Irish cricket takes big step - ICC

The International Cricket Council says the success of Tuesday's one-day international at Malahide was a "big step" for Irish cricket.

ICC global development manager Tim Anderson said he was impressed by Tuesday's occasion with over 10,000 watching the defeat by England.

"10,000 people in Dublin on a Tuesday afternoon suggests this is becoming a very serious cricket market," he said.

Cricket Ireland are aiming to secure Test status for the country by 2020.

Despite Ireland's six-wicket defeat after earlier appearing to have England in trouble, Cricket Ireland chief Warren Deutrom felt that there were many positives that could be taken from the country's biggest ever home game.

Deutrom acknowledged that the country was not yet in a position where it could "even ask the question" about Test status but added that he was pleased with continuing progress.

As he watched the contest in glorious sunshine at the redeveloped Malahide ground, ICC official Anderson described Ireland as "probably the most important associate nation".

"Having an event like today when we can get this number of people into a game of cricket in Ireland is a big step in saying to the ICC: 'There is a growing culture of cricket in this country'," he said.

"Continuing to perform well on the pitch when you have opportunities like this and opportunities to perform in World Cups and World Twenty20s (is important) as is having a very strong governance and administration.

"They are the best (associate nation) on the field and the only one we could see producing what they are producing today."

Anderson added that Ireland can hold out hope of having more opportunities to play against full member countries in the coming years.

Continue reading the main story

“We're ticking the box to really embed or develop a culture of cricket in Ireland”

Cricket Ireland chief executive Warren Deutrom "Full members struggle to play everyone (of the other full members) so moving that concept ahead is not easy but we are considering those options with our full members.

"Hopefully in the future, the regular structured opportunities could be available."

The ICC official said that Irish cricket's governance "is one of the best in world cricket and not just in the affiliate and associate countries".

"Cricket Ireland have a fantastic CEO in Warren Deutrom and a very good board and management team," he said.

Deutrom pointed out the presence of Irish President Michael D Higgins among the dignitaries at Tuesday's game as evidence of the increasing profile of the sport in the country.

"It's also about having that dream to be as good as we can be," added Deutrom.

"If our players are leaving us to go to England and chasing their Test dream then we always stand to lose our best players.

"We are not asking the (Test) question yet. We've set out by 2019 or 2020 that's where we're going to be.

"Two of the boxes that we hadn't ticked up until the last 18 months was about having a domestic three-day structure and having some form of tier between club and country, which is the Inter-Provincial structure we have introduced this year.

"And in terms of having a culture of cricket which is another of the criteria, what does that mean?

"I would suggest (it is) having 10,000 fans - at least half of whom are totally new to the sport - coming in to consume the game today and media from all over the UK and Ireland.

"We have 650 hospitality guests. We sold all our perimeter advertising. Corporate Ireland has bought into it. I'd say we're ticking the box to really embed or develop a culture of cricket in Ireland."

View the original article here

AUDIO: ICC impressed by Irish cricket progress

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.

View the original article here

BCB-PCB impasse affects Dhaka cricket league

There is uncertainty over the participation of Pakistan players in the upcoming Dhaka Premier Division Cricket League, Bangladesh's domestic one-day competition, due to a strained relationship between the Bangladesh Cricket Board and the PCB.

With less than five days before the start of the league on September 10, none of the 12 Dhaka clubs have managed to confirm the services of a Pakistan player. This season, a club can field up to three foreign players during a match and can register 10 players during the season. However, according to the BCB, it has not received any no-objection certificates (NOCs) from the PCB, a situation similar to what occurred before start of the Bangladesh Premier League earlier this year.

An NOC is mandatory under a new ICC ruling on players participating in another country's domestic competition. Previously, the Dhaka clubs contacted the players who then sought permission from their respective province or department, and a letter was sent from the BCB or the Cricket Committee of Dhaka Metropolis (CCDM) to help with visas in Bangladesh.

This year, however, the process is likely to be a drawn out one due to the impasse between the boards. Relations between the two boards have been difficult since a Dhaka court ruling stopped Bangladesh from touring Pakistan in April last year. Throughout 2012, the BCB sought to conduct the tour only to back off citing security fears. In December 2012, BCB chief Nazmul Hassan put the tour on hold and said that the side would visit Pakistan only if the overall security improved. Two weeks later, the PCB refused to issue NOCs to its players to participate in the BPL, giving the Bangladesh board another reason to delay the proposed international tour. The PCB's decision to prohibit its players from the BPL resulted in chaos as franchises scrambled to find last-minute replacements for Pakistan players two days before the tournament began.

"It wasn't us who told them not to come [to play in the BPL]," Hassan said. "It was the PCB who denied NOCs at the last minute. We played without them, and that is how we have remained. If suddenly they change the decision and contact the clubs here, it will be a different situation.

"We will play the Dhaka Premier League without the Pakistani players because the PCB hasn't given them the NOC. There's no need for any discussions. We have accepted their hasty decision not to send players during BPL. We were not invited for any discussions at the time."

According to the PCB, it is seeking a formal written communication from the BCB before considering the release of its players. The PCB said that players were being approached directly with no written agreement from the "Bangladeshi organisers and board".

The current requirement of an NOC to engage with a player from a foreign country was prevalent last year, and the PCB had to issue the letters to its players, after the BCB made it mandatory for clubs to sign only overseas cricketers with first-class experience.

Iqbal Yusuf Chowdhury, who is in charge of Cricket Coaching School (CCS), one of the twelve Dhaka Premier League clubs, said he would seek the BCB's help in getting Pakistan cricketers to play in the tournament: "I will submit a letter on Saturday, to ask BCB to help me with NOCs from PCB."

Other Dhaka club officials have already started to look elsewhere this year, particularly to countries where players are free between September and October. A few clubs are interested in approaching Sri Lanka cricketers and some players have reportedly signed up. Clubs are also likely to contact players from England, India and Zimbabwe.

A steady flow of Pakistani cricketers, international and uncapped, has been a feature of Bangladesh's domestic competitions, particularly the Dhaka Premier League. Ever since the clubs were allowed a quota of foreign players, they have mainly been interested in bringing cricketers from Pakistan.

Even when the second tier of the Dhaka league system or the first-class competition allowed foreigners for a short while, Pakistani players were the ones in demand. Players who are regulars in the Dhaka Premier League could also suffer financially, as a result of the issues between the boards. Usually, players are paid between $5,000 to $15,000 per season, depending on their first-class experience and Dhaka league performance. For international players, the rate goes up substantially and the clubs are often rewarded.

Wasim Akram was the biggest name from Pakistan to have played in the Dhaka league. Shahid Afridi, Abdur Razzak, Shoaib Malik and Imran Farhat have also played domestic cricket in the country; Farhat scored the first double-century in Bangladesh first-class cricket. In recent years, Misbah-ul-Haq, Nasir Jamshed, Ahmed Shehzad, Khurram Manzoor, Khalid Latif, Fawad Alam and Hammad Azam have played in the Dhaka Premier League regularly.

Mohammad Isam is ESPNcricinfo's Bangladesh correspondent. He tweets here.
Umar Farooq is ESPNcricinfo's Pakistan correspondent. He tweets here

Feeds: Mohammad Isam © ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

View the original article here

Andrew Strauss a candidate to carry on excellent work of Hugh Morris at England and Wales Cricket Board

So it was rather strange to see the post advertised last week. Of course, the England and Wales Cricket Board is quite rightly acting swiftly upon Morris’s resignation – even if he will remain in the post until the end of the year – but you just assumed that Morris would always be a fixture within the organisation.

He has, after all, been there in a variety of roles, all performed with the utmost diligence and excellence, since retiring from the game in 1997.

There is now disbelief in Wales; disbelief that Morris has been tempted back to his former county to sort a mess long in the making. Morris will be chief executive and director of cricket. As one player said to me: "There is quite literally no better person in the whole world to do the job."

But if Glamorgan have struck gold, what now about the ECB? It should be remembered that the managing director’s role was only introduced upon the recommendation of the Schofield Report after the 5-0 Ashes drubbing in 2006-07. Morris was actually part of that report and there were some screams of a "job for the boy" when he was appointed.

The truth, however, is that there was no better man; a former England international with business experience (an MBA), a sports science degree, extensive knowledge of the ECB’s coaching systems (he set up the National Academy), as well as a Level Four coach himself.

To my knowledge there is nobody like that banging at the door right now. The job description is interesting in that it stresses that "international playing experience" is required.

Presumably that is in cricket. No, I’m not being silly for the sake of it. Australia recently copied England and appointed an equivalent of Morris, but it was a former rugby union international, Pat Howard, rather than a former cricketer.

On which point it has been interesting to read that Mickey Arthur, the Australia coach summarily sacked just before the Ashes, has been in talks with Super??15 rugby franchise Western Force about a role in talent development and recruitment.

However, I cannot see the ECB appointing someone like Sir Clive Woodward (although Rob Andrew, the Rugby Football Union’s professional rugby director was once accomplished enough as a cricketer to have scored a first-class century for Cambridge University).

The contenders are more likely to be Andrew Strauss, then three current directors of cricket: Angus Fraser (Middlesex), Mike Watkinson (Lancashire), Martyn Moxon (Yorkshire), and maybe the ECB’s own Steve Elworthy. None of them fit the role as snugly as Morris did.

If Strauss should want the job, then you suspect it would be his, although, if Andy Flower stays on as team director, there would then be the curious role reversal of former captain Strauss suddenly being Flower’s boss.

What is sure is that the appointment will not come from the current crop of county chief executives, of whom only two – David Smith at Northamptonshire and David Leatherdale at Worcestershire – played first-class cricket. In that respect Morris’s return to Glamorgan is a boon for the county game in general, providing some much-needed cricketing intelligence and clout.

There is simply too little of it. Of course, there are some who believe that former professionals are not necessarily the best people to fill such positions.

I am reminded of the recent comment of Michael Henderson, who, writing in The Cricketer magazine, concluded a piece about the spirit of cricket furore surrounding Stuart Broad with the words: "Cricket is too fine a game to be left in the hands of professionals."

In administration posts, however, it can also be too complex for pure businesspeople. As in most things, balance is required.

Cricketers can be blinkered as Mike Atherton noted to an extreme in a column last week – "very few players I played with (in fact, I cannot think of a single example) thought of the wider questions of the good of the game".

Some like Strauss have probably always had that broader vision. Retirement may have broadened it even more. He has been a useful addition to Sky Sports’ coverage this summer, as well as penning some decent stuff for a rival rag, but too many of his ilk are lost from the inside of the game.

View the original article here

'I just try to convey my enjoyment of cricket'

Now as 40 years ago, Bill Lawry can get excited at the drop of a hat - by a shot, a ball, a catch. His job, he says, is to make the man in the garden come into the house to check what happened

A lot of commentary today is noise. Just gratuitous and grating shouting. Yet one of the most loved commentators of all time is a shouter. Like the rest today, Bill Lawry too is a peddler, but he sells enjoyment of the cricket. Talking to him, you understand why his loudness doesn't jar. This interview was after Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke had both scored double-centuries on the second day of the Adelaide Test between Australia and India, and Brad Haddin was trying to get some quick runs to set up a declaration. It wasn't the most gripping spell of cricket, but you couldn't take Lawry's eye off the cricket, even when he was answering questions. Once, during an answer, he went, "There he goes…" He restrained himself, and even though it was all happening out there, he was clean as a whistle until it was all over.

How did you first get into commentary?
I first got into commentary when we were playing state one-day games. There were Richie Benaud, myself and Bobby Simpson, working for Channel 10. Channel 0 [it was called] back then. We did one or two of those, on small grounds. And then, of course, along comes Kerry Packer in 1977-78, and the first commentary team was Richie Benaud, Fred Trueman, Keith Stackpole, and myself.

I was an estate manager for a manufacturing company and had a full-time job. This just came along. Something new. Under lights, coloured clothing. We had a great time.

Keith Stackpole and I had never done television over a long period before, and Frank Tyson joined the team as well. And we had guest commentators over the years come from every country.

Were there any nerves the first time?
Well, there were but it was quite a good feeling to have Richie Benaud there. Richie had been commentating in England since 1960-61, so we had his experience.

It was all new. Everybody was excited. We had cameras at both ends for the first time in the history of the game. We had cameras square of the wicket. We had all these wonderful new things. Exciting time. Very lucky to be there.

And of course we had very good players. Australia had the Chappell brothers and Lillee and Marsh, and all these types of guys. The World XI was Tony Greig, and West Indies with Clive Lloyd, and all their wonderful cricketers. It was just an exciting time. Changing of the guard as far as cricket was concerned. All of a sudden we had an outside promoter promoting the game rather than the cricket boards.

Did you have any reservations against putting your name behind this non-traditional cricket?
I didn't have any reservations, because as former players we were unhappy with the amount of money we were being paid. Once Kerry Packer came along, it became a professional sport. What we see today, 40 years on, what we take for granted, all started with World Series Cricket. He paid the players well, the crowds were big, we went full-time on television.

Were you asked to make it sound more exciting?
No. We had no instructions whatsoever.

Did you expect to make such a long career out of it?
No. It was not a career for me. Until I retired at 65 - I'm 74 now - I did this for fun. I got a pay obviously, but I did it for fun. Just an add-on to my working career. It's just been a wonderful enjoyment. I enjoy the money - because I never got any money when I played - but I have enjoyed more the thrill of watching great players over the last 40 years. The Vivian Richardses, the Lillees, the Chappell brothers, the Bothams. In recent times we have got the Pontings and the Shane Warnes...

"When I was on my first tour of England, I come in after the game, and Mr Jack Fingleton [then a journalist] called me aside and said, 'Bill it's great to be enthusiastic, but you shouldn't be appealing for lbws at deep midwicket'"

You were an intense batsman. As a commentator did you go back home and analyse how you did that day?
I never treated it like that. Our first producer was a guy called David Hill. And he just said, "Be yourself." That's all. I just come along to enjoy the cricket, and hopefully convey to the people at home that I am enjoying the cricket, and it's a great game, and enjoy the skill. We have been here and seen Clarke and Ponting score double-hundreds. I mean, how fortunate are we to be sitting right behind the wicket? There are people at work, and people at the beach - they come home and all of a sudden they find two double-hundreds. Richie and I for the last 30-odd years have seen all this happen. It's wonderful.

You said your first producer told you to be yourself. Our impression of you was of a stodgy opening batsman.
Well, that's right. But I scored the first one-day hundred in Australia. (Laughs) That's a record Ponting or Bradman hasn't got. (Laughs)

It was different, I suppose. We were playing as amateurs. We just went out to enjoy batting. I just enjoyed batting. I think today, obviously, you are getting a lot of money to perform well. We probably had a different attitude. We just played to win the game.

As a commentator were you this excitable always?
Well, I was always excitable when I played. It might not have shown in my batting, but I always appealed the loudest in the field. In fact when I was on my first tour of England, I was fielding at square leg or somewhere, and I come in after the game, and Mr Jack Fingleton [then a journalist] called me aside and said, "Bill it's great to be enthusiastic, but you shouldn't be appealing for lbws at deep midwicket."

How did the phrases come about? "It's all happening." "It's all over at the WACA." "Clean as a whistle."
They just come out. Just pick up the mic. Nothing is pre-planned. I don't sit down and do any homework, apart from studying who the players are.

I have been very lucky. I have seen some wonderful moments. Once [Shahid] Afridi hit two sixes off the first two balls down in Hobart. Those are great moments to be on air. Also, it helps to be on first, which I do a lot of the time. In Test matches you might get two wickets in the first two overs, and you only get three wickets on some other days. You have got to make sure when you get those wickets, that everybody at home - if he is outside in the garden - comes in to see what is going on. You want him to say, "What was that noise?" and go in and see a wicket has fallen.

How much of your commentary is science? How much of it is instinct?
Mine's all instinct. I just try and call it each ball as I see it. I love to get a wicket, I love to get a great catch or a run-out. I just try and be involved without going over the top.

I don't try and analyse it too much. I just try and bring in my experiences as a player. I realise that probably 70% of the people at home are not cricket experts. The people that come here probably understand the game 80%. The people at home don't understand that much. I try and explain it to them. When we first started, David Hill actually had a chart up on the wall with field positions, because when we were saying to somebody who has migrated to Australia, "He has got a man at leg gully", what does leg gully mean to a 14-year-old girl or a young boy who is not brought up in a cricketing family? What is silly point? A traffic stop or something?

A bowler starts to think where he is going to pitch the ball before he starts running in. When you are off air, what do you do?
I watch every ball when I am at the cricket.

Even when you are not on air? I always watch. I don't bring a computer to the ground. I don't do any other work at all. I just watch the game. That was because David Hill earlier on said that if you are on next, I don't want you to repeat what the guy before said. Most times I sit in there, I watch what's going on, so when I am on, I have got my thoughts, not Richie Benaud's or Tony Greig's. And I love watching the cricket, and I have always loved watching it, and I think you can learn by watching.
"I think today, obviously, you are getting a lot of money to perform well. We probably had a different attitude. We just played to win the game. That's all I wanted to do - go out and win" © PA Photos
Richie Benaud is a man of few words. He is an analyst. He analyses the game. Tony Greig talks about Africa. He cares about Africa. All that sort of stuff. I bring out my feelings about the game. Tony and Ian [Chappell], they have been there since the World Series ended. We have been there 30 years as well. Luckily there have been very few changes. Not only are we working together, we are great mates. You don't have a 30-year career as a cricketer. I said to my wife - when I met her, I was 19 years old and I was playing for Victoria - this will last only five or six years, this cricket.

I have been one of the lucky generation to have gone on from being an amateur to a professional on television but not as a career, as a hobby and a delight.

You were once quoted saying you enjoyed this more than your cricket. How can that be?
That's probably not quite right. Obviously you enjoy the game more as a player. I suppose it was the times. When I first played for Australia I was a tradesman of tools. I'd work till five o'clock, I'd rush to practice, get there at 6 o'clock, and bat for 20 minutes in the dark. I'd love to have been a professional because you can train your skill all day. I often felt for our fast bowlers. They'd work a full day's work and get to practice at, say, 6pm and bowl for two overs and go home and go to work the next day. When we played four-day Shield games, we'd arrive on Thursday night and play on Friday and go to work the day it was over.

Could that have played a role in what kind of batsman you were?
I wasn't a slow scorer, really. I played one or two slow innings, but I think Bobby Simpson and I had a pretty good partnership, and I reckon our strike rate would be the same over our career. Not one or two games, where I might have batted all day for a 90 or something. That was something you do intentionally. You see a situation and say to yourself, "I am going to be here at stumps." That's part of your job. It's all very well to be flamboyant, but if you get beat, that's not a lot of fun.

Do you struggle to stay in your chair?
I jump up and down occasionally.

What do you enjoy the most? A six or a wicket or a run-out? Or a cartwheeling stump?
All types. I guess, reflecting back I would say what really excited me the most was when Hayden and Gilchrist were opening in the 50-over games. Up till then the plan seemed to be, if the openers got through the first 15 overs and you were none for 70, you had a real good start. All of a sudden Hayden and Gilchrist come out and they were 60 after eight overs. What you are trying to get across to people is, it's not easy. It's very skilful. Very few players who can do it. Walk out against the new ball, and go bang bang.

If you ask me the three most exciting cricketers I've seen, one of them I played one Test with was Dennis Lillee. I think I have to say Warne and Gilchrist in my memory were most exciting. Warne, because he is the best legspinner of all time, but Gilchrist is the only wicketkeeper in the history of the game to come in at No. 7 and change the game in an hour. You could be 6 for nothing, and he could come out and change it with a quick hundred. So they remain in my mind.

Some of the great catches... I remember Allan Border catching [Mike] Gatting at the MCG at first slip in a one-dayer. Still in my mind, diving to his left. Glenn McGrath's catch here. Things like that stick in your mind. Of course you remember the dropped catches. Earlier people wouldn't know if a catch was dropped. Now with TV the whole world sees it.

Who is your favourite commentator to work with?
I suppose I'd have to say Richie. Richie was my first Test captain, and he was a very good cricket captain, but he has been an exceptional captain of the Channel 9 team. He has set the standard. He gave us credibility, and his knowledge of the game was fantastic. Blokes like myself were allowed to be a bit vocal because he was the steady influence on the other side of the mic. You could always look up and see Richie was there and feel safe.

Has he ever had to restrain you? "Steady on Bill"
Never. Never ever said that. No. Richie is not like that. If you are going to hang yourself, Richie will let you hang yourself. "I watch every ball. I don't bring a computer to the ground. I don't do any other work. I just watch the game. That was because I was told: if you are on next, I don't want you to repeat what the guy before said" He has been sensational, and a good friend of mine since 1975, but he has been more than that. He has been a sort of rock to lean on. When you go to the ground it is great to see Richie there. He was the host commentator there until Mark Nicholas came along.

Tony Greig and myself are very good friends. Ian Chappell and I played together, and I can honestly say none of us have said a cuss word in 30 years. I don't think there has ever been an argument. That's full credit to the producers and the directors.

The guys who do the best job, who we don't mention, are the cameramen. They stand out in the heat for six hours and rarely miss anything.

Have you ever met Billy Birmingham?
No. Billy Birmingham is very interesting because when he made those tapes, I was cricket manager of Victoria, and I'd go out to schools, and obviously a six-year-old kid had no idea who I was because I wasn't playing then. They'd say, "Are you Billy Birmingham?" I'd say, "I wish I was."

Who are you favourite commentators?
Unfair to pick out any. I'd have to rate Richie as No. 1. I used to enjoy Keith Stackpole, an old team-mate. I enjoy being with Tony Greig because we are always challenging each other. That's good. You have got to have your own point of view. Sometimes it gets a bit argumentative. That's fine, as long as it is not spiteful. And I obviously liked Michael Holding because his voice was so soft. Couldn't understand what he was saying half the time, but I loved his voice. Freddie Trueman in the early days was good. Freddie would be smoking his pipe, which is unheard of today. Tony Cozier from the West Indies. We have had some wonderful overseas commentators. They have all been wonderful, and they have all been different. That's the reason why I enjoy it.

Cricket has changed completely since when you started. Do you ever get cynical?
I never get cynical because I think back and think I have been very lucky. The fact that I played and toured England for seven months and played every county and did it for no money gave me more of an appreciation of the game. The difference was, when I played, you never said you had an injury, because if you dropped off, you never got back. Players get injured today, they put them on leave for months, and back they come.

Sidharth Monga is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Feeds: Sidharth Monga © ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: 'Splashgate' is just not cricket - or at least not as we would like to recognise it

Visions of Gazza having some heinous cocktail of spirits squirted down his throat in a Hong Kong ‘dentist’s chair’ squared in sudden symmetry with our cricketers’ puerile prank.

Acts of crass delinquency, if we care to be reminded of rugby players being caught up in dwarf-tossing in a Queenstown backpackers’ bar, are increasingly infecting our gentlemen sports.

To judge by the supposed apology for Sunday night’s incident, dismissed by Swann as a “call of nature”, the England and Wales Cricket Board is also mirroring football’s capacity for insipid PR-speak. “As a team we pride ourselves on respecting all things cricket,” the statement read.

Well, besides not respecting the opposition, the pitch, the over rate, or the concept of a batsman walking when he is out, what precisely do this side respect? It is difficult to conceive an action more inherently disrespectful than one where, after a compelling final day’s action, the winners then decide to relieve themselves on the very same patch of grass.

In cricket, just as in rugby, the apologists will always advance the tiresome ‘boys will be boys’ defence. The wisdom prevails that as soon as stumps are drawn, the lads are free to engage in whatever outlandish form of hedonism floats their boat.

Thus do the tales of Ian Botham holding court at the Taj in Mumbai, forcing colleagues to neck king-size shots while quoting passages from the Gideon Bible, or that of David Boon drinking 52 ‘tinnies’ on the flight from Sydney to London in 1989 serve to enrich those players’ mystique.

Both Botham and Boon, admittedly, tend to pass that popular litmus test of ‘guys I wouldn’t mind sharing a pint with’. Urinating on the field of play, however, is the type of low-rent misdemeanour for which even footballers – especially footballers – would rightly be pilloried.

Stuart Broad, England’s unlikely enfant terrible of this Ashes series, naturally refused to comment on the issue on Wednesday. He merely spoke vapidly of “the end of the matter”, denying he had seen any newspaper headlines on a story that had colonised the agenda for three days.

Normally it is the football players who display this carefully cultivated remoteness, distancing themselves from controversy with a few meaningless banalities. But certain members of our cricket team are a breed apart when it comes to their engagement, or lack of it, with the subject at hand.

Kevin Pietersen had just made a beautifully composed century in the third Test at Old Trafford, only to alienate himself all over again with a monosyllabic masterpiece of a press conference. Does your knee hurt, Kevin? “Sometimes.” Will you need a rest at any point? “Nope.”

There is, of course, a history here. Pietersen, from the moment he lost the England captaincy in 2009, has loathed the press with a level of primal intensity that would make Sir Alex Ferguson’s vendettas look like playful badinage.

Given that his advocate-in-chief is that full-time celebrity leech, Piers Morgan, and that he now only grants interviews to his mates in the sport, KP does not exactly strain himself to project a lovable personality.

He is the emblem, alas, of a group of young men quite conspicuously unloved. While Alastair Cook’s side savour the satisfaction of a 3-0 series win, they ought to reflect upon how their uncompromising, occasionally cynical style of play denies them the acclaim that would otherwise be their due.

The ‘spirit of cricket’ can be a nebulous concept at the best of times but it refers, essentially, the notion of giving a little back to the game.

This is one department where Cook’s men – whether it be Broad’s time-wasting at Trent Bridge in taking off his shoe, or the England top order’s tactic of killing the match at the Oval with a glacial first-innings run rate – have been falling short all summer long.

On scoreline alone, England’s class of 2013 should command a place in the Ashes pantheon. And yet they are garlanded with nothing like the tributes showered upon the victorious teams of 2005 and 2009, when an open-top bus parade brought Trafalgar Square to a standstill or when Vauxhall residents would hang out of their balconies beside the Oval to watch the triumphant denouement.

The latest crop are a hardheaded, ferociously pragmatic bunch, but not in a fashion that redounds to their credit.

What they represent, as the ‘Splashgate’ after-party would illustrate, is just not cricket – or at least not as we would like to recognise it.

View the original article here

The Ashes showcased cricket at its best but game still ripe for corruption while fixers continue to swarm around T20

These are the words of Paul Condon, the former head of the Anti-Corruption and Security Unit, when he stepped down from his post in 2011. Corruption in cricket will flourish again, he said, unless…

By repeating these words two years on, I don't want to be a spoil-sport. Quite the opposite: I don't want our sport to be spoiled by match-fixing and spot-fixing.

Yet the Ashes series ended on such a high note that we can all too easily drift into the assumption that cricket worldwide, and in every format, is in fine and uncorrupted health.

Thanks primarily to Michael Clarke, every player contributed to making the last day of the fifth Test as entertaining as it could have been. Some lamented the decision to go off for bad light with four overs left, but that was the time to stop: it was much darker at the Oval than the television screen suggested.

Both umpires, in my opinion, had an almost perfect game. After a summer in which DRS played far too large a part, Aleem Dar of Pakistan and Kumar Dharmasena of Sri Lanka showed how Test umpiring should be done.

And it would have been most unjust if Australia, having made all the running, had lost. It is a sophisticated sport that does not reduce everything to winning and losing but allows for the shade of gray that is a draw.

But as Lord Condon warned us, we should not assume that cricket everywhere is alright.

A Test batsman has pleaded guilty to spot-fixing. Not a fringe player either, but one who has played 61 Tests and scored six Test hundreds, more than anybody else for Bangladesh: Mohammed Ashraful.

Mohammed Ashraful has pleaded guilty to spot fixing

The owner of Ashraful's T20 franchise, Dhaka Gladiators, has been charged with various offences along with eight other players, including Darren Stevens of Kent.

A pretty capable cricket XI can now be assembled of those charged with corruption, as the three Indian players who have been charged include the Test bowler Sree Sreesanth.

"Cricket will always be the global sport most vulnerable to corruption because of the nature of the game - every single ball generates multiple betting opportunities - and the consequential heavy volume of betting," as Lord Condon stated in the Sunday Telegraph two years ago.

"The fixers do not have to fix the outcome of the whole match to arrange a betting coup. The cricketers involved use the twisted logic that they can deliver the fixed event for the betting coup and still go on to win the match."

And while Ashes cricket clings to an old tradition of different values, franchise-owned T20 leagues proliferate around the world. Some players are contracted to a number of teams and cannot feel deep loyalty to all of them.

Lord Condon went on: "In the frenzy of commercialisation cricketers are immersed in a heady atmosphere of monopoly money bidding for franchises, teams and players. An 'anything goes' party atmosphere, with more and more agents, celebrities and even previous fixers re-emerging at matches can seduce cricketers into a flawed and toxic justification for their occasional spot-fixing."

Have the ICC and every national board "shown leadership and determination to keep malpractice to an absolute minimum"?

Some have, some have not. And to judge by the number of "previous fixers" swarming around these T20 leagues, some as coaches and commentators, I for one do not assume that underneath the surface professional cricket worldwide is in a healthy and uncorrupted state.

View the original article here

'I just try to convey my enjoyment of cricket'

Now as 40 years ago, Bill Lawry can get excited at the drop of a hat - by a shot, a ball, a catch. His job, he says, is to make the man in the garden come into the house to check what happened

A lot of commentary today is noise. Just gratuitous and grating shouting. Yet one of the most loved commentators of all time is a shouter. Like the rest today, Bill Lawry too is a peddler, but he sells enjoyment of the cricket. Talking to him, you understand why his loudness doesn't jar. This interview was after Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke had both scored double-centuries on the second day of the Adelaide Test between Australia and India, and Brad Haddin was trying to get some quick runs to set up a declaration. It wasn't the most gripping spell of cricket, but you couldn't take Lawry's eye off the cricket, even when he was answering questions. Once, during an answer, he went, "There he goes…" He restrained himself, and even though it was all happening out there, he was clean as a whistle until it was all over.

How did you first get into commentary?
I first got into commentary when we were playing state one-day games. There were Richie Benaud, myself and Bobby Simpson, working for Channel 10. Channel 0 [it was called] back then. We did one or two of those, on small grounds. And then, of course, along comes Kerry Packer in 1977-78, and the first commentary team was Richie Benaud, Fred Trueman, Keith Stackpole, and myself.

I was an estate manager for a manufacturing company and had a full-time job. This just came along. Something new. Under lights, coloured clothing. We had a great time.

Keith Stackpole and I had never done television over a long period before, and Frank Tyson joined the team as well. And we had guest commentators over the years come from every country.

Were there any nerves the first time?
Well, there were but it was quite a good feeling to have Richie Benaud there. Richie had been commentating in England since 1960-61, so we had his experience.

It was all new. Everybody was excited. We had cameras at both ends for the first time in the history of the game. We had cameras square of the wicket. We had all these wonderful new things. Exciting time. Very lucky to be there.

And of course we had very good players. Australia had the Chappell brothers and Lillee and Marsh, and all these types of guys. The World XI was Tony Greig, and West Indies with Clive Lloyd, and all their wonderful cricketers. It was just an exciting time. Changing of the guard as far as cricket was concerned. All of a sudden we had an outside promoter promoting the game rather than the cricket boards.

Did you have any reservations against putting your name behind this non-traditional cricket?
I didn't have any reservations, because as former players we were unhappy with the amount of money we were being paid. Once Kerry Packer came along, it became a professional sport. What we see today, 40 years on, what we take for granted, all started with World Series Cricket. He paid the players well, the crowds were big, we went full-time on television.

Were you asked to make it sound more exciting?
No. We had no instructions whatsoever.

Did you expect to make such a long career out of it?
No. It was not a career for me. Until I retired at 65 - I'm 74 now - I did this for fun. I got a pay obviously, but I did it for fun. Just an add-on to my working career. It's just been a wonderful enjoyment. I enjoy the money - because I never got any money when I played - but I have enjoyed more the thrill of watching great players over the last 40 years. The Vivian Richardses, the Lillees, the Chappell brothers, the Bothams. In recent times we have got the Pontings and the Shane Warnes...

"When I was on my first tour of England, I come in after the game, and Mr Jack Fingleton [then a journalist] called me aside and said, 'Bill it's great to be enthusiastic, but you shouldn't be appealing for lbws at deep midwicket'"

You were an intense batsman. As a commentator did you go back home and analyse how you did that day?
I never treated it like that. Our first producer was a guy called David Hill. And he just said, "Be yourself." That's all. I just come along to enjoy the cricket, and hopefully convey to the people at home that I am enjoying the cricket, and it's a great game, and enjoy the skill. We have been here and seen Clarke and Ponting score double-hundreds. I mean, how fortunate are we to be sitting right behind the wicket? There are people at work, and people at the beach - they come home and all of a sudden they find two double-hundreds. Richie and I for the last 30-odd years have seen all this happen. It's wonderful.

You said your first producer told you to be yourself. Our impression of you was of a stodgy opening batsman.
Well, that's right. But I scored the first one-day hundred in Australia. (Laughs) That's a record Ponting or Bradman hasn't got. (Laughs)

It was different, I suppose. We were playing as amateurs. We just went out to enjoy batting. I just enjoyed batting. I think today, obviously, you are getting a lot of money to perform well. We probably had a different attitude. We just played to win the game.

As a commentator were you this excitable always?
Well, I was always excitable when I played. It might not have shown in my batting, but I always appealed the loudest in the field. In fact when I was on my first tour of England, I was fielding at square leg or somewhere, and I come in after the game, and Mr Jack Fingleton [then a journalist] called me aside and said, "Bill it's great to be enthusiastic, but you shouldn't be appealing for lbws at deep midwicket."

How did the phrases come about? "It's all happening." "It's all over at the WACA." "Clean as a whistle."
They just come out. Just pick up the mic. Nothing is pre-planned. I don't sit down and do any homework, apart from studying who the players are.

I have been very lucky. I have seen some wonderful moments. Once [Shahid] Afridi hit two sixes off the first two balls down in Hobart. Those are great moments to be on air. Also, it helps to be on first, which I do a lot of the time. In Test matches you might get two wickets in the first two overs, and you only get three wickets on some other days. You have got to make sure when you get those wickets, that everybody at home - if he is outside in the garden - comes in to see what is going on. You want him to say, "What was that noise?" and go in and see a wicket has fallen.

How much of your commentary is science? How much of it is instinct?
Mine's all instinct. I just try and call it each ball as I see it. I love to get a wicket, I love to get a great catch or a run-out. I just try and be involved without going over the top.

I don't try and analyse it too much. I just try and bring in my experiences as a player. I realise that probably 70% of the people at home are not cricket experts. The people that come here probably understand the game 80%. The people at home don't understand that much. I try and explain it to them. When we first started, David Hill actually had a chart up on the wall with field positions, because when we were saying to somebody who has migrated to Australia, "He has got a man at leg gully", what does leg gully mean to a 14-year-old girl or a young boy who is not brought up in a cricketing family? What is silly point? A traffic stop or something?

A bowler starts to think where he is going to pitch the ball before he starts running in. When you are off air, what do you do?
I watch every ball when I am at the cricket.

Even when you are not on air? I always watch. I don't bring a computer to the ground. I don't do any other work at all. I just watch the game. That was because David Hill earlier on said that if you are on next, I don't want you to repeat what the guy before said. Most times I sit in there, I watch what's going on, so when I am on, I have got my thoughts, not Richie Benaud's or Tony Greig's. And I love watching the cricket, and I have always loved watching it, and I think you can learn by watching.
"I think today, obviously, you are getting a lot of money to perform well. We probably had a different attitude. We just played to win the game. That's all I wanted to do - go out and win" © PA Photos
Richie Benaud is a man of few words. He is an analyst. He analyses the game. Tony Greig talks about Africa. He cares about Africa. All that sort of stuff. I bring out my feelings about the game. Tony and Ian [Chappell], they have been there since the World Series ended. We have been there 30 years as well. Luckily there have been very few changes. Not only are we working together, we are great mates. You don't have a 30-year career as a cricketer. I said to my wife - when I met her, I was 19 years old and I was playing for Victoria - this will last only five or six years, this cricket.

I have been one of the lucky generation to have gone on from being an amateur to a professional on television but not as a career, as a hobby and a delight.

You were once quoted saying you enjoyed this more than your cricket. How can that be?
That's probably not quite right. Obviously you enjoy the game more as a player. I suppose it was the times. When I first played for Australia I was a tradesman of tools. I'd work till five o'clock, I'd rush to practice, get there at 6 o'clock, and bat for 20 minutes in the dark. I'd love to have been a professional because you can train your skill all day. I often felt for our fast bowlers. They'd work a full day's work and get to practice at, say, 6pm and bowl for two overs and go home and go to work the next day. When we played four-day Shield games, we'd arrive on Thursday night and play on Friday and go to work the day it was over.

Could that have played a role in what kind of batsman you were?
I wasn't a slow scorer, really. I played one or two slow innings, but I think Bobby Simpson and I had a pretty good partnership, and I reckon our strike rate would be the same over our career. Not one or two games, where I might have batted all day for a 90 or something. That was something you do intentionally. You see a situation and say to yourself, "I am going to be here at stumps." That's part of your job. It's all very well to be flamboyant, but if you get beat, that's not a lot of fun.

Do you struggle to stay in your chair?
I jump up and down occasionally.

What do you enjoy the most? A six or a wicket or a run-out? Or a cartwheeling stump?
All types. I guess, reflecting back I would say what really excited me the most was when Hayden and Gilchrist were opening in the 50-over games. Up till then the plan seemed to be, if the openers got through the first 15 overs and you were none for 70, you had a real good start. All of a sudden Hayden and Gilchrist come out and they were 60 after eight overs. What you are trying to get across to people is, it's not easy. It's very skilful. Very few players who can do it. Walk out against the new ball, and go bang bang.

If you ask me the three most exciting cricketers I've seen, one of them I played one Test with was Dennis Lillee. I think I have to say Warne and Gilchrist in my memory were most exciting. Warne, because he is the best legspinner of all time, but Gilchrist is the only wicketkeeper in the history of the game to come in at No. 7 and change the game in an hour. You could be 6 for nothing, and he could come out and change it with a quick hundred. So they remain in my mind.

Some of the great catches... I remember Allan Border catching [Mike] Gatting at the MCG at first slip in a one-dayer. Still in my mind, diving to his left. Glenn McGrath's catch here. Things like that stick in your mind. Of course you remember the dropped catches. Earlier people wouldn't know if a catch was dropped. Now with TV the whole world sees it.

Who is your favourite commentator to work with?
I suppose I'd have to say Richie. Richie was my first Test captain, and he was a very good cricket captain, but he has been an exceptional captain of the Channel 9 team. He has set the standard. He gave us credibility, and his knowledge of the game was fantastic. Blokes like myself were allowed to be a bit vocal because he was the steady influence on the other side of the mic. You could always look up and see Richie was there and feel safe.

Has he ever had to restrain you? "Steady on Bill"
Never. Never ever said that. No. Richie is not like that. If you are going to hang yourself, Richie will let you hang yourself. "I watch every ball. I don't bring a computer to the ground. I don't do any other work. I just watch the game. That was because I was told: if you are on next, I don't want you to repeat what the guy before said" He has been sensational, and a good friend of mine since 1975, but he has been more than that. He has been a sort of rock to lean on. When you go to the ground it is great to see Richie there. He was the host commentator there until Mark Nicholas came along.

Tony Greig and myself are very good friends. Ian Chappell and I played together, and I can honestly say none of us have said a cuss word in 30 years. I don't think there has ever been an argument. That's full credit to the producers and the directors.

The guys who do the best job, who we don't mention, are the cameramen. They stand out in the heat for six hours and rarely miss anything.

Have you ever met Billy Birmingham?
No. Billy Birmingham is very interesting because when he made those tapes, I was cricket manager of Victoria, and I'd go out to schools, and obviously a six-year-old kid had no idea who I was because I wasn't playing then. They'd say, "Are you Billy Birmingham?" I'd say, "I wish I was."

Who are you favourite commentators?
Unfair to pick out any. I'd have to rate Richie as No. 1. I used to enjoy Keith Stackpole, an old team-mate. I enjoy being with Tony Greig because we are always challenging each other. That's good. You have got to have your own point of view. Sometimes it gets a bit argumentative. That's fine, as long as it is not spiteful. And I obviously liked Michael Holding because his voice was so soft. Couldn't understand what he was saying half the time, but I loved his voice. Freddie Trueman in the early days was good. Freddie would be smoking his pipe, which is unheard of today. Tony Cozier from the West Indies. We have had some wonderful overseas commentators. They have all been wonderful, and they have all been different. That's the reason why I enjoy it.

Cricket has changed completely since when you started. Do you ever get cynical?
I never get cynical because I think back and think I have been very lucky. The fact that I played and toured England for seven months and played every county and did it for no money gave me more of an appreciation of the game. The difference was, when I played, you never said you had an injury, because if you dropped off, you never got back. Players get injured today, they put them on leave for months, and back they come.

Sidharth Monga is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Feeds: Sidharth Monga © ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

View the original article here

'I love Test cricket, but I'm also a realist'

Shane Bond explains his retirement from long-form cricket, and talks about New Zealand's talent pool, his likely successors, and his plans for the future

New Zealand have always been a promising side but have failed to be in the top bracket. Why do you think they remain on the fringes?
We have always been a competitive one-day side. In Test cricket we seem to struggle to put big runs on the board consistently for two innings. We have always bowled pretty well but it is the runs factor in the last few years that has us a little bit inconsistent in Test cricket. The other factor is, we have lost players through the years to injuries, and because we don't have the depth, it hits us harder than some other teams.

Could it also be because cricket is not the primary sport in New Zealand, and the long shadow of rugby probably hurts the development of players?
Look, cricket is the No. 2 sport. Previously there were a lot of rugby players who were good cricket players as well, so they had to make a choice. But with the IPL around, there is a real career in cricket, so that may change in the future. It comes in waves. Early in the 2000s we climbed to No. 3 in Test rankings, when we had an experienced team mixed with some good young players. At the moment we are sort of more an inexperienced team. But hopefully in the next five years we can push our way back up.

What about the money? Is it appealing enough for a youngster to think of cricket as a future career?
It is definitely not about the money. It is just pure numbers. Cricket is still a hugely popular game, but we have so few players that we are not going to have a massive amount of outstanding players come through. But we still are a very talented side. We just lack that ability to play at the top level: mainly, in first-class cricket we just don't get to face good fast bowling or we are not exposed to guys like Murali [Mutiah Muralitharan] or Harbhajan [Singh]. So when you make the step up to Test cricket, all of a sudden you are exposed to that sort of bowling and it takes our players a little bit of time to adjust. It will take at least two or three years of playing Tests for them to feel comfortable to face that level of bowling.

Do you think New Zealand cricket is being marginalised by the higher powers?
I don't think so. If we are not playing good Test cricket then people are not going to come to watch us. So it is up to us as a team to perform, and if we beat teams then people will come. It is harder for us because our season is limited by our weather. We spend a lot of time training indoors, and we don't get outdoors till late [in the season], which makes it bloody tough for our players. And our season is limited, where we have about four months to play at home. So I don't think we are being marginalised. It is just a product where people want to see just the best teams play the best teams and we are not one of the best teams in Tests at the moment.

Teams still take us seriously, but I can't say for certain a particular timeframe. We have some definite talent there in [Ross] Taylor, [Martin] Guptill. Obviously [Daniel] Vettori is such a key player and we can't afford to lose him. There is a lot on his shoulders, so it is going to be tough.

Is there too much on his plate? He is the captain, a virtual coach, and the best player in the team.
Mark Greatbatch's inclusion as a coach has relieved him somewhat. But that is what Dan wants to do - to lead from the front and set an example, which is what he does on and off the field. I hope he doesn't put too much on his shoulders, but he seems to be handling it okay at the moment. He is such a good player, but I still worry about him.

You mentioned a couple of young talents already. Who are the other players who are in a position to step up and share the leadership with Vettori?
Those two, and [Brendon] McCullum is obviously a senior player now. Our bowling is little bit thin and [Tim] Southee is our biggest talent. We forget he is only 21 and already has ups and downs, but I definitely like the attitude with which he plays. There is going to be a lot put on his shoulders in the next two years. You still might not see the best of him for another four or five years, but his skills and attitude make him a fine player. Then we have got Kane Williamson, who is a seriously talented batsman. Hopefully these guys will get the opportunities.

Apart from Southee, who do you think is ready to be your successor?
There aren't many quick bowlers coming around. There are a couple of guys in our Under-19 team who are good, but again, I don't think bowlers come into their prime till they are 24-25. We are a little bit thin on fast bowlers and don't have an out-and-out fast bowler in domestic cricket, except Andy McKay.

"If New Zealand are not playing good Test cricket then people are not going to come to watch us. So it is up to us as a team to perform, and if we beat teams then people will come"

Do you see yourself moving into a mentor's role to look after the young bowlers?
That is my plan, to move into coaching once I finish playing. I have got to get my Level 3 coaching certificate, and that is where I see myself - assisting the young guys at the domestic level.

How difficult was it to retire from Test cricket?
It was tough. I love Test cricket and always felt I was a Test bowler first and foremost. Test cricket is about getting people out and that's what I do: I got people out. A lot of goals I wanted to achieve were built around Test cricket, but I am also a realist. I realised every time I played four- or five-day cricket, I broke if I played few games on the bounce. It is just the way I played: I find it difficult to hold back. I just go hard. It hurt me. But I wanted to keep playing. I have had enough injuries. I am sick and tired of being in rehab, and if I did that one more time I would've been probably finished. I wanted to finish playing rather than get injured and fall by the side.

Did you ever keep count of the injuries?
No. Because I know how many times I've had to come back and do the hard work to get back on the park. The most frustrating thing was, a lot of times I've thought: "This is it, I am going to go on a real good run here" and I have got back to playing my absolute best cricket and then there has been an injury.

What advice would you give youngsters coming out of injury?
You have to manage yourself well. I still see it now when I play with guys who are injured and they want to be back for a game that is, say, six weeks down the line. You've just got to come back when you are fully fit. Too many people - and I have made the mistake in the past - sometimes rush back to make a tour or a series even when they are not a 100% fit. You are better off taking it step by step; do your rehab properly, get yourself back in the condition you need to be in, build your bowling up, and then get ready at the right time.

Are you saying you made that mistake yourself? Can you give us an example?
I was coming from a back injury - I had fractured it twice - to the England tour in 2004. Even if I had done the rehab, I had played only one game before the tour, bowling just 10 overs. Once in England, I played a couple of first-class games and I broke my back again. I just wasn't ready for it. It is hard to say, "Look, I'm not ready." I wouldn't make that mistake again now.

Eighty-seven Test wickets - so close to the 100 mark. It must have crossed your mind many times before you decided to quit?
I wanted to try and get to 150 Test wickets. That is what I planned when I came back the last time. I wanted to just keep trying. And that was the hardest thing. My motivation to play Test cricket always was to get 50 runs with the bat and take 150 Test wickets. When I came back against Pakistan, I felt I had the opportunity once again to achieve those goals, and then, bang, I got injured. It was demoralising.

"Southee is our biggest talent. There is going to be a lot put on his shoulders in the next two years" © Getty Images

Would you make a comeback?
Test cricket? No chance. Not the way I feel right now.

What is the most difficult thing about fast bowling?
It is bowling when you are sore and uncomfortable, especially in today's game, when you are bowling day in and day out. The hardest thing about bowling is, you know you are going to get hurt at some point. Injury is inevitable. You are just doing everything to stop it. Some guys last longer than others, but sometimes when you get that injury, you tend to get injured again and again.

Steve Waugh reckons there is too much diagnosis of players now. According to him that is adding to the problem rather than resolving. How do you see this?
You always play with niggles. As a player, I know what is sore, what is a niggle and what could blow into something big. Most bowlers want clarity. It is the fear of the unknown: "I am going to go into a game here. There is something not quite right. I don't know what it is." I'd rather know what it is. So if I get a scan, at least I know it is not a tear. It is a professional sport. There is a lot more at stake. The more information you get, the better it is, because at least then I am making an informed decision.

Did you ever find the answer to why you were getting injured so often?
Probably, it was just because of the way I bowled. I struggled to bowl within myself. A lot of bowlers bowl at 90%. I always bowled as hard I could. The thing that hurt me the most was, I was really lazy in my late teens. Because of that, I got a lot of back problems. So I missed a lot of years from 17 to 23. I never had a good base for bowling. I just lacked it. I went away from cricket, and then I am back, and all of a sudden bowling proper fast. I played a little bit of cricket and I was in the New Zealand team suddenly. I went from a little bit of cricket to international cricket, where I am bowling fast. That catch-up was too much. The difference in intensity at domestic and international levels is massive and people don't appreciate how big it is. I just played with that intensity and it took its toll.

Incidentally, you made your international debut because Dion Nash got injured, didn't you?
Yes, I did. I got my chance on an A tour because Scott Styris got injured, and then I got my international chance because Nash and [Shayne] O'Connor got injured in Australia. A lot of players have come in because of someone else's misfortunes.

Do you think the lack of successors plays a role in injuries to fast bowlers?
Yes. For example, if a series is on the line with the score at 1-1, the team doesn't want to risk resting the strike bowler.

Did you consider changing into a line-and-length bowler to prolong your career? Something even someone like Richard Hadlee did.
No, never. People asked me why I didn't ever slow down. But I always saw my value to the team as a strike bowler, Olympic bowler. I give the results because I bowl the way I do. People said I could bowl at 90%. Sure, I have had injures, but I feel I have been a pretty successful bowler the way I am, so why would I change? I'd rather have a shorter career and be successful than stretch it out and let my performance drop.

Is there anything that can be done to preserve fast bowlers?
I worry that fast bowlers are going to withdraw from Test cricket early to play limited-overs cricket. Most fast bowlers break down while playing the longer form, since the ability to rest and rotate is always tough. Bowlers are almost going to be like pitchers, where you play a game and sit out the next, because of the amount of cricket played these days. Australia are lucky because they win more than they lose. They seem to rotate bowlers even during series and still win. People tend to forget they are resting and rotating and giving guys a week off here and there. A lot of the other teams, because they are struggling to win 50-50, are just playing their best team all the time, and they suffer when there are injuries.

"People said I could bowl at 90%. Sure, I have had injures, but I feel I have been a pretty successful bowler the way I am, so why would I change? I'd rather have a shorter career and be successful than stretch it out and let my performance drop"

Is Twenty20 a safer alternative?
Definitely, because it is not day-in-day-out stuff. You know you can go hard for four overs without getting yourself to the point of physical exhaustion even if you happen to bowl again. You are not risking injury like you would when bowling eight- to nine-over spells, which sometimes can be dangerous. In Twenty20, it is much easier.

What do you think will be the long-term impact of the IPL on New Zealand cricket?
The more players we can get exposed to play the IPL, the better it would be for our cricket. Playing in subcontinental conditions, in front of big crowds, against quality spinners under pressure, and also alongside other international players, will teach them various things. It can only mean good for our players.

You took up the ICL offer because the board felt they wanted to move on. Did you feel let down by New Zealand Cricket?
I was. I had a clearance to go and play. It was sad at the time. But I understood the reasons behind the board's decision. Still, it didn't make it easy. But it doesn't bother me anymore. I am happy to be back.

Are Twenty20 leagues a good retirement option for fast bowlers?
I don't look at it as a retirement option. I couldn't retire from international cricket and just play. My motivation comes from achieving stuff for New Zealand. The money is great but you don't play for the money. You play to win, I suppose.

Would you say you underachieved, given your talent, or overachieved despite the injuries?
Statistically, I have overachieved. I have had a stunted career because of the injuries. It gives me a lot of satisfaction that in my last series I bowled at 150kph in a couple of games, despite all the screws and the shit in my back, which is stiff as a board. I'm nearly 35, and to come out and bowl as quick as that gives me satisfaction. I am not fighting it any more. I am enjoying it. I used to be pretty intense and wound up even if I missed a practice session. I am a more relaxed player after my comeback.

Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at Cricinfo

Feeds: Nagraj Gollapudi © ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

View the original article here

Zimbabwe bring focus back to cricket

Match facts

Friday, August 23, 2013
Start time 1330 local (1130 GMT) Big Picture

In a relatively quiet month for international cricket, save for the ongoing marquee Test series in England, Zimbabwe and Pakistan have managed to shoehorn a series to fill a gap in the calendar. Shortly after the series was confirmed came the off-field distraction involving the Zimbabwe players and the cricket board. A familiar pay dispute led to fears over whether the tour would get under way but, thankfully, the players made peace with the board with the formation of a players union. The dispute, however, disrupted the hosts' practice schedules and though they have since resumed training, it remains to be seen if it has been sufficient. This is in contrast to the preparations ahead of the recent home series against India. The players trained for ten weeks, but it wasn't enough to stretch an experimental Indian side. The batting was the biggest let down, followed by the fielding. The result was a 5-0 thrashing. It will only get tougher against Pakistan, who're playing full strength despite the low-profile nature of the tour.

Prosper Utseya, the offspinner, has insisted that the players are in the right frame of mind. "We have managed to put that [contractual issue] behind now and some of the players have been offered contracts," Utseya told the Zimbabwe Herald. "Obviously I am not sure what they've got, but they looked happy. It is good that ZC have managed to meet us halfway going into the series."

Series wins in the West Indies have given Pakistan confidence after the gloom of the Champions Trophy. The performances of the youngsters in the two T20s in the West Indies, including Umar Amin and Zulfiqar Babar, should have pleased them immensely. A few players have been busy in the Caribbean Premier League, though, among them, only Mohammad Hafeez features in the upcoming T20s. The rest of the squad have been training in Lahore.

Form guide

Pakistan WWWLW (last five completed matches, most recent first)
Zimbabwe LWLLL Players to watch

Sikandar Raza is likely to play his first game against the country of his birth, but that alone shouldn't be the only talking point about him. Raza's 82 against India was the highest individual score by a Zimbabwe batsman in the series and though his form fell away in the remaining games, it marked him down as a player to watch. What Raza needs is consistent scores to keep his place in the XI. Zulfiqar Babar had to wait till he was 34 to get his first opportunity for Pakistan. The left-arm spinner was picked in the T20 squad for the West Indies and had a dream debut, taking 3 for 23, but his job didn't end there. Batting at No. 8, Babar had the honour of facing the final ball of the match with one needed to win. He finished the game with a swagger, hitting a six. He ended the two-match series with five wickets and the expectations off him would have increased.

Team news

Zimbabwe trimmed their practice squad to 15 on the eve of the series. There were no surprises in the squad.* Zimbabwe (possible): 1 Vusi Sibanda, 2 Hamilton Masakadza, 3 Sikandar Raza, 4 Brendan Taylor (capt & wk), 5 Malcolm Waller, 6 Sean Williams, 7 Shingi Masakadza, 8 Prosper Utseya, 9 Natsai M'shangwe, 10 Brian Vitori, 11 Tinashe Panyangara

Pakistan are without Umar Akmal for the series, after he was withdrawn after suffering a seizure while flying in the West Indies. Sarfraz Ahmed was named the replacement wicketkeeper.

Pakistan (likely): 1 Nasir Jamshed, 2 Mohammad Hafeez (capt), 3 Ahmed Shehzad, 4 Umar Amin, 5 Haris Sohail, 6 Shahid Afridi, 7 Sarfraz Ahmed (wk), 8 Sohail Tanvir, 9 Zulfiqar Babar, 10 Saeed Ajmal, 11 Asad Ali

Stats and trivia

In the last bilateral series between these sides in Zimbabwe, in 2011, Pakistan won both T20s Shahid Afridi needs 84 more for 1000 T20 runs. Mohammad Hafeez is the only Pakistan batsman to pass that milestone. Umar Akmal is second with 929. Quotes

"Their batsmen are prone to cracking under pressure and that is what we will have to do if we are to get the better of them. We really need to put them under pressure and play smart cricket."
Zimbabwe's Prosper Utseya * - 15.30 GMT, August 22, 2013 - Story updated following Zimbabwe's squad announcement

Kanishkaa Balachandran is a senior sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo

Feeds: Kanishkaa Balachandran © ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

View the original article here

'I love Test cricket, but I'm also a realist'

Shane Bond explains his retirement from long-form cricket, and talks about New Zealand's talent pool, his likely successors, and his plans for the future

New Zealand have always been a promising side but have failed to be in the top bracket. Why do you think they remain on the fringes?
We have always been a competitive one-day side. In Test cricket we seem to struggle to put big runs on the board consistently for two innings. We have always bowled pretty well but it is the runs factor in the last few years that has us a little bit inconsistent in Test cricket. The other factor is, we have lost players through the years to injuries, and because we don't have the depth, it hits us harder than some other teams.

Could it also be because cricket is not the primary sport in New Zealand, and the long shadow of rugby probably hurts the development of players?
Look, cricket is the No. 2 sport. Previously there were a lot of rugby players who were good cricket players as well, so they had to make a choice. But with the IPL around, there is a real career in cricket, so that may change in the future. It comes in waves. Early in the 2000s we climbed to No. 3 in Test rankings, when we had an experienced team mixed with some good young players. At the moment we are sort of more an inexperienced team. But hopefully in the next five years we can push our way back up.

What about the money? Is it appealing enough for a youngster to think of cricket as a future career?
It is definitely not about the money. It is just pure numbers. Cricket is still a hugely popular game, but we have so few players that we are not going to have a massive amount of outstanding players come through. But we still are a very talented side. We just lack that ability to play at the top level: mainly, in first-class cricket we just don't get to face good fast bowling or we are not exposed to guys like Murali [Mutiah Muralitharan] or Harbhajan [Singh]. So when you make the step up to Test cricket, all of a sudden you are exposed to that sort of bowling and it takes our players a little bit of time to adjust. It will take at least two or three years of playing Tests for them to feel comfortable to face that level of bowling.

Do you think New Zealand cricket is being marginalised by the higher powers?
I don't think so. If we are not playing good Test cricket then people are not going to come to watch us. So it is up to us as a team to perform, and if we beat teams then people will come. It is harder for us because our season is limited by our weather. We spend a lot of time training indoors, and we don't get outdoors till late [in the season], which makes it bloody tough for our players. And our season is limited, where we have about four months to play at home. So I don't think we are being marginalised. It is just a product where people want to see just the best teams play the best teams and we are not one of the best teams in Tests at the moment.

Teams still take us seriously, but I can't say for certain a particular timeframe. We have some definite talent there in [Ross] Taylor, [Martin] Guptill. Obviously [Daniel] Vettori is such a key player and we can't afford to lose him. There is a lot on his shoulders, so it is going to be tough.

Is there too much on his plate? He is the captain, a virtual coach, and the best player in the team.
Mark Greatbatch's inclusion as a coach has relieved him somewhat. But that is what Dan wants to do - to lead from the front and set an example, which is what he does on and off the field. I hope he doesn't put too much on his shoulders, but he seems to be handling it okay at the moment. He is such a good player, but I still worry about him.

You mentioned a couple of young talents already. Who are the other players who are in a position to step up and share the leadership with Vettori?
Those two, and [Brendon] McCullum is obviously a senior player now. Our bowling is little bit thin and [Tim] Southee is our biggest talent. We forget he is only 21 and already has ups and downs, but I definitely like the attitude with which he plays. There is going to be a lot put on his shoulders in the next two years. You still might not see the best of him for another four or five years, but his skills and attitude make him a fine player. Then we have got Kane Williamson, who is a seriously talented batsman. Hopefully these guys will get the opportunities.

Apart from Southee, who do you think is ready to be your successor?
There aren't many quick bowlers coming around. There are a couple of guys in our Under-19 team who are good, but again, I don't think bowlers come into their prime till they are 24-25. We are a little bit thin on fast bowlers and don't have an out-and-out fast bowler in domestic cricket, except Andy McKay.

"If New Zealand are not playing good Test cricket then people are not going to come to watch us. So it is up to us as a team to perform, and if we beat teams then people will come"

Do you see yourself moving into a mentor's role to look after the young bowlers?
That is my plan, to move into coaching once I finish playing. I have got to get my Level 3 coaching certificate, and that is where I see myself - assisting the young guys at the domestic level.

How difficult was it to retire from Test cricket?
It was tough. I love Test cricket and always felt I was a Test bowler first and foremost. Test cricket is about getting people out and that's what I do: I got people out. A lot of goals I wanted to achieve were built around Test cricket, but I am also a realist. I realised every time I played four- or five-day cricket, I broke if I played few games on the bounce. It is just the way I played: I find it difficult to hold back. I just go hard. It hurt me. But I wanted to keep playing. I have had enough injuries. I am sick and tired of being in rehab, and if I did that one more time I would've been probably finished. I wanted to finish playing rather than get injured and fall by the side.

Did you ever keep count of the injuries?
No. Because I know how many times I've had to come back and do the hard work to get back on the park. The most frustrating thing was, a lot of times I've thought: "This is it, I am going to go on a real good run here" and I have got back to playing my absolute best cricket and then there has been an injury.

What advice would you give youngsters coming out of injury?
You have to manage yourself well. I still see it now when I play with guys who are injured and they want to be back for a game that is, say, six weeks down the line. You've just got to come back when you are fully fit. Too many people - and I have made the mistake in the past - sometimes rush back to make a tour or a series even when they are not a 100% fit. You are better off taking it step by step; do your rehab properly, get yourself back in the condition you need to be in, build your bowling up, and then get ready at the right time.

Are you saying you made that mistake yourself? Can you give us an example?
I was coming from a back injury - I had fractured it twice - to the England tour in 2004. Even if I had done the rehab, I had played only one game before the tour, bowling just 10 overs. Once in England, I played a couple of first-class games and I broke my back again. I just wasn't ready for it. It is hard to say, "Look, I'm not ready." I wouldn't make that mistake again now.

Eighty-seven Test wickets - so close to the 100 mark. It must have crossed your mind many times before you decided to quit?
I wanted to try and get to 150 Test wickets. That is what I planned when I came back the last time. I wanted to just keep trying. And that was the hardest thing. My motivation to play Test cricket always was to get 50 runs with the bat and take 150 Test wickets. When I came back against Pakistan, I felt I had the opportunity once again to achieve those goals, and then, bang, I got injured. It was demoralising.

"Southee is our biggest talent. There is going to be a lot put on his shoulders in the next two years" © Getty Images

Would you make a comeback?
Test cricket? No chance. Not the way I feel right now.

What is the most difficult thing about fast bowling?
It is bowling when you are sore and uncomfortable, especially in today's game, when you are bowling day in and day out. The hardest thing about bowling is, you know you are going to get hurt at some point. Injury is inevitable. You are just doing everything to stop it. Some guys last longer than others, but sometimes when you get that injury, you tend to get injured again and again.

Steve Waugh reckons there is too much diagnosis of players now. According to him that is adding to the problem rather than resolving. How do you see this?
You always play with niggles. As a player, I know what is sore, what is a niggle and what could blow into something big. Most bowlers want clarity. It is the fear of the unknown: "I am going to go into a game here. There is something not quite right. I don't know what it is." I'd rather know what it is. So if I get a scan, at least I know it is not a tear. It is a professional sport. There is a lot more at stake. The more information you get, the better it is, because at least then I am making an informed decision.

Did you ever find the answer to why you were getting injured so often?
Probably, it was just because of the way I bowled. I struggled to bowl within myself. A lot of bowlers bowl at 90%. I always bowled as hard I could. The thing that hurt me the most was, I was really lazy in my late teens. Because of that, I got a lot of back problems. So I missed a lot of years from 17 to 23. I never had a good base for bowling. I just lacked it. I went away from cricket, and then I am back, and all of a sudden bowling proper fast. I played a little bit of cricket and I was in the New Zealand team suddenly. I went from a little bit of cricket to international cricket, where I am bowling fast. That catch-up was too much. The difference in intensity at domestic and international levels is massive and people don't appreciate how big it is. I just played with that intensity and it took its toll.

Incidentally, you made your international debut because Dion Nash got injured, didn't you?
Yes, I did. I got my chance on an A tour because Scott Styris got injured, and then I got my international chance because Nash and [Shayne] O'Connor got injured in Australia. A lot of players have come in because of someone else's misfortunes.

Do you think the lack of successors plays a role in injuries to fast bowlers?
Yes. For example, if a series is on the line with the score at 1-1, the team doesn't want to risk resting the strike bowler.

Did you consider changing into a line-and-length bowler to prolong your career? Something even someone like Richard Hadlee did.
No, never. People asked me why I didn't ever slow down. But I always saw my value to the team as a strike bowler, Olympic bowler. I give the results because I bowl the way I do. People said I could bowl at 90%. Sure, I have had injures, but I feel I have been a pretty successful bowler the way I am, so why would I change? I'd rather have a shorter career and be successful than stretch it out and let my performance drop.

Is there anything that can be done to preserve fast bowlers?
I worry that fast bowlers are going to withdraw from Test cricket early to play limited-overs cricket. Most fast bowlers break down while playing the longer form, since the ability to rest and rotate is always tough. Bowlers are almost going to be like pitchers, where you play a game and sit out the next, because of the amount of cricket played these days. Australia are lucky because they win more than they lose. They seem to rotate bowlers even during series and still win. People tend to forget they are resting and rotating and giving guys a week off here and there. A lot of the other teams, because they are struggling to win 50-50, are just playing their best team all the time, and they suffer when there are injuries.

"People said I could bowl at 90%. Sure, I have had injures, but I feel I have been a pretty successful bowler the way I am, so why would I change? I'd rather have a shorter career and be successful than stretch it out and let my performance drop"

Is Twenty20 a safer alternative?
Definitely, because it is not day-in-day-out stuff. You know you can go hard for four overs without getting yourself to the point of physical exhaustion even if you happen to bowl again. You are not risking injury like you would when bowling eight- to nine-over spells, which sometimes can be dangerous. In Twenty20, it is much easier.

What do you think will be the long-term impact of the IPL on New Zealand cricket?
The more players we can get exposed to play the IPL, the better it would be for our cricket. Playing in subcontinental conditions, in front of big crowds, against quality spinners under pressure, and also alongside other international players, will teach them various things. It can only mean good for our players.

You took up the ICL offer because the board felt they wanted to move on. Did you feel let down by New Zealand Cricket?
I was. I had a clearance to go and play. It was sad at the time. But I understood the reasons behind the board's decision. Still, it didn't make it easy. But it doesn't bother me anymore. I am happy to be back.

Are Twenty20 leagues a good retirement option for fast bowlers?
I don't look at it as a retirement option. I couldn't retire from international cricket and just play. My motivation comes from achieving stuff for New Zealand. The money is great but you don't play for the money. You play to win, I suppose.

Would you say you underachieved, given your talent, or overachieved despite the injuries?
Statistically, I have overachieved. I have had a stunted career because of the injuries. It gives me a lot of satisfaction that in my last series I bowled at 150kph in a couple of games, despite all the screws and the shit in my back, which is stiff as a board. I'm nearly 35, and to come out and bowl as quick as that gives me satisfaction. I am not fighting it any more. I am enjoying it. I used to be pretty intense and wound up even if I missed a practice session. I am a more relaxed player after my comeback.

Nagraj Gollapudi is an assistant editor at Cricinfo

Feeds: Nagraj Gollapudi © ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

View the original article here

'I just try to convey my enjoyment of cricket'

Now as 40 years ago, Bill Lawry can get excited at the drop of a hat - by a shot, a ball, a catch. His job, he says, is to make the man in the garden come into the house to check what happened

A lot of commentary today is noise. Just gratuitous and grating shouting. Yet one of the most loved commentators of all time is a shouter. Like the rest today, Bill Lawry too is a peddler, but he sells enjoyment of the cricket. Talking to him, you understand why his loudness doesn't jar. This interview was after Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke had both scored double-centuries on the second day of the Adelaide Test between Australia and India, and Brad Haddin was trying to get some quick runs to set up a declaration. It wasn't the most gripping spell of cricket, but you couldn't take Lawry's eye off the cricket, even when he was answering questions. Once, during an answer, he went, "There he goes…" He restrained himself, and even though it was all happening out there, he was clean as a whistle until it was all over.

How did you first get into commentary?
I first got into commentary when we were playing state one-day games. There were Richie Benaud, myself and Bobby Simpson, working for Channel 10. Channel 0 [it was called] back then. We did one or two of those, on small grounds. And then, of course, along comes Kerry Packer in 1977-78, and the first commentary team was Richie Benaud, Fred Trueman, Keith Stackpole, and myself.

I was an estate manager for a manufacturing company and had a full-time job. This just came along. Something new. Under lights, coloured clothing. We had a great time.

Keith Stackpole and I had never done television over a long period before, and Frank Tyson joined the team as well. And we had guest commentators over the years come from every country.

Were there any nerves the first time?
Well, there were but it was quite a good feeling to have Richie Benaud there. Richie had been commentating in England since 1960-61, so we had his experience.

It was all new. Everybody was excited. We had cameras at both ends for the first time in the history of the game. We had cameras square of the wicket. We had all these wonderful new things. Exciting time. Very lucky to be there.

And of course we had very good players. Australia had the Chappell brothers and Lillee and Marsh, and all these types of guys. The World XI was Tony Greig, and West Indies with Clive Lloyd, and all their wonderful cricketers. It was just an exciting time. Changing of the guard as far as cricket was concerned. All of a sudden we had an outside promoter promoting the game rather than the cricket boards.

Did you have any reservations against putting your name behind this non-traditional cricket?
I didn't have any reservations, because as former players we were unhappy with the amount of money we were being paid. Once Kerry Packer came along, it became a professional sport. What we see today, 40 years on, what we take for granted, all started with World Series Cricket. He paid the players well, the crowds were big, we went full-time on television.

Were you asked to make it sound more exciting?
No. We had no instructions whatsoever.

Did you expect to make such a long career out of it?
No. It was not a career for me. Until I retired at 65 - I'm 74 now - I did this for fun. I got a pay obviously, but I did it for fun. Just an add-on to my working career. It's just been a wonderful enjoyment. I enjoy the money - because I never got any money when I played - but I have enjoyed more the thrill of watching great players over the last 40 years. The Vivian Richardses, the Lillees, the Chappell brothers, the Bothams. In recent times we have got the Pontings and the Shane Warnes...

"When I was on my first tour of England, I come in after the game, and Mr Jack Fingleton [then a journalist] called me aside and said, 'Bill it's great to be enthusiastic, but you shouldn't be appealing for lbws at deep midwicket'"

You were an intense batsman. As a commentator did you go back home and analyse how you did that day?
I never treated it like that. Our first producer was a guy called David Hill. And he just said, "Be yourself." That's all. I just come along to enjoy the cricket, and hopefully convey to the people at home that I am enjoying the cricket, and it's a great game, and enjoy the skill. We have been here and seen Clarke and Ponting score double-hundreds. I mean, how fortunate are we to be sitting right behind the wicket? There are people at work, and people at the beach - they come home and all of a sudden they find two double-hundreds. Richie and I for the last 30-odd years have seen all this happen. It's wonderful.

You said your first producer told you to be yourself. Our impression of you was of a stodgy opening batsman.
Well, that's right. But I scored the first one-day hundred in Australia. (Laughs) That's a record Ponting or Bradman hasn't got. (Laughs)

It was different, I suppose. We were playing as amateurs. We just went out to enjoy batting. I just enjoyed batting. I think today, obviously, you are getting a lot of money to perform well. We probably had a different attitude. We just played to win the game.

As a commentator were you this excitable always?
Well, I was always excitable when I played. It might not have shown in my batting, but I always appealed the loudest in the field. In fact when I was on my first tour of England, I was fielding at square leg or somewhere, and I come in after the game, and Mr Jack Fingleton [then a journalist] called me aside and said, "Bill it's great to be enthusiastic, but you shouldn't be appealing for lbws at deep midwicket."

How did the phrases come about? "It's all happening." "It's all over at the WACA." "Clean as a whistle."
They just come out. Just pick up the mic. Nothing is pre-planned. I don't sit down and do any homework, apart from studying who the players are.

I have been very lucky. I have seen some wonderful moments. Once [Shahid] Afridi hit two sixes off the first two balls down in Hobart. Those are great moments to be on air. Also, it helps to be on first, which I do a lot of the time. In Test matches you might get two wickets in the first two overs, and you only get three wickets on some other days. You have got to make sure when you get those wickets, that everybody at home - if he is outside in the garden - comes in to see what is going on. You want him to say, "What was that noise?" and go in and see a wicket has fallen.

How much of your commentary is science? How much of it is instinct?
Mine's all instinct. I just try and call it each ball as I see it. I love to get a wicket, I love to get a great catch or a run-out. I just try and be involved without going over the top.

I don't try and analyse it too much. I just try and bring in my experiences as a player. I realise that probably 70% of the people at home are not cricket experts. The people that come here probably understand the game 80%. The people at home don't understand that much. I try and explain it to them. When we first started, David Hill actually had a chart up on the wall with field positions, because when we were saying to somebody who has migrated to Australia, "He has got a man at leg gully", what does leg gully mean to a 14-year-old girl or a young boy who is not brought up in a cricketing family? What is silly point? A traffic stop or something?

A bowler starts to think where he is going to pitch the ball before he starts running in. When you are off air, what do you do?
I watch every ball when I am at the cricket.

Even when you are not on air? I always watch. I don't bring a computer to the ground. I don't do any other work at all. I just watch the game. That was because David Hill earlier on said that if you are on next, I don't want you to repeat what the guy before said. Most times I sit in there, I watch what's going on, so when I am on, I have got my thoughts, not Richie Benaud's or Tony Greig's. And I love watching the cricket, and I have always loved watching it, and I think you can learn by watching.
"I think today, obviously, you are getting a lot of money to perform well. We probably had a different attitude. We just played to win the game. That's all I wanted to do - go out and win" © PA Photos
Richie Benaud is a man of few words. He is an analyst. He analyses the game. Tony Greig talks about Africa. He cares about Africa. All that sort of stuff. I bring out my feelings about the game. Tony and Ian [Chappell], they have been there since the World Series ended. We have been there 30 years as well. Luckily there have been very few changes. Not only are we working together, we are great mates. You don't have a 30-year career as a cricketer. I said to my wife - when I met her, I was 19 years old and I was playing for Victoria - this will last only five or six years, this cricket.

I have been one of the lucky generation to have gone on from being an amateur to a professional on television but not as a career, as a hobby and a delight.

You were once quoted saying you enjoyed this more than your cricket. How can that be?
That's probably not quite right. Obviously you enjoy the game more as a player. I suppose it was the times. When I first played for Australia I was a tradesman of tools. I'd work till five o'clock, I'd rush to practice, get there at 6 o'clock, and bat for 20 minutes in the dark. I'd love to have been a professional because you can train your skill all day. I often felt for our fast bowlers. They'd work a full day's work and get to practice at, say, 6pm and bowl for two overs and go home and go to work the next day. When we played four-day Shield games, we'd arrive on Thursday night and play on Friday and go to work the day it was over.

Could that have played a role in what kind of batsman you were?
I wasn't a slow scorer, really. I played one or two slow innings, but I think Bobby Simpson and I had a pretty good partnership, and I reckon our strike rate would be the same over our career. Not one or two games, where I might have batted all day for a 90 or something. That was something you do intentionally. You see a situation and say to yourself, "I am going to be here at stumps." That's part of your job. It's all very well to be flamboyant, but if you get beat, that's not a lot of fun.

Do you struggle to stay in your chair?
I jump up and down occasionally.

What do you enjoy the most? A six or a wicket or a run-out? Or a cartwheeling stump?
All types. I guess, reflecting back I would say what really excited me the most was when Hayden and Gilchrist were opening in the 50-over games. Up till then the plan seemed to be, if the openers got through the first 15 overs and you were none for 70, you had a real good start. All of a sudden Hayden and Gilchrist come out and they were 60 after eight overs. What you are trying to get across to people is, it's not easy. It's very skilful. Very few players who can do it. Walk out against the new ball, and go bang bang.

If you ask me the three most exciting cricketers I've seen, one of them I played one Test with was Dennis Lillee. I think I have to say Warne and Gilchrist in my memory were most exciting. Warne, because he is the best legspinner of all time, but Gilchrist is the only wicketkeeper in the history of the game to come in at No. 7 and change the game in an hour. You could be 6 for nothing, and he could come out and change it with a quick hundred. So they remain in my mind.

Some of the great catches... I remember Allan Border catching [Mike] Gatting at the MCG at first slip in a one-dayer. Still in my mind, diving to his left. Glenn McGrath's catch here. Things like that stick in your mind. Of course you remember the dropped catches. Earlier people wouldn't know if a catch was dropped. Now with TV the whole world sees it.

Who is your favourite commentator to work with?
I suppose I'd have to say Richie. Richie was my first Test captain, and he was a very good cricket captain, but he has been an exceptional captain of the Channel 9 team. He has set the standard. He gave us credibility, and his knowledge of the game was fantastic. Blokes like myself were allowed to be a bit vocal because he was the steady influence on the other side of the mic. You could always look up and see Richie was there and feel safe.

Has he ever had to restrain you? "Steady on Bill"
Never. Never ever said that. No. Richie is not like that. If you are going to hang yourself, Richie will let you hang yourself. "I watch every ball. I don't bring a computer to the ground. I don't do any other work. I just watch the game. That was because I was told: if you are on next, I don't want you to repeat what the guy before said" He has been sensational, and a good friend of mine since 1975, but he has been more than that. He has been a sort of rock to lean on. When you go to the ground it is great to see Richie there. He was the host commentator there until Mark Nicholas came along.

Tony Greig and myself are very good friends. Ian Chappell and I played together, and I can honestly say none of us have said a cuss word in 30 years. I don't think there has ever been an argument. That's full credit to the producers and the directors.

The guys who do the best job, who we don't mention, are the cameramen. They stand out in the heat for six hours and rarely miss anything.

Have you ever met Billy Birmingham?
No. Billy Birmingham is very interesting because when he made those tapes, I was cricket manager of Victoria, and I'd go out to schools, and obviously a six-year-old kid had no idea who I was because I wasn't playing then. They'd say, "Are you Billy Birmingham?" I'd say, "I wish I was."

Who are you favourite commentators?
Unfair to pick out any. I'd have to rate Richie as No. 1. I used to enjoy Keith Stackpole, an old team-mate. I enjoy being with Tony Greig because we are always challenging each other. That's good. You have got to have your own point of view. Sometimes it gets a bit argumentative. That's fine, as long as it is not spiteful. And I obviously liked Michael Holding because his voice was so soft. Couldn't understand what he was saying half the time, but I loved his voice. Freddie Trueman in the early days was good. Freddie would be smoking his pipe, which is unheard of today. Tony Cozier from the West Indies. We have had some wonderful overseas commentators. They have all been wonderful, and they have all been different. That's the reason why I enjoy it.

Cricket has changed completely since when you started. Do you ever get cynical?
I never get cynical because I think back and think I have been very lucky. The fact that I played and toured England for seven months and played every county and did it for no money gave me more of an appreciation of the game. The difference was, when I played, you never said you had an injury, because if you dropped off, you never got back. Players get injured today, they put them on leave for months, and back they come.

Sidharth Monga is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Feeds: Sidharth Monga © ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

View the original article here