”
Independent

England have waited 75 years to end a hoodoo that outlasts even the search for a homegrown Wimbledon champion, and they have taken the lead in an Ashes series for the first time since 1997. History and momentum suddenly feel aligned

Andrew Miller at Lord's20-Jul-2009The cinema at the back of the MCC Museum was a cramped and sweaty venue for Ricky Ponting to reflect on the end of an era. As he took his place in front of the lights of an array of TV cameras, the Ashes urn itself could not have been more than 10 metres from where he sat. It has been a constant source of Australian irritation that the prize they value above all others in international cricket has seldom ventured beyond its glass case at the home of cricket, but for three-quarters of a century, that home itself has been a citadel where the Baggy Green reigns supreme.Today, however, England recaptured their castle, with Andrew Flintoff battering a hole through the defences, and while the urn remains an Australian keepsake for now, their challenge of regrouping in the final three Tests feels that little bit harder with the banker fixture bulldozed out of the equation. England have waited 75 years to end a hoodoo that outlasts even the search for a homegrown Wimbledon champion, and they have taken a 1-0 lead in an Ashes series for the first time since 1997. History and momentum suddenly feel aligned.”We knew about all those records and facts coming into the game,” said Ponting. “It wasn’t a motivating factor for the team to want to play well, but we had a very proud record here until now, and losing on the biggest stage that you play Test cricket on makes that a little bit more disappointing. As a group we’ve just been a bit off the mark right the way through the game. We’ve tried our hardest and things didn’t fall into place for as us we would’ve liked.”With his grizzled features and battered Baggy Green, Ponting’s gameface has a lived-in look to it, as well it might after 14 years as an elite Australian cricketer. He was present in the dressing-room back in 1997, when England were skittled for 77 in a rain-wrecked game, and he followed up that sighter with victories in 2001 and 2005. All the while that Australia have been the undisputed champions of Test cricket, success at Lord’s has been taken as read. No single setback at any ground in the world could do more to underline the fact that a new and uncertain era is upon them.Australia have played 19 Tests at Lord’s since Hedley Verity spun them to defeat in 1934, and they have emerged victorious on nine separate and memorable occasions. In times of strife Lord’s has been a touchstone, in times of dominance it’s been Australia’s jewel in the crown. In 1948, in the second Test of the Invincibles tour, for instance, their margin of victory was an agenda-setting 409 runs; in 1985, when Allan Border led arguably their weakest Ashes team in history, they still found the resolve to square the series at HQ, with Border himself making 196 in a tense four-wicket win.

No single setback at any ground in the world could do more to underline the fact that a new and uncertain era is upon them

Thirteen years before that, it was Bob Massie’s turn to feel the Lord’s effect, as he found inspiration beyond belief to claim 16 wickets on his Test debut – one more than he managed in the whole of the rest of his career. In 1989, it was Steve Waugh – Australia’s Mr History himself – who cemented their series lead with the second and proudest century of his formative tour. At every turn, the grandest stage in the game has provided inspiration to Australia, and that was even the case in an heroic but doomed fourth innings today, when Michael Clarke rose above the disappointment of his 91 here four years ago, to lead the assault on an ultimately unattainable world record.But sadly for Australia, the one moment when that inspiration went astray was the moment they needed it most. On the first morning of this contest, with eight Lord’s debutants in their ranks, Ponting’s men shrunk from history where their forebears would have risen to grasp it. In 29 overs of a stunningly one-sided session, England’s openers hurtled to 126 for 0. As hard as Australia tried to regroup thereafter, the damage to their prospects had been done – as the final margin of victory clearly demonstrated.Instead it was England who set about seizing some history for themselves. Flintoff does not profess to being a stats man, which is just as well in a career that is destined to be under-rewarded. But he nevertheless rose above himself, about his injury concerns, and most importantly of all, above his favourite foes, to carve his second entry on the Lord’s honours boards, six long and eventful years after battering a futile century in an innings defeat to South Africa.In so doing he became only the sixth man to make his mark on both the batting and bowling lists, but it was history of a very different kind that drove him on today. “Everyone was on about 75 years and not having won at Lord’s,” he said, “but apart from a couple of Tests that had nothing to do with us. It was a massive team effort and it was nice to get five, and go up on that board. But to go one-up in an Ashes series was the big one.”

After 79 ICL players decided to withdraw, it has become obvious that the league, in its original avatar, is no more

Ajay S Shankar02-Jun-2009It is a question that has been snapping at their heels ever since the momentous launch in Mumbai two years ago. And now, it’s a question they can no longer run away from. Will the ICL survive? Tony Greig, the face and voice of the private venture, says the battle is not over; Himanshu Mody, the brain behind it, says the league will emerge stronger. But after 79 of its Indian cricketers decided over the last month that they don’t want to be tagged as rebels any longer, it has become obvious that the Indian Cricket League, in its original avatar, is no more.Of course, cricket might still spring back to life under the ICL banner, possibly this October. But that would, at best, be a diluted version of what was once hailed as a revolution in world cricket. For now though, it looks like it will be a long haul back, if at all.What are the options?
ICL officials say that the current exodus of players is part of a larger plan where they will first trim the losses – running costs, including a wage bill that runs into millions of rupees – and then start with a clean slate. They say that they still have around 40-odd players on the rolls and can recruit new talent whenever they need to. In the meantime, they are hoping that the economic recession will let up, and that they will also succeed in getting the courts in London to force the ICC into granting the ICL recognition, citing restrictive-trade-practice clauses, as it happened in the famous Kerry Packer-versus-the-establishment tussle in the 1970s. Such an outcome, they claim, will lead to two things: sponsors will be back with money, and the players will only be happy to sign up for the official version.But for now this is just a scenario. The reality is that the official IPL, and the BCCI’s sponsors, are mopping up whatever money is left in the market; and the players are now wary of signing up for a league that will shut them out of all official cricket, thanks to the BCCI’s all-pervading ban. In fact, in the middle of the last ICL season, a senior player revealed the trauma and frustration he was going through, after even his local college refused to let him use net facilities. As for the players who are still with the ICL, only a handful are Indian; the rest are foreign players, most of whom, as Greig admitted, have retired from international cricket and so are driven by a “different motivation”.What went wrong?
The ICL claimed that their mission was to promote domestic Indian talent, and they did succeed to an extent, at least in shining the spotlight on talented players like like R Sathish, G Vignesh and Alfred Absolem, who may have slipped under the radar otherwise. But overall, the league’s cricket was inconsistent, and the foreign players failed to sparkle – Brian Lara, their biggest signing, failed to even turn up after a season. They were unable to sustain the initial buzz, having struggled with sparse crowds in the first season, and found comfort later only in Ahmedabad, a cricket-crazy city that was kept out of the IPL loop. Besides, the league, which was launched with a projected three-year budget of Rs 100 crore (US$ 21 million approximately), struggled to evolve a profit-making model.Then again, within months of the ICL’s launch, the IPL swept through cricket, with the full backing of the powerful BCCI and their sponsors, drowning whatever hopes the ICL may have had of carving a niche for itself in the business of Twenty20 cricket. More than anything else, it was the vindictive attitude of the BCCI that finally broke the ICL’s back. Players were banned, and the dues they were officially entitled to from the BCCI were kept on hold; sponsors were aggressively persuaded to stay away; and the ICC network was used to ensure that other national boards shut their doors on their ICL players. Not only did the Indian board ignore worldwide protests against their aggressive and monopolistic crackdown, they also pushed the ICC’s board to refuse recognition to the ICL, leaving the world body vulnerable to a legal challenge.The BCCI even led David Morgan, the ICC president, to believe that the issue could be sorted out amicably but ended up having two “compromise meetings” with the ICL that yielded nothing. The BCCI’s offer? Shut down the ICL and take up an IPL franchise instead, or similar variations, including a suggestion that the ICL operate as a veterans’ league. The ICL, not surprisingly, rejected these offers.Walking back into their state Ranji teams may not be so easy for many•ESPNcricinfo LtdWhat does this mean for the players?
Some of the ex-ICL players that Cricinfo spoke to were confident that they would be selected to play for their states again. This could be true for established players like Bengal’s Deep Dasgupta and Abhishek Jhunjhunwala, Hyderabad’s Ambati Rayudu and Uttar Pradesh’s Shalabh Srivastava. But it may not be such an easy road for others. Some state officials are still seething at the way these players walked out on them two years ago – the Hyderabad Ranji team was almost wiped out. Return tickets, obviously, will be at a premium. Besides, as one state association official asked: what will they do with the players who stepped up to fill the breach two years ago?Then there’s the IPL. The BCCI initially said that those who returned from the ICL would be eligible to play domestic cricket immediately (the IPL is a domestic event), but seems to have developed second thoughts since. They have clarified that the norms for IPL eligibility will be revealed later, and suggested that they may apply a year’s cooling-off period on these players before they are let into the official league. But according to some ICL players who have returned, the event that they are really hoping to be a part of is the BCCI’s soon-to-be-launched inter-corporate tournament, to be conducted in 50-over and Twenty20 formats – the winners will take home Rs 1 crore (US$ 213,000 approximately), and the runners-up half that amount.The word on the street
Naturally, the ICL’s willingness to release their players without much fuss, and the BCCI’s open welcome, have led to intense speculation in Indian cricket circles. An ICL official privately suggested that these moves are part of a compromise that could see Zee TV, ICL’s parent company, get a share of the official broadcasting pie when the BCCI’s TV rights come up for renewal next year. Zee TV is currently blacklisted by the Indian board, and one of the reasons why Subhash Chandra, the owner of Zee, started the ICL was that he was denied the opportunity to broadcast India matches in 2004, which led to a long-drawn legal battle with the BCCI. Incidentally, Chandra also shares a good personal rapport with Sharad Pawar, the former BCCI president, who still has the final say in Indian cricket matters.The buzz doing the rounds among ICL players, meanwhile, is that they will be part of an IPL auction now, with a cap of US$ 50,000 per player. But, of course, all these suggestions have been dismissed as “wild speculation” by BCCI officials who claim that the ICL is simply crumbling under its own financial burden.

Mohammad Yousuf’s career is replete with gems, but a few innings stand out for their sheer class. Here is Cricinfo’s list of five

Cricinfo staff29-Mar-2010

115 v West Indies, Barbados, 2000

West Indies had skittled half the Pakistan side for less than 40 runs, after they chose to bat, but they had not planned for the unheralded Yousuf Youhana, who led the rescue act with a classy 115 in six hours, with 14 fours. His dismissal shortly before stumps on day one, brought the innings to an end and gave the persevering Walsh his 18th five-wicket innings return in Tests. At the time, Youhana rated this, his third Test century, as his best knock, over his debut hundred and his 95 against Australia in Brisbane.

100* v India, Dhaka, 2000

Pakistan made a flying start, but India hit back hard to leave them in strife at 103 for 4. Youhana masterminded a recovery with a canny 100, and displayed the kind of maturity that would have made Javed Miandad proud. He paced his innings with precision, and never looked ruffled. His first fifty consumed 90 balls and focused on consolidation, before he opened up in grand style to bring up the second in 23, getting to an even hundred by lifting the last ball of the innings over long-on for six. He has taken the match beyond India’s grasp, and the rivals were eliminated from the Asia Cup.

81* v India, Birmingham, 2004

Four summers later, he would inflict more agony on the neighbours with another classic, this time while chasing. In front of a packed house, with a ticket to the next round of the 2004 ICC Champions Trophy at stake, Youhana’s innings of determination clinched a thriller for Pakistan, against their bugbear in world tournaments. Pakistan needed 201 and India chipped away to leave them 27 for 3, but they had no way to get past the bulwark of the Pakistan middle-order. He added 75 with Inzamam, and remained composed and canny, hardly putting a foot wrong, to get Pakistan home with four balls to spare.

111 v Australia, Melbourne, 2004-05

With Inzamam-ul-Haq out with a back injury, Youhana became Pakistan’s first Christian captain, and hits 11 fours and four sixes in a brilliant first-day 111 off 134 balls in the Boxing Day Test. He shared a national record fourth-wicket stand against Australia of 192 in 46 overs with Younis Khan. There was nothing weak about the Australian attack – McGrath, Gillespie, Warne and Kasprowiscz – but he batted excellently, hitting Warne for three of his four sixes. His dismissal sparked off a collapse, and Pakistan went on to lose the match, but the Melbourne crowd knew it had witnessed a classic innings.

202 and 48 v England, Lord’s, 2006

During the first Test of what was to become an excellent personal summer, Mohammad Yousuf arrived at the crease – after England had piled on 528 – with Pakistan 28 for 2, then 68 for 4, and parked himself comfortably at the holy altar of the game. He batted seven hours and 48 minutes for an impeccable double-hundred that featured 26 fours and a six in 330 balls. In the second innings, he scored a further 48 from 62 balls as Pakistan secured a draw. He came close to another double hundred in Leeds, en route to a record-breaking year when he scored a staggering 1788 runs.

England had the chance to grasp the series on the second day at Newlands, but they loosened their grip

Andrew McGlashan in Cape Town04-Jan-2010England had the chance to grasp the series on the second day at Newlands. It was nearly theirs for the taking, but nearly isn’t close enough. Andrew Strauss wanted his side to show ruthlessness with South Africa down in the series, but they couldn’t manage to keep their foot on the home side’s throat. It hasn’t been terminal to their hopes, but it has been frustrating.When they blew away South Africa’s four remaining wickets in 17 balls, the stage appeared set for them to dominate the day and take a stranglehold on the series. The cloud and drizzle of the opening day had dispersed to leave the clearest of Cape Town skies and everything said it was batting time. However, it didn’t work out that way, and the balance of this match could not have been finer at the end.Of all the performances that nearly came off it will be Ian Bell’s that will provoke much of the debate. He had ducked and dived; played and missed; driven and cut for nearly three hours after coming to the crease with England tottering on 73 for 4. It was the moment for Bell to silence his doubters once and for all. If he’d followed his elegant Durban hundred with another here then claims of ‘doing it easy’ would have been thrown out the window.Then it ended when he couldn’t resist having a dip at his 121st delivery. The ball was asking to be put away, a wide long hop from Jacques Kallis, but instead of whistling to the cover boundary it ended up in JP Duminy’s hands at point. Bell knew what he had done as he stood in the crease and looked skywards before hauling himself off.Cook’s 65 was England’s best of a frustrating day•Getty ImagesBut it wasn’t a day to single out Bell. He wasn’t the only one to succumb to South Africa’s suffocating grip. Jonathan Trott had settled in nicely for 20 before chopping Dale Steyn into his stumps and Paul Collingwood was trapped playing across the line. The two batsmen who fell early, Strauss and Kevin Pietersen, erred in their shot selection as well. Getting out is no shame, but you don’t want to offer the opposition a helping hand.The application certainly wasn’t lacking. England battled hard against the most disciplined South African bowling of the series, but it was that increased pressure that led to a few shots that will leave a bitter taste. Six batsmen reached 19, but so far Alastair Cook’s 65 is the highest score of the innings, and that effort ended with a weak pull to midwicket straight after tea.”It’s frustrating, when you do all the hard work. But it’s one of my shots, and I obviously didn’t execute it very well today,” Cook said. “A lack of pace is what has probably done for me. It’s very disappointing, but you’ll take 60-odd rather than less.”However, if one of the starts had been converted into three figures England, if not in full control, would have put South Africa on the back foot. “Obviously, we’re slightly disappointed with the nature of a couple of the dismissals,” Cook said. “But I think you’ve got to give credit to the way South Africa bowled. They didn’t bowl many bad balls at all, kept us under constant pressure and when you’re not scoring, it sometimes builds.”What the day has achieved, though, is to move the game forward. The draw is now almost out of the equation and the third innings will become vital. A straight shoot-out could suit England, who will be able to prey on the pressure South Africa face to keep the series alive. It’s win or bust for the hosts.Any lead England can muster will be precious and with Matt Prior at the crease that is still possible. He scored as freely as anyone managed all day – which wasn’t very at all – as he moved to 52 off 96 balls. Once again, the long batting order is proving immensely valuable. “Lower-order runs really helped us in the summer against Australia,” Cook said. “It helps any team if you can do that.”England, though, will have to do it the hard way. The third day is forecast to hit 100 degrees in the Cape which will be a draining experience for England’s four-man attack. If they are able to keep the visitors in with a chance of winning this Test, and with it the series, the batsmen should be the ones buying all the post-match drinks.

It’s the lack of technology that should be the crux of any further debate, not the gaining back of a lost review

Andrew McGlashan in Johannesburg16-Jan-2010The dark clouds that have surrounded the Wanderers each afternoon of this Test are not the only storms brewing in Johannesburg but, unlike the thunder showers, the latest controversy over the review system won’t disappear in a matter of minutes. England have created more than a few rumbles after escalating their anger at Graeme Smith’s reprieve on the second day by asking the ICC to reinstate the lost review.While England’s frustrations at seeing Smith survive and score a hundred are understandable, trying to gain compensation makes them out to be desperate. It would set an impossible precedent if the ICC were to grant England an extra review, especially with so much time having elapsed since the incident. Umpiring errors have never been corrected in retrospect and this, for all the controversy involved, is just another of those. What has irked England the most, however, is a belief that pre-series agreements haven’t been adhered to.The ICC, unsurprisingly, have defended Daryl Harper’s role in the whole affair, but if he really did just forget to turn up the volume on his TV set then there is no defence. But the ECB knew it couldn’t go in all guns blazing against Harper – outright criticism of an umpire just isn’t cricket – so it has had to find another route to make its displeasure clear.The ECB needs to be careful how they handle this whole affair because technology in decision-making isn’t going away. They don’t want to be alienated and besides, it isn’t as though England haven’t benefited in this series. Without a review, Paul Collingwood would have fallen to the first ball in the second innings in Cape Town, and England would have lost the Test – and maybe even the series.Yet, there is a strong feeling they would quite happily do away with the whole system, having been the one board opposed to its implementation in the first place. “Until the technology is applied correctly we are better off with our oldest method,” said Giles Clarke, the ECB chairman. “If the umpire is as deaf as a post and as blind as a bat at least it’s the same for both sides.”Such is the ECB’s anger that Clarke may try and convince the two touring teams that England face in the summer – Bangladesh and Pakistan – to shelve the review system. India, even though they voted in favour of it, set a precedent when they didn’t use reviews for the recent Test series against Sri Lanka.Amid all the rancour, however, it is worth remembering that even if Harper had heard a noise there is no guarantee he would have reversed Smith’s decision. Without Hotspot and the Snickometer, edges are very difficult to rule on – although the noise on the Smith replay was loud and at the precise moment that ball passed bat.It’s the lack of technology that should be the crux of any further debate, not the gaining back of a lost review. That has been and gone. The only way the system could be tweaked in the future would be to adapt it such that, if a bowling side asks for a review and the replays show a no-ball was missed, therefore rendering the review null and void, they won’t lose one off their quota. That is something that can happen in the instant of an appeal, not a day later.

In truth, a situation like this has been on the cards. The ECB has never been a fan of the review system, mainly because it doesn’t like the players being in control of questioning the umpires’ decision.

In truth, a situation like this has been on the cards. The ECB has never been a fan of the review system, mainly because it doesn’t like the players being in control of questioning the umpires’ decision. Speaking at the Wanderers, Clarke was at pains to say how he felt it impacted the basic fabric of the game – that the umpire’s decision is final – and expressed his concerns about the effects at lower-levels in club and children’s cricket with players replicating what they saw at international level.Yet there has always been questioning of umpiring decisions, and one impact of the UDRS has actually been a reduction in the levels of dissent. If anything, the system is improving player behaviour which was one of the aims the ICC was hoping to achieve. However, Clarke has already made his displeasure of this “blasted system” known at “the highest levels” of the ICC, and the matter will be on the agenda for the next meeting in February. But having lost out 9-1 in the original vote, there is little hope of him being able to changing many minds.And rightly so, because the system has shown it can work. It’s a point worth emphasising because, in light of all the recent events, that simple fact appears to have been forgotten. But what the last 48 hours has reiterated is there can’t be a half-way house where the use of technology is concerned, and that is where the ICC must take a leading role. Clarke confirmed that Hotspot will be used during the English season, but it remains unclear how many aids will be available for England’s next Test series against Bangladesh in March. This issue won’t be dying away any time soon. The ECB will make sure of that.