When Dean Jones refused the money in the cake tin

Before the scope of corruption in the game became clear, Jones had provided a warning that was not heeded

Daniel Brettig28-Sep-2020In the aftermath of Dean Jones’ awfully sudden loss, his pioneering tendencies have been well and truly covered.Jones, it has been said, revolutionised the game through his attention to the details of one-day matches and innings, and an entertaining streak that made him a hero to far many more children, now adults, than perhaps even he realised. Barely an article or interview has gone by without a reference to him wearing sunglasses in the field, starting a trend that has remained to this day.What has been lost is arguably the most vital manner in which Jones was pioneering, certainly among cricketers in Australia. It was something for which he should have received far more credit, and it is to the detriment of administrators and leaders in the game at the time that Jones did not.Had more attention been paid to the rich cash offer Jones received from “John”, aka the Indian bookmaker MK Gupta, in Sri Lanka in 1992, an episode he immediately reported to the touring team’s leaders, there may have been a chance to stamp on the corruption fire before it grew so wildly out of control.ALSO READ: Ian Chappell – Dean Jones will always be known for Madras
Almost certainly, Mark Waugh and Shane Warne would not have been able to get into near identical information-sharing arrangements with “John” over the ensuing two years. At the very least, had there been greater publicity around the way that gambling influences had seeped beyond Asian teams into the Australian fold, there would have been absolutely no grounds for Waugh, Warne and others up to Hansie Cronje to claim naivety as well as stupidity.As recently as August, Jones gave a frank account of what had transpired 28 years ago at the Taj Samudra Hotel in Colombo, in a jovial YouTube interview. “The last Tests I played were in Sri Lanka and I actually got introduced by Manoj Prabhakar, an Indian Test cricketer, to ‘I’ve got a mate, we need to meet in the meeting room at the Taj hotel [in Colombo], because last year he got me a deal to wear some clothes or something and you get some money and you’ll do a couple of photo shoots, no big deal’, and I thought it’s the same.”So I walk downstairs and he says ‘I want you to meet my friend John’, and I say ‘so what do you want me to do’, and he says ‘I just want you to tell me, sometimes you have Craig McDermott bat at No. 4 as a pinch-hitter, what’s your team, who’s likely to do well and who’s likely not to do well’. He wasn’t telling me to fix anything, he just wanted knowledge. And I’ve gone ‘what’s in it for me’ and he brought up a cake tin and it had US$50,000 cash in it. I was earning that a year. Then he put the mobile phone on and said ‘you’ve got to ring me up when things are happening’.2:17

Ian Bishop – ‘Dean, an innovator in ODIs, a human being of great depth’

“You know when your gut says ‘no, this is not right’, so I’ve gone ‘no thanks, I’m good’. I wasn’t nasty, said ‘nice to meet you, all the best to you’. So I walked out and I remember I was in the elevator and I looked in the mirror and I looked at myself and thought ‘I think that’s the greatest thing you’ve ever done’, telling him to piss off.”It’s all there: the approach through a familiar intermediary, after Jones and Prabhakar had crossed paths countless times during India’s tour the previous Australian summer; the inordinately attractive sum of money for not much sweat relative to the trials of international cricket. There’s more: the reporting of the meeting is as telling as the meeting itself.”I went and reported it to Allan Border and to Bob Simpson and Cam Battersby our team manager,” Jones said. “And AB looked at me and said ‘if that’s all he wanted, why didn’t you take the money, there’s nothing wrong, you do that on radio or put it in a newspaper column’, he made a good point.”He said ‘he didn’t ask you to get out, or bat slow’ and I said ‘no, he just wanted knowledge … I just don’t think it’s right Allan’. By the way, I actually asked ‘John’ who else was doing it, and I’m not going to bring up names here, but there were other names in other teams, in every country.”ALSO READ: Thank you, Deano, for the many moments and memories
Laid out there and then are the more or less institutional combination of familiarity and naivety around the implications of such relationships, as personified by Border; and the implication of a far wider story that cricket officialdom had little understanding about and even less interest in.This was no surprise given a few of the tales told round this time. Jones had, in earlier years, even styled himself as an unofficial bookie in the Australian dressing room. On the 1989 Ashes tour he took on bets totalling £1200 in value against the possibility of Tim May hitting the first six of his life. When May cleared the boundary rope at Canterbury in a tour game, Jones paid up, somewhat regretfully. Before the 1992 Sri Lanka tour, while serving as Durham’s inaugural overseas player in a fixture against the touring Pakistanis, Jones was jokingly offered £1000 by Javed Miandad to get himself out before reaching a century. As was the case in Colombo a few months later, Jones found himself able to decline.Why did Jones say no? Above all, a frank and often tempestuous relationship with his father, Barney, ensured Jones knew the stakes. They had argued at length in the summer of 1984-85, when Jones, out of the Test side after making his debut in the West Indies, initially wanted to accept an offer to join the rebel tour of Apartheid South Africa. Barney was having none of it, in rows that Jones’ younger brothers have vividly recalled. He recounted his father’s angry words in : “If you go over there you’ll never play for Australia again … don’t go. At least you’ll be able to look in the mirror and tell your kids when you’re 40 that you didn’t sell your country out.”Mark Waugh and Shane Warne at the 1998 press conference where they admitted dealings with a bookmaker•Getty ImagesA few details of the Colombo story vary, depending on who tells it. The sum of cash offered to Jones ranges from US$40,000 to US$60,000. Testimony from Gupta and Prabhakar to the Indian police match-fixing investigation in 2000 indicated that Jones did not decline, merely that he did not immediately accept, and then did not follow up. Battersby, in Inside Story, related that Jones posed the offer as more of a question for management to answer.”Deano rang up and asked to come up and see me. He said: ‘I’ve had this approach from an Indian bookmaker. He wants to know what the weather’s like, how much rain there is, humidity, the state of the wicket, what’d I do if I won the toss. What do you think I should do?’ I said ‘Deano, I wouldn’t touch that with a bargepole. It may be completely innocent. But if you go out and get a blob first ball, and this came out, you’d never live it down.”What is absolutely consistent is that the approach was made, that Jones discussed it with the team’s leaders more or less immediately, and that he did not take up the offer. What’s more, he remained somewhat puzzled in subsequent days, months and years that the episode – particularly the fact he had been told that “John” had already formed relationships with at least one international representative from every other major cricketing nation – was not followed up.During the 1992-93 home summer, Jones pondered whether to write one of his columns for The Sunday Age on the subject, consulting with his ghostwriter, Mark Ray, who recalls a pair of exchanges over the phone. Jones: “I want to do a column about bookies in cricket – there are players giving bookies information. It’s pretty big, it’s secret, but there’s a helluva lot of money involved” Ray: “Sure, that’s a great column but we’ve already got one ready for this week, make some notes and get back to me.”By the following week, Jones was having second thoughts – perhaps not surprisingly in a season where his previously sure hold on a place in Australia’s team was slipping from his grasp. “It’s too tricky,” he concluded, “I’m not going to do it.”

In February 1995, with Jones on the international outer as the Australians toured New Zealand, he did speak out, around the time that the story of Salim Malik’s offers to bribe Mark Waugh, Shane Warne and Tim May on the 1994 tour of Pakistan had broken.First, Jones went on record in a page one story filed by Ray, saying: “I refused the offer straight away and he then increased it to $66,000 a year. He had the money with him in unmarked notes in a cake tin. It was not an offer to fix a game. He just wanted an Australian player on his books to offer information as to likely 12th men, the state of the pitch or the fitness of players.”Then via the decidedly un-cricketing avenue of the Channel Seven current affairs show Today Tonight (Kerry Packer’s rival Nine network was entrenched as the home of Australian cricket), Jones said: “Every team has got a Narc. Every team. And that, give it time, it’ll come out.”ALSO READ: Archive – Dean Jones on ESPNcricinfoThe reporter, Greg Hoy, then made the following clarification: “What he means is, he says, that someone on the Australian team is selling inside information to bookmakers, and he says the Australian Cricket Board knows it.” And Jones followed up: “It’s just the way I was brought up. This type of stuff is killing the game. We want kids to be coming into an honest game with an honest living, and that’s what I want to see happening.”Ray, meanwhile, had been making ever more pointed inquiries to the ACB about information that the Malik bribery story was far from the whole picture, aided by an anonymous letter to the effect that at least one Australian player had entered into exactly the kind of information sharing relationship that Jones had declined in 1992.While Ray was unable to fully unearth the story at the time, his questions forced an internal investigation during the New Zealand tour, whereupon Warne and Waugh admitted to ongoing conversations with “John”.Shamefully, Warne and Waugh were privately fined by the ACB’s chief executive Graham Halbish and chairman Alan Crompton, and then permitted to fly off to the 1995 West Indies tour without a substantial debate at board level. With the “distraction” avoided and Warne and Waugh safely on the plane, Australia won the series to take on the mantle of world champions. The story was kept quiet until December 1998, whereupon Waugh and Warne made near identical public statements in Adelaide.The frontpage story in The Sunday Age during February 1995•The AgeOver time and subsequent inquiries, other bits and pieces of the story filtered through: Waugh may have met “John” as early as the Hong Kong Sixes tournament in October 1993, and spoke to him in the West Indies even after the ACB fines had been levied. In his subsequent, independent investigation of the affair in 1999, the Queensland QC Rob O’Regan did not hide his disgust.”I do not think it is possible to explain their conduct away as the result merely of naivety or stupidity. They must have known that it is wrong to accept money from, and supply information to, a bookmaker whom they also knew as someone who betted on cricket. Otherwise they would have reported the incident to team management long before they were found out in February 1995. In behaving as they did, they failed lamentably to set the sort of example one might expect from senior players and role models for many young cricketers. A more appropriate penalty would, I think, have been suspension for a significant time.”An enduring irony of the affair is that while Waugh went on to play for Australia until 2002, and Warne carried on until 2007, when he had scooped more than 700 Test wickets, it was Jones who endured smears. In a 1998 judicial inquiry in Pakistan, Sarfraz Nawaz made the careless suggestion that Jones had been “forced to retire” due to his involvement, an allegation instantly rebuffed with the words: “That is absolute rubbish. Any inquiry to the Australian Cricket Board will give you the same answer. Made to retire yes, but not for that.”In 2010, Jones’ name was dredged up again in the wake of the sting that exposed Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir. This time he responded with a column shot through with obvious hurt. “I was never interviewed by the ICC about this meeting,” he wrote for The Age of events in Sri Lanka. “I have always said that my books are open for authorities to canvass. This happened 20 years ago but the mud and insinuations are still being brought up, which offends me and my family deeply. I have done nothing wrong.” It would not be the last time.Undoubtedly, the time has come to recognise that in the murky ethical territory of early contacts with bookmakers, Jones’ passion for cricket and sense of right and wrong placed him in even more exclusive company than his cricket achievements do. If only the arbiters of the day had been willing to listen.

Talking Points: How did spinners do so well in Sharjah?

Also, should the Kolkata Knight Riders have opened with Rahul Tripathi?

Deivarayan Muthu12-Oct-2020Why did Russell bowl in the powerplay?
Andre Russell has been the Kolkata Knight Riders’ designated death bowler this IPL, but with them leaving out Sunil Narine, who has been put on the warning list because of an alleged suspect action, they needed Russell to front up in the powerplay, middle overs, and death as well. Also, with the Knight Riders picking batsman Tom Banton over offspin-bowling allrounder Chris Green and fast bowler Lockie Ferguson, they had only five genuine bowling options and part-timer Nitish Rana, who didn’t bowl at all.Russell, who had injured his knee in the CPL and possibly aggravated it while tumbling near the boundary against the Kings XI Punjab on Saturday, ran up gingerly on Monday and aborted. However, he then ran in harder and rushed Aaron Finch with a short ball on his fifth delivery. The next ball was also similarly short and Russell drew a spliced pull, but Kamlesh Nagarkoti dropped a regulation catch at short fine leg to give Finch a life on 19. Finch added 28 to his tally before he was bowled by Prasidh Krishna.Should the Knight Riders have opened with Tripathi?
In the Knight Riders’ match against Delhi Capitals at Sharjah, Rahul Tripathi showed his attacking enterprise with 36 off 16 from No. 8, and in the next game he returned to the top, a position where he thrived with Rising Pune Supergiant. He maximised the powerplay against the Super Kings, his 81 off 51 balls setting up a ten-run victory. However, after managing only 4 off 10 balls in his next innings at the top against the Rajasthan Royals, Tripathi was shuffled to the lower-middle order again, this time to accommodate IPL debutant Banton at the top.Rahul Tripathi goes over the leg side•BCCIBanton didn’t show enough attacking intent. He faced five dots out of 12 balls he faced and was castled for 8. Shubman Gill, the other opener, was brisk but not brisk enough in a tall chase of 195. Tripathi batted at No. 7 and by the time he came in, the game was up for the Knight Riders.In hindsight, the Knight Riders could have given Tripathi another shot at opening the batting and taking on the short boundaries despite Banton having opened in 36 of his 40 T20 innings. That would have also allowed Banton to ease into the IPL by sandwiching between Eoin Morgan and Andre Russell in the middle order.Why did Sundar bowl just one over in the powerplay
Washington Sundar had taken down both Shane Watson and Faf du Plessis on Saturday, and with the Sharjah pitch also getting slower, quite a few may have expected him to bowl earlier than the sixth over. Probably, Virat Kohli held him back to match him up with left-handers Rana and Eoin Morgan. After inside-edging a slog sweep onto his pad, Rana aimed another slog sweep off Sundar in the next over, but the spinner went much fuller and quickened his pace to knock over his middle stump.Sundar then kept Morgan to 5 off 4 balls before he found extra bounce and drew a top edge to short third man. The Knight Riders were reduced to 64 for 5 and there was no way back for them.How did the spinners do so well in Sharjah?
Varun Chakaravarthy, Sundar and Yuzvendra Chahal had combined figures of 12-0-57-3. The success of the spinners was partly down to the tiring pitches and the absence of grass. Even the likes of Russell, Kamlesh Nagarkoti, and Krishna found grip when they took pace off and bowled cutters into the pitch. This wasn’t quite the Sharjah pitch where teams had rattled off 200-plus totals for fun at the start of the season.Kohli had opted to bat, reasoning that this pitch will become more slower in the second half. It sure did, with Sundar and Chahal finding more turn and some uneven bounce. The Knight Riders’ rapidly rising asking rate also worked in the favour of both Sundar and Chahal. Isuru Udana’s slower offcuters, too, were difficult to put away.

Varun Chakravarthy, Ruturaj Gaikwad, Natarajan and other young players who have impressed me this IPL

The tournament has given so many young Indian cricketers the opportunity to go to the next level with their skills

Mark Nicholas09-Nov-2020T20 cricket at IPL level is the sport’s abstract expressionism, manifesting itself in the many bursts of invention and energy that drive each game.On one side of the white line, batsmen explore “360”, while bowlers revert to any one of a myriad options, and fielders take the role of ball-playing acrobats. On the other, celebrity ownership and endorsement, sponsorship, product placement, advertising sales, and above all, jaw-dropping sums of money for television rights, give full licence to the business of cricket in the age of populism.To those who praise the immediacy of creation and the overwhelming attack on the senses that comes with it, it is the only game in town. To others, it is the very devil itself: the end of the classics and of romanticism.As in art, there is room for both. It is part of cricket’s attraction that the many formats appeal to its many people. Only the narrow-minded fail to see that.ALSO READ: Balls of IPL 2020: Seven stunning deliveries that left a markCricket is without limitation but various disciplines are required to ensure its success: to pitch a knuckleball, the bowler must have learnt the fundamentals. Test cricket will live on. Michelangelo spent a long time at the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel; Jackson Pollock less so over the fibreboard for “No. 5, 1948”. T20 may no longer be cricket’s abstract incarnation, but powerful elements of expression remain in a game that continues to thrill on the field and provide a force for good off it. Never has this been more so than in the UAE these past two months. Cricket is out here on its own in the desert, not a spectator in sight, and it is alive.Were I pushed to pick one cricketer who best illustrates both the sporting and artistic appeal, who inspires the young, intrigues the old, and transcends the formats, it would be the young Afghan, Rashid Khan.Last night his team, the Sunrisers Hyderabad, were knocked out of the competition. Next stop was the final, but it proved beyond them. Their talisman has been a legspinner from a country that got ODI status only about a decade ago.Yuzvendra Chahal and Rashid Khan – the scourge of batsmen in the IPL and elsewhere•BCCIKhan is just 22, fascinated by the intricacies and possibilities of spin bowling, and fiercely competitive. Around the tournament people watch and talk: statisticians tell stories through the medium of cold numbers, coaches plan their application. There is spin everywhere at the IPL. On Friday, the Royal Challengers Bangalore picked four of the blighters.Wristspin leads the way but the best of the finger merchants – R Ashwin, Shahbaz Nadeem, Washington Sundar, Axar Patel – have had good days. All the twirlymen look to Khan now, the boy who emerged from hard-working parents and many siblings as the best spinner in the family. Together, they fled the Afghan war, taking refuge in Pakistan before returning to Nangarhar and the schooling that taught him to rest easy in the global reaches of modern-day professional cricket. He captained his country at 19 and took ten wickets against Bangladesh in their first Test victory. He is a man for all seasons.You would be surprised at how fast Khan bowls the cricket ball. Or perhaps I should say how hard. His pace is good club-standard medium. If the ball were to hit an unprotected inside thigh, and it often does, the recipient will know about it. The overspin gives it the impression of a threat, hurrying the opponent and bouncing high to hit the splice of his bat. It is as if the ball has an energy of its own, imparted by Khan, but seemingly increased by interaction with the pitch. Of course, this is not possible, but as Shane Warne famously said, “The art of wristspin is the creation of something that isn’t there.”ALSO READ: Rashid Khan: ‘I never think about wicket tally, my focus is always on bowling economically’If you are lucky enough to stand close to Khan at release, the good ones fizz out of his hand, just loud enough to be heard. Warne did that too. Warne was more sidespinner to Rashid’s overspinner, though the Australian could be either and tended to let the pitch decide. He had the legspinner that Khan would like to have. Khan has the googly that Warne only briefly had.Having seen a lot from afar of Afghanistan’s favourite son these past two months, and on occasion, sneaked up close in the hour before play when the bowlers work out on the practice pitches, I have found myself in awe. Even Muttiah Muralitharan, a coach to the Sunrisers, is impressed; so too the batsmen who are wary and lack the courage to take him on. By no means is Khan done yet, for he works ever harder on mastery of the legspinner and has bowled more of them in this IPL than any previous. He was bothered, he said, by the slog-sweep, so he thought he’d get the batsmen guessing. The googly – or wrong’un, as Warne would call it – is his default position and a pretty solid one at that.Young Indians are in his wake, tugged along by the developing legend. Ravi Bishnoi is 20, super-smart and quick with his go-to, which, like for Khan, is the googly; Rahul Chahar is 21, with a strong action and an inclination to give the legbreak a rip. Both bound to the wicket, all energy and enterprise, unburdened by failure. Mention must also be made of Yuzvendra Chahal, 30 now, but such a skilful bowler, a craftsman indeed, whose happy knack is to have the last laugh.The hero shot: KKR’s Varun Chakravarthy takes a photo with Ricky Ponting, the Delhi Capitals coach and the former Australian captain•Pankaj Nangia/BCCII like the story of Varun Chakravarthy, the Kolkata Knight Riders spinner who began a cricket life as an unsuccessful wicketkeeper-batsman and ditched it to pursue a degree in architecture. After five years studying, qualifying and briefly working freelance, he pined for the life of bat and ball and took upon seam bowling. Then he messed up his knee and took up spin. Somewhere during this period, he acted in a movie.Dinesh Karthik liked the look of him in the Knight Riders nets, where he exchanged ideas with Sunil Narine and resolved to become fitter and stronger. Now he has an IPL contract with them and is to tour Australia with India’s T20I team. He claims he has all the seven variations – offie, leggie, googly, topspinner, carrom ball, flipper and slider – and says so without a hint of conceit.After KKR’s game against the Chennai Super Kings, he asked for a selfie with MS Dhoni; the same with Ricky Ponting after the Delhi clash; and with Harsha Bhogle. But this is not the age of innocence! Next time he played the Super Kings, he knocked over Dhoni, who said Chakravarthy was hard to read and quick off the pitch. These spinners are such characters. Warne would tell you they have to be, or else the next stop is whipping boy.ALSO READ: Varun Chakravarthy, the architect drawing up Knight Riders’ blueprint for successWhether by design or the law of unintended consequences, the IPL is a pathway. The young talent on show, under the spotlight, with a price on its head and many miles from the womb that made it, has the platform to go big. If a player turns it on here, he can cope. In the end, given the talent, it is only whether talent can cope that matters.Devdutt Padikkal is 20 and has scored more runs than anyone else in their first season. He is an upright left-hander who brings calm to the frenetic and style to the base. He has left some balls alone, an act of minimalism that takes courage and suggests judgement is at the core of his performance. He drives the ball over extra cover – a shot to warm the heart of a purist – with grace and to good effect, while he works the back-of-length stuff off his hip with the look of Bill Lawry, a man of whom he may never have heard. Lawry scored a lot of runs for Australia before the television days of “Got ‘im!” took hold. Padikkal looks to have a few runs in him too.Shubman Gill is 21 and made his one-day debut for India, against New Zealand last year. This is no surprise. The selectors would be blind otherwise.He is from Punjab, where his family owned and farmed the lands. His father dreamt of playing top-class cricket but the reality failed him, whereupon he made the ascent of his son the dream, encouraging first the child, then the youth, to sleep with bat and ball – he is neither the first nor will he be the last to do so. Gill’s match-winning hundred in the semi-final of the 2018 Under-19 World Cup brought praise from the gods – Rahul Dravid and Sachin Tendulkar among them. Like his team, the Kolkata Knight Riders, his form this IPL has been fitful, but when good, it is better than those around him. Sunil Gavaskar thinks Gill the real deal – tall, strong and with that most essential of gifts, to play the ball late. If he sticks with straight lines and simple thoughts, his father may yet sleep more happily than he could ever have imagined.Ruturaj Gaikwad made three fifties in six innings for the Chennai Super Kings this season•BCCIThere are others, all with their wings at full span. Sanju Samson and Ishan Kishan are wonderful timers but of a very different type. They are atop the six-hitting tree – Samson with a right-hander’s easy straight-hitting power; Kishen with the left-hander’s punchy strong forearms and hyper-rotating wrists.A word on Ruturaj Gaikwad, whose name alone prompts interest (albeit spelt one letter differently from the great defender of years long past). Barely able to lay bat on ball for three innings, he was dropped from the Chennai Super King’s middle order but successfully returned late in the tournament when their race was run.In build and stance, there is something of Ajinkya Rahane to him – slim, slight and orthodox. The similarities do not end there. His batting has an efficiency to it, as if the frills are for others less down to earth. His driving of the ball is at once clinical and crisp, with energy conserved for the six inches either side of contact with the ball, during which time his hands are – well, big call, I know – Dhoni-fast. From the commentary box behind the bowling arm, we see a lot of the face of the bat in his defence. The second Mr Gaikwad is another to watch.Amongst the young quicks are Navdeep Saini and Kartik Tyagi, the first a little longer in the tooth than the second, each lively and spirited. Then Shivam Mavi and Kamlesh Nagarkoti, hustlers both. But none has a story like T Natarajan, who came penniless but eager to Chennai from a rural area and got a break in the Tamil Nadu Premier League. From there, the IPL scouts circle like vultures.ALSO READ: Who is T Natarajan, and what made his performance so special?After doing bench time with the Kings XI Punjab in 2017, he was picked up at auction by the Sunrisers Hyderabad. Again, he had a season on the sidelines and itched for more. He sent most of his money home to his parents and used the rest to set up a cricket academy in the village, at which all coaching is free. He built a house and refused to let his parents work anymore. Lockdown helped him. With no cricket to play, he worked on his fitness. For the best part of six months, he lifted 20kg water jars and pulled and pushed the roller. Last night, he was a key figure in the Sunrisers’ push for a place in the final. Next week he flies to Australia with the India squad. He has been included to pick up experience on the tour, but don’t back against him getting a game.Natarajan is a feisty competitor, street-smart, and a master of the yorker. Ask him to bowl six of them at a handkerchief, he will suggest there is no chance. Replace the hanky with a batsman and he reckons he will nail six from six. T Natarajan is everything the IPL pathway stands for.Has the tournament surprised me? Yes. The standard is high, the drama ongoing, and the spirit as it should be. I’ve had my favourites, as any onlooker should, because over seven weeks and across 60 matches, you cannot help but warm to the stage and its players. There are days when you think “Enough now!” and days when you thank your lucky stars.I have talked mainly about the young cricketers setting out on their journey in a limited-overs game that has changed beyond recognition since the time I first marvelled at it. That time, incidentally, was the 1967 Gillette Cup final at Lord’s. I sat on the outfield behind the boundary rope, a little boy, too shy to ask for an autograph. Kent – 193 all out in 59.4 overs – beat Somerset – 161 in 54.5. That is a total of 354 runs in 114.3 overs. Last night, the Delhi Capitals reached their first IPL final in a match that yielded 361 runs in 40 overs. That’s entertainment.

How 2020 made us fall in love with cricket all over again

The pandemic showed us what we stood to lose, but it also gave us greater perspective on the issues that really matter

Sambit Bal31-Dec-2020Defeat, any sportsperson who has experienced considerable success will tell you, is a greater teacher than victory. The same for life and adversity. Not in living memory has the human race been challenged like it was in 2020, and while the cost, in terms of loss of life, economic hardship, and just the all-encompassing shadow of fear, has been immense, what have we learnt? Or discovered? About ourselves and our world?Some things are instantly palpable. Collectively, we have found resilience and the adaptability to navigate through our circumstances. Remote-working made room for more family time and for reacquainting oneself with simple pleasures and finding new ones.At ESPNcricinfo, we survived the unthinkable – the absence of live sport – by slipping for a while into magazine mode, a thoroughly enjoyable challenge that meant conceiving and producing features, both text and video, that required the rigours of a weekly, at the pace of an instant medium. And gratifyingly, many of those features continue on the site, even after the return of cricket.Apart from everything else, and I believe I speak on behalf of many of my colleagues – and many of you – the break allowed us to renew our love for the game. Given how it felt when the world began shutting down in March, any cricket, let alone how much of it we have at the moment, feels like a miracle.But what about the most valuable lesson? Powered by artificial intelligence, super-fast cloud computing and advances in molecular science, the scale of human ambition and imagination has seemed limitless this century, luring us into a sense of unassailability. By making us confront our fragility, the pandemic has served as a useful reminder of our place in the universe and the power of nature.Related

  • Virus stops cricket

  • There was cricket in 2020. Isn't that miracle enough?

  • Who makes it to our teams of the year?

  • Steven Asks: How closely did you follow cricket in 2020?

  • How did New Zealand, England, West Indies and women's cricket fare this year?

Cricket needed some soul-searching too. On the face of it, it is prosperous like never before, but beneath the boom there are serious fissures that imperil its future. And the pandemic has hastened one crisis that was always coming. But first, the good stuff.Cricket in the time of Covid
When life was suspended earlier this year – offices and businesses shut, borders closed, flights cancelled – resumption of live sport seemed the lowest priority. But yet, when sport, first football and then cricket, started up again, much earlier than we had expected, it reaffirmed its place in our lives. Even while the shadow of the pandemic hung grimly and normalcy seemed a distant vision, the sight of young and fit athletes displaying physical skill was reassuring and uplifting. Sport is not a luxury; it is the most joyous extension of life.For all the criticism they cop, let’s give a hand to the administrators for rising to a challenge no one could have imagined, much less planned for. The England Cricket Board led the way. Without precedence to go by or any template to follow, it put together a biosecure apparatus that was as elaborate as it was detailed. Faith came too from the West Indian players, who were the first ones to travel, and then from Ireland*, Pakistan and Australia, who ensured a full English summer.The BCCI benefited from this experience and pulled off an even more impressive feat. At the best of times, organising the IPL, which is as big as the World Cup in scale, is a gigantic task. To gather players, support staff, broadcast crew, umpires and officials from at least nine different countries, amid varying levels of travel restrictions, and host the tournament away from home in three separate emirates, with different quarantine norms and border restrictions, required fleet-footed planning, coordination with multiple government and private agencies, and exacting efficiency and rigour in execution. There was no room for lapses. After one Covid scare, the tournament went swimmingly.Playing the IPL in the UAE this year required an unprecedented level of coordination and care behind the scenes•Samuel Rajkumar/BCCIMeanwhile, there was the CPL in the Caribbean and, quite amazingly, the first edition of the Lanka Premier League, which, despite aborted attempts, a few Covid scares, and a few pullouts, was successfully completed mid-December in Sri Lanka.As the year wound on, crowds returned to grounds in New Zealand and Australia, and with chants, applause, drums, flags and even some boos, cricket felt restored.Cricket economy: brace for impact

But trouble is brewing elsewhere. The cricket economy, overheated for long and largely reliant on one country, is due a correction. Cricket subsists on broadcast revenue and the big cricket boards and the ICC have flourished in the last two decades on the back of mega rights deals. This has enriched the entire cricket ecosystem barring one vital constituent – the broadcaster.The rumblings have begun already. Cricket Australia is in a dispute over the value of the rights with its primary broadcaster; New Zealand Cricket has gone entirely digital; Pakistan has gone with an advertising revenue-sharing deal with the government-owned broadcaster based on highly optimistic projections; and both West Indies and Bangladesh are without broadcast deals at the moment.But the loudest warning came from the man primarily responsible for putting the cricket economy into hyper drive. Uday Shankar, the out-going chairman of Star and Disney India*, under whose leadership Star invested over US$ 4.5 billion in cricket rights in the current cycle, $3.5 billion of which went to the BCCI alone, said in an interview in the Times of India this October that the current global model of the game was fast becoming unsustainable and for cricket authorities to not take that into account would be short-sightedness.

For all the criticism they cop, let’s give a hand to the administrators for rising to a challenge no one could have imagined, much less planned for

The cricket establishment, he argued, was in denial in thinking it was still all about Test cricket. Fans were primarily interested in T20s and ODIs and it was only marquee Test cricket – India vs Australia and England, Australia vs England – that they cared about. Advertisers and sponsors were always likely to prioritise the interests of fans.Star’s own deal with the BCCI for India’s bilateral cricket, drafted with no room for negotiation, is illustrative of Shankar’s point. Worth nearly a billion dollars, it is agnostic of format and opposition, with the broadcaster required to pay the same fee for a Test against Afghanistan as for a T20I against Australia.At the other end, there’s growing financial inequity between rich and poor boards, and a consequent and inevitable widening quality gap in the cricket played. New Zealand remain an outlier and perhaps a model of governance for the smaller boards in the way they have managed their resources to remain competitive, but signs are troubling everywhere else. Cricket’s elite club expanded when Afghanistan and Ireland were granted Test status in 2017, but those two sides have managed four and three Tests respectively since then.The big boys of this club, India, England and Australia, meanwhile have played 284 of the 454 Tests held since the beginning of 2010 (62.5%), of which 77 have been what Shankar described as marquee contests. Looked at from different vantage points, this points to either the Big Three cornering the biggest slice of action for themselves, or that too many Tests are commercially unviable in the current model.It’s a strong argument that the market will eventually determine the future of bilateral cricket, but the erosion of the game’s traditional battlefields will eventually shrink the global talent pool and the effects will be felt in the shiny T20 leagues that dip into this pool. This scenario might seem distant, but the IPL has just laid out its expansion plans and the demand for quality players will increase 20%. This is a simplistic illustration, but the underlying point is that even leaving aside the concept of equality, cricket isn’t a big enough sport to let some of its branches wither away.A powerful gesture can help in changing attitudes while a half-hearted one can dilute or confuse your message•Christiaan Kotze/AFP/Getty ImagesSouth Africa’s free fall
If you set aside wealth and boardroom power, South Africa have been, pretty much since their reintegration in 1992, a cricket powerhouse, a worthy challenger to Australia in the first decade of the century, and in possession of a better record away from home than everyone else. They produced an assembly line of international-quality fast bowlers, handy allrounders, gritty all-weather batsmen, and a few all-time greats. Their World Cup miseries aside – and even here, their failures become a talking point because they make it to the knockouts – they were never a side easily beaten. As a box-office draw, they were always gold class. England played five-Test series against them, and there was much hand-wringing when India’s last tour to their shores was cut to three Tests from four.It is distressing therefore to watch the gradual descent of a team so consistently excellent. Part of this is cyclical, of course. When a collection of world-class players, including a couple of once-in-a-lifetime ones, comes together, the departure of those players leaves massive voids. You don’t lose Jacques Kallis, Graeme Smith, Hashim Amla, AB de Villiers, Dale Steyn, Vernon Philander and Morne Morkel over a period of five years – the last four over two – without suffering a dip. But the South African situation has also been aggravated by administrative chaos and the aggressive implementation of the national reservation policy.A sub-optimal cricket team is a small price to pay given the heinousness of South Africa’s past, and affirmative action in sport is part of a much more significant narrative. But even though delicate, the question at least needs to asked: whether the ultimate aim – of getting the cricket team to be more representative of the nation – wouldn’t be better served by a far more aggressive approach to developing talent at the lower levels. How many underprivileged children can afford to be in the elite cricket schools, for long the nursery for nurturing talent in South Africa, or to pursue professional cricket as a vocation, given their socio-economic circumstances? Wouldn’t creating equal opportunities at the grassroots be far more transformative than imposing stiff targets at the highest level?South Africa also face the challenge of containing the exodus of aspiring white players to whichever other nation – the US being the latest promised land – will have them. If the national team continues to decline, would cricket not become a less attractive sport for young people?

As the year wound on, crowds returned to grounds in New Zealand and Australia, and with chants, applause, drums, flags and even some boos, cricket felt restored

But who can one address these questions to? Cricket South Africa’s CEO was first suspended, then sacked for misconduct. One acting CEO stepped down, the second has been suspended for breaches of the Companies’ Act. The COO has been sacked. The entire cricket board resigned after the sports minister threatened to intervene, and an interim board is now in place. Amid all the chaos, a Covid outbreak led to the abandonment of an ongoing tour by England.The year 2020 couldn’t end any sooner for cricket in South Africa, but the fear is that it could get much worse in 2021.Take a knee, and rise together
Another confounding image came from South Africa on Boxing Day when the national team stood with raised fists to support the Black Lives Matter movement. It was a strange half-gesture.Taking a knee has become the most powerful symbol of solidarity with the movement that ignited across the world after George Floyd, an African-American man, was choked to death by a white police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota.England and West Indies women take a knee during a T20I in Derby in September•Nathan Stirk/Getty ImagesCricket did itself credit when the England team joined the West Indies players in taking a knee when play resumed after the pandemic in Southampton.The Test also featured a rousing interview on Sky Sports with Michael Holding, the former West Indies great, which became cricket’s call to arms on racism. Holding later criticised the England and Australia teams for not continuing the practice further in the summer.There’s an argument that the world needs to move beyond symbolism to tangible action against racism. It’s a hollow one. Taking a knee doesn’t prevent tangible action. In fact, by raising awareness repeatedly, it can help promote action. And as a symbolic gesture from sportspersons, it is profound and stirring. It’s the recognition of a problem; it’s a simple message of empathy with the persecuted, and a high-profile statement that the world stands united against the abomination of racism. It’s a movement that needs to expand. In India, it should transmute into Dalit Lives Matter, for casteism here is just as malevolent as racism elsewhere.As for racism, South Africa has the most to apologise for. The reluctance of its elite cricketers to go the full distance – a simple matter of bending a knee – sends the wrong message.

The only viable option is to approve and share a list that specifies the nominated concussion substitute for each player ahead of a match. That will not solve the problem but it will avoid post-substitution disgruntlement

Anatomy of collapses
When a team gets bowled out for 36, it is, inevitably, a combination of the following things: outstanding bowling on a helpful pitch, a few mistakes from the batsmen, but, most crucially, every element falling precisely in place in favour of the bowlers in an uncommon manner. Every potentially wicket-taking ball must find its mark – the edge, the pad or the stumps – every edge must carry and every catch must be taken. Batting can be a cruel game of fractions, and when caught in a perfect storm like India were in that fateful session in Adelaide, the room for error, the lifeblood of batting, is minimised to almost zero as bowlers find their zone.Another day, for no fault of the bowlers, it’s another story. On the first evening of the Melbourne Test, Mitchell Starc could have had three wickets in the first over instead of one, and Pat Cummins could have had six wickets in his two spells across two days instead of two. Shubman Gill was beaten three times in one Cummins’ over and dropped in the slips soon after. He would be dropped once more the next morning and score boundaries off genuine edges; Cheteshwar Pujara had edges off his bat drop short twice before being dismissed due to a third, and Ajinkya Rahane, the century-maker, had two clear reprieves.But it’s also a fact that teams collapse more often these days. For one, it has been a bowler-friendly era, with home teams preparing wickets to suit their bowlers, and in the process, helping all bowlers. Also, in an age that places a premium on fast run-scoring, defensive techniques have been eroded to a point where batsmen aren’t equipped to play out tough sessions with sideways movement. That’s true of all teams, including England, whose home grounds thrive on seam and swing.There are two ways to look at it. We can lament the lowering of the overall quality of Test cricket. Poor batsmanship means bowlers are made to look better, and the primary contest in cricket is devalued. Or we choose to embrace the way of the times and celebrate what we have: Test cricket on wheels, runs at a fast clip, sometimes wickets at a faster clip, and more results than ever before.The problem with upholding the umpire’s call for lbws is that the human decision introduces inconsistency•Mark Brake/Cricket Australia/Getty ImagesAnother manifestation of deteriorating defensive technique is the growing number of instances of batsmen getting hit on the head after taking their eyes off the ball. This has made concussions substitution one of the most important regulation changes introduced into the game. It’s a matter of debate why it can’t be extended to include all serious external injuries – a broken arm, for example – but head injuries are grievous, sometimes deceptively so, compared to others, and the substitution takes the pressure off teams and individual players to deploy a concussed player when a match is poised delicately.But it does create piquant situations like the one in India’s first T20I against Australia last month, when Yuzvendra Chahal came off the bench to replace Ravindra Jadeja, who took a blow to his head during his pugnacious and eventually match-defining innings of 44 off 23 balls. Chahal, a specialist and match-winning T20 bowler, duly bowled India to victory, causing considerable frustration to the Australian team.India clearly got the best of the deal in that match. They got full value from the bat of Jadeja, picked as an allrounder, but since he was also due to bowl four overs of spin, Chahal, even though he is a legspinner and Jadeja a left-arm spinner, was the only possible substitution available.But there is no way to avoid such scenarios in the future. It will be impossible for teams to carry like-for-like substitutes for every player, or even every group of players. And what if a substitute also gets injured? The only viable option is to approve and share a list that specifies the nominated substitute for each player ahead of the match. That will not solve the problem but it will avoid post-substitution disgruntlement.

It is ironical that the BCCI under Ganguly’s presidency has spent considerable time at the court to overturn the very reforms that facilitated his ascension

Decision over the decision-maker
The Decision Review System was meant, apart from trying to get as many decisions correct as possible, to take some heat away from the umpires, by co-opting players into the decision-making process. Despite the occasional baffling outcome with the technology, even the staunchest traditionalists will not have a convincing argument for reverting to the old ways.But a massive bugbear remains – the umpire’s call, which grants the benefit of doubt to the original decision for lbw. Umpire’s call was introduced for one primary reason: to account for a margin of inevitable uncertainty in the ball-tracking technology. However, the margin-of-uncertainty argument would be far more palatable if the benefit of doubt wasn’t granted to the umpire’s decision. The sport needs consistency and not confusion. One batsman can’t be out and another be not out, as is the case presently, when the ball is shown to be hitting the stumps in both instances.Joe Burns, battling to save his career, was dismissed in the Adelaide Test when the ball was shown to be grazing the leg stump. In the next Test, Marnus Labuschagne survived a review even though a larger part of the ball than in Burns’ case was projected to be hitting. The difference was that Burns was given out on the field and Labuschagne not out. A series of umpire’s calls that go against a team can prove decisive to the result of a game.There is a simple fix. Keep a standard margin of uncertainty in favour of the batsman. Perhaps reduce it to the batsman being out if more than 25% of the ball is projected to hit the stumps. And remove the umpire’s call. The sanctity of the decision is more important than that of the decision-maker.The skipper becomes a suit
Great expectations carry the risk of great disappointment. It would have been futile to expect Sourav Ganguly, among India’s most adored captains, to replicate the success he had with the Indian team in his stint in cricket governance, but when he promised a new era after being nominated as the BCCI president, hopes ran high. Perhaps a bit naïvely.Michael Holding’s moving interview about the racism he has experienced helped bring greater focus to the Black Lives Matter conversation in cricket•Getty ImagesIt’s true that Ganguly would not have become president – not so soon, at least – if most of the other leading aspirants had not been debarred in the wake of the Supreme Court-backed reforms mandated by the Lodha committee, but it is also true that Ganguly was co-opted by the old system. In the time-honoured tradition of the BCCI, he didn’t fight an election: he was selected. Though as board president he was never going to have around him a stellar team of the sort that made his tenure as Indian captain so successful, it is ironic that the BCCI under his presidency has spent considerable time in court trying to overturn the very reforms that facilitated his rise to the post.Under the new constitution that elected him, Ganguly’s term is over. Yet he, and Jay Shah, the BCCI secretary, carry on, because the Supreme Court has been in no haste to make a ruling on the petition by the board to overturn the cooling-off clause between terms in office mandated by the Lodha committee.Meanwhile, the professional administration has been dismantled piece by piece. The BCCI has not replaced the CEO and the CFO who left; it is without a head of cricket operations and an administrative head for the National Cricket Academy. And just recently, the board picked a selection committee that has no experience in T20 cricket, though there are two back-to-back T20 World Cups on the horizon.The concept of zonal selectors, though officially discarded, is alive in practice and Abey Kuruvilla, who played the last of his 35 international matches in 1997, was preferred as the West Zone candidate over Ajit Agarkar, who represented India in 221 matches and played six seasons of the IPL. (This is not to say that more international experience is a defining qualification for being a better selector, but experience of contemporary cricket has to count, particularly in T20, which is almost a different game from Test cricket.)In simple terms, it’s just like in the old era – the honorary office bearers are back in administrative roles, thus defeating one of the central reforms that stipulated a clear demarcation of functions between the elected office bearers and the executive.Part of the problem is that the Lodha committee failed to address one of the root issues at hand. The reforms were limited to the top tier, and that was never going to be enough as long as the underlying electoral process remained the same. It only meant that many from the old guard who were debarred merely transferred their positions to their nominees. Some faces might have changed, but the power remained with the same network of clubs and state associations.It would have been beyond Ganguly to single-handedly upend the system that anointed him, but had he tried, he would have had the mandate of the Supreme Court and the force of goodwill behind him. Instead he has been in the news for his endorsement deals – among others for businesses that compete with the BCCI’s official sponsors – and for his links with a company that owns an IPL franchise.Our sporting heroes are not obliged to always live up to our image of them, but we are still entitled our disappointment.Persons of the Year
I have two, and neither held a bat or a ball this year. Steve Elworthy, the ECB’s event director, for leading cricket’s response to the pandemic and putting the show back on the road. And Michael Holding, for being the game’s eloquent voice of conscience in the BLM movement.*ESPNcricinfo and Star are part of the Walt Disney CompanyMore in our look back at 2020*Dec 31, 2020, 8.35 GMT: In the original version of the piece, Ireland was missing from the list of teams that toured England

Battle-lines drawn in the culture war as Ollie Robinson episode becomes political cricket ball

English cricket has no time to lose as divisive issue exposes society’s faultlines

David Hopps09-Jun-202113:01

Newsroom: Was the ECB fair in its dealing with Ollie Robinson?

The cricket writer and broadcaster, Adam Collins, observed in podcast this week that he could pretty much guess 80 percent of the stance that the usual suspects would take on the Ollie Robinson affair.Sportswriters, shock jocks, politicians, the bloke down the pub and, most unnervingly, ourselves, we all now routinely rehash positions established long ago in the full-scale culture war that has become a permanent feature of British life. So here we go then, that leaves 20 percent of unexpected insights at best – and, if they emerge at all, they will probably emerge from an empty, hollow despair about how society should be better than this.Robinson, or at least an 18-year-old Robinson, has blundered oafishly into the latest episode of the never-ending culture war that has become our daily soundtrack. Twitter has condemned him, or condemned those who do; the usual riot of digital indignation. And, in a polarised world, all of us have rushed to the side we were told we must choose long ago. Woke liberals against prejudice and injustice to the left, conservative self-appointed defenders of free speech to the right. Hurry along now, and assume your positions. Most of you were in position already, debating the booing of England’s football team. The ignorant and bigoted booing, that is. Just in case you want an early clue where these observations might be heading.To its dismay, the ECB finds itself caught up in an issue which is being wilfully misrepresented by many outside the game. The prime offender is the prime minister, Boris Johnson, assisted by his underling at the ministry for digital, culture, media and sport, Oliver Dowden, who have both termed Robinson’s “punishment” (actually a suspension pending an investigation) as excessive as they calculatingly seek political capital from the latest populist issue to protect their lead in the polls. The prime minister does not much care for accountability or moralising – and the opinion polls suggest that neither does the majority of the public.But this is not about victimisation of the perpetrator. It is about protecting the real victims – the minorities who became the quarry during Robinson’s sexist and racist tweets, however immature and unthinking that they may have been, and who repeatedly find such episodes socially debilitating as they seek a just and fair society.Related

UK government weighs in on Ollie Robinson's suspension by ECB

James Anderson: England players committed to 'improving ourselves' in wake of Ollie Robinson row

Amnesty may offer solution as English cricket catches up with society's shifting values

England to reaffirm commitment to 'improve society through sport' before Edgbaston Test

In suspending Robinson, English cricket acted as it must – although, if the investigation drags on, it has the capacity to mess up from here. Robinson’s historic tweets were not only distasteful, the timing of their discovery could not have been more unfortunate as they ran directly contrary to the ECB’s central tenet – emblazoned on pre-Test t-shirts – that the game must become more inclusive, diverse and welcoming to everyone. Test debut or not, irrespective of whether the greatest day in his life was about to be tarnished for ever, the ECB had no choice but to explore the matter further. It is what any well-run business would feel obliged to do.That commitment to diversity is not just decent and principled, and how it should be, it is the only way cricket in England can prosper. It speaks to many ethnic groups in our society. It can – and does – strengthen bonds. The game must clearly and happily embrace all races, all genders, all sexualities, (not to mention all classes) if it is to achieve its potential. And the irony is that when it is seeking funds from public bodies, that is exactly what it is expected to do.Ollie Robinson’s indiscretions ruined what should have been the greatest day of his life•PA Images via Getty ImagesFor sure, Robinson’s apology was well-judged. But one presumes it was written for him, as these things normally are, and he grabbed the lifebuoy with relief. We just have to hope it conveys his true feelings.That ECB investigation must be rapid; this issue has already festered long enough. Under no circumstances must Robinson’s doltish, highly dubious behaviour make him some kind of anti-hero for every small-town bigot, or every far-right commentator, and it is to be hoped that he fears exactly the same. But neither should Robinson become a convenient scapegoat by which the ECB can protect its own reputation. At such moments, a governing body’s capacity for self-protection should never be under-estimated.As Michael Holding, the West Indian great, shrewdly pointed out, a humane and proportionate response is necessary here, with demands for high standards and personal growth going alongside a recognition that people can change as they mature. Such a conclusion, from a man whose contribution to the Black Lives Matter debate was moving enough for to win a BAFTA, carries considerable weight. It is what most people in the game are calling for and it is probably what he will get. Discussions in specialist cricket circles have been largely in agreement, although there is the juicy possibility that and the magazines will take different political slants.So imagine the fastest response the ECB has ever made to any disciplinary matter and divide it by ten: that is how quickly they should act. But they must also be thorough because if there are any other skeletons in Robinson’s closet – verbal or otherwise – they must be unearthed now. That would at least disappoint the Australian media, which likes to reserve such revelations for the day before a first Ashes Test.

If cricket really does want to achieve its worthy ideals of promoting a self-evidently inclusive game, then the evidence is that society is not about to deliver perfect citizens. Britain’s culture war has emboldened the prejudiced and deepened divisions within our society.

It might well be true that the ECB is being driven as much by economic necessity as much as idealism, but some of the charges against it have been absurd. Prominent among them is the idea that Robinson is undergoing “retroactive adjudication” – that he is being punished for behaviour that was acceptable in the past.Well, “wokeness” might not have been a word in 2012, but I don’t recall 2012 behaving like 1972 – his racism and misogyny was just as unacceptable then. Neither is the ECB investigation remotely an issue of suppression of free speech, of so-called Cancel Culture, in which public figures are ostracised for not conforming to acceptable liberal beliefs.Some on the other side of the argument have charged that Robinson’s behaviour is indicative of a deep-seated problem within the game. That cricket is somehow rotten. Cricket certainly needs to examine whether it has underlying problems. But blaming the game is reminiscent of the day the Conservative PM, Margaret Thatcher, marched into the Football Association with hooliganism rampant in the early 80s to ask when the game would stop its hooligans damaging society, to which she was asked, , when would society stop its hooligans damaging football.Evidence that cricket has a problem is most persuasive in its terrible developmental record for cricketers of black and Asian background or from the testimonies of men such as Michael Carberry, who has long been adamant that racist attitudes lurk within the game. Less persuasive are the discoveries made this week while grubbing around in the detritus of English cricketer’s Twitter feeds, which doesn’t immediately appeal as a positive way to spend the day and appears to be the modern sports journalist’s version of going through the dustbins.Boris Johnson, pictured at The Oval in 2018, has passed his own judgement on the Robinson saga•AFP via Getty ImagesTo offer up one example: if Eoin Morgan and Jos Buttler were occasionally tempted on social media to send up the distinctive English speech patterns of some Indian cricket fans then, sure, it was a bit tawdry, and was not about to win them a stint on Live at the Apollo, but a life lived in fear of light-hearted expression is no life at all. Self-censorship can go too far and when that happens the ECB should have the courage to tell the most extreme social media Thought Police to commit their energy to the real, pressing problems of the world.If the ECB is to prove that its response is not sanctimonious, if it really does want to achieve worthy ideals of promoting a self-evidently inclusive game, then it must recognise that the evidence is that society is not about to deliver perfect citizens. Britain’s culture war has emboldened the prejudiced and has deepened divisions within our society.Schools are just about holding the line. One head of sixth form messaged me last week desperate for Robinson to be punished because, if he wasn’t, then the teacher faced a near-impossible task to impress on sport-mad pupils that unacceptable behaviour on social media at 17 and 18 – not stray verbal errors (most of us must plead guilty to that), but a digital footprint, errors for posterity – could harm them later in life.”He can’t get away with it,” he said, but he seemed to overlook the fact that Robinson’s antics had already ruined what should have been the greatest day of his life. He would be better off lobbying the culture secretary.If society patently cannot deliver, then the only choice for cricket – if it is to achieve the standards it proclaims to want – is to ring-fence the game. Rid yourself of cynicism about glib marketing phrases and “improving society through sport” is a noble aspiration. As Jimmy Anderson suggested after attending a PCA/ECB racism workshop this summer, “you’re never too old to learn”, but more importantly you’re never too young either. From the time any player reaches a county 2nd XI, the process of education must be strengthened and embraced by everyone. That education must make demands on all classes, all races, all religions, without fear or favour, laying down basic cultural expectations.By the time a player represents England, these expectations should be second nature, and not temporarily adopted whenever a crisis strikes in an atmosphere of paranoia. An alternative Spirit of Cricket is required – one that enables England to confidently lead the way, and which can have a more meaningful effect than some desperate rinsing of social media accounts to keep the hounds at bay.

Dom Bess and Jack Leach, a tale of two spinners

Bess enjoyed better luck and greater reward but, in terms of consistency, Leach was superior

George Dobell07-Feb-2021It was, in this tale of two spinners, the best of times and the worst of times.While Jack Leach spent much of the day craning his neck to see how far back the latest six off his bowling had been hit, his former apprentice, Dom Bess, cut through the best middle-order in world cricket. To claim any of Virat Kohli, Ajinkya Rahane, Cheteshwar Pujara or Rishabh Pant might have been considered an admirable achievement: to claim all four is exceptional.And yet, beneath those figures, there’s a more complex picture. Because statistics don’t just mislead. They lie and cheat and insist the cheque is in the post as they try to sell you a time-share in Fallujah.For the truth is that Leach bowled perfectly reasonably. He just happened to be the victim of an assault on his bowling by Pant that, on another day, could have resulted in a wicket. And while Bess, at times, bowled nicely, he would also be the first to accept his control slipped as the day wore on and he enjoyed more than a little fortune with a couple of his wickets. The point is, the difference in figures was far greater than the difference in performance.Bess is earning quite a reputation as having something of a golden arm. His five-for in Galle, not so long ago, contained some outrageous luck: Niroshan Dickwella slicing a long-hop to point, for example, or Dasun Shanaka caught after his slog-sweep cannoned off the short-leg fielder and into the gloves of Jos Buttler.And, as he claimed two more wickets here – both men in the top eight of the ICC’s Test batting rankings – with a full toss and long-hop, it was hard not to wonder how long his winning streak could last.Related

  • Made in Somerset: pride as Dom Bess, Jack Leach share 14 wickets in Galle win

  • Bess and Leach have their work cut out for them in India

  • Jack Leach wants to 'cherish' every moment on first tour of India

  • Dom Bess takes four as India face battle to avoid follow-on

  • Jofra Archer, and the IPL to Test cricket transition

What isn’t necessarily recalled so rapidly, is the missed chances he has suffered. The stumping and catch missed by Buttler against Pakistan, for example, or the slip catch missed by Ben Stokes against West Indies.Yes, Bess has had some fortune of late. But he has now taken 16 wickets in two-and-a-half Tests this year at an average of 19.37 apiece. For how long can such success be ascribed to fortune?And he did, at times, bowl really well here. He dismissed Kohli, for example, at the end of a probing spell that saw him build pressure on one of the best batsmen of his era. After 17 deliveries against him had produced just four singles – Kohli had, in all, faced 47 deliveries for his 11 runs and was without a boundary – Bess pushed one a little wider, saw it drift further before it turned just enough to take the inside edge.Might batsman error have been a contributory factor? Of course. But England had frustrated him for more than an hour and Bess had lured him out of position with that drift and punished him with that turn. It was a nice piece of bowling.”It’s certainly up there with the most satisfying wickets of my career,” Bess said. “Obviously he’s a phenomenal, world-class player. But it was special more for what my process was.”It wasn’t about bowling that magic ball. It was about smashing in 10-15 balls in a good area. Then something will happen. It’s the process of getting there. I was really pleased that I kept him in a spot, then one has gone and it’s straight to Ollie Pope.”The wicket of Pant was reward for some decent bowling, too. Bess knew Pant would come at him. But he continued to toss the ball up. And, this time, he added a bit of width, too, so that when Pant came down the wicket, he was always reaching for the ball. The hint of turn was enough to draw a slightly false stroke. Again, was the batsman at fault? Of course. But Bess set the trap and executed the plan neatly.It’s hard to find many compliments about the long-hop that dismissed Pujara, though. On most days, such balls will go to the boundary. But today, Pujara’s pull stroke thumped into the back of Pope at short-leg and looped to Rory Burns at mid-wicket.By then, Rahane had been brilliantly caught by a diving Joe Root at cover. To some extent, he had been set-up by the previous deliveries: Bess troubling him with drift and coming close to having him caught at mid-wicket a couple of balls previously. And the ball he attempted to drive did dip, too, contributing to the false stroke. The fact is, though, Rahane hit a full toss to a fielder. It would be disingenuous not to acknowledge the element of fortune.And that’s fine. The vast majority of wickets are a combination of good bowling and batsman error. So when Bess pointed out afterwards he was “due a bit of luck”, it was hard to disagree.”I’m not bothered how the wickets come,” he said. “There’s so many times you bowl a good ball and don’t get anything. You’re due a bit of luck aren’t you?”Dom Bess was rewarded with four wickets•BCCIBut Leach didn’t enjoy any such fortune. At one stage, Pant hit him for four sixes in seven balls. After eight overs, he had conceded 77 runs. It looks ugly, doesn’t it? They are worse figures than Simon Kerrigan endured at The Oval in 2013. And that was a game which proved a turning point in Kerrigan’s career.But while Leach was, like Kerrigan, hit out of the attack, he wasn’t hit off his stride. This was more a case of fine batting than poor bowling. And while Pant was clearly the victor in the duel – he scored 48 in 21 balls from Leach, including five sixes (all in the arc between mid-wicket and mid-on) and two fours – there was hardly a poor ball in there. Instead Pant, recognising the potential danger of Leach gaining assistance from the foot marks outside his off stump, backed himself to hit the bowler out of the attack. It was a high-risk approach, but it worked.But given just a bit of fortune, Leach might have won this tussle. Twice he saw the ball pass agonisingly close to the boundary fielders set for the stroke. At no stage did he lose his composure; at no stage did he lose his line and length. He basically came up against a fine player who took a chance and saw it come off. It happens.There was a case for persevering with Leach in the attack. England were defending a mammoth first-innings total of 578, after all, and Pant only needed to mis-time one. But instead, Root fiddled his bowlers around and, having frustrated Pant with an over of his own bowling – firing the ball into the rough outside off stump and conceding only a single in the process – he saw Bess benefit from his frustration in the next over.”I thought Leach bowled really well,” Bess said. “And that’s not me just saying it. Pant played a phenomenal innings, but if one goes straight up in the air, it’s a completely different game. I know people will look at the outcomes; I know at one point he was going at 10 an over. But it doesn’t matter: I thought he bowled really well.”The data would appear to support that view. Leach hasn’t bowled a single full toss in his 17 overs to date. And while he has dropped short 10 times, none of those deliveries cost him a boundary.Bess, by contrast, has bowled 10 full tosses and 16 short balls in his 23 overs to date. And while those deliveries cost him 27 runs, they also brought him two wickets.Leach’s pitch maps to Washington Sundar and Pant were almost identical, but Sundar took him for a far more reasonable 17 runs from 39 balls. It seemed to sum up Leach’s day when Jofra Archer, running back from mid-on, dropped Sundar off him near the close.So, hard times for Leach. But as Bess said, we must guard against judging these things from the “outcomes”. In terms of consistency, Leach was the better of the two bowlers. In time, you would think, his luck will turn.

Familiar questions remain for Australia in T20 jigsaw puzzle

Big-name players will return but some key areas will continue to provoke debate when Australia resume playing

Andrew McGlashan07-Mar-2021Australia fought back from 2-0 down to square the series against New Zealand before suffering a heavy loss in the decider. The squad was missing at least four players who will be inked into the T20 World Cup squad, in theory given an opportunity to assess the wider options available. With the team now facing a lengthy break, what can be gleaned from the five matches?Related

  • Ashton Agar and Ish Sodhi move up in T20I bowlers' rankings

  • 'Thought about that first ball a thousand times' – Meredith

  • Finch was 'never doubting' he would emerge from slump

  • Martin Guptill leads New Zealand charge to series victory

Wade the frontrunner, but where does the keeper bat?However this series had played out there would have been questions remaining afterwards because of the names missing, especially so at the top of the order. David Warner will return and open with Aaron Finch – that’s probably the easy bit – but at the moment it appears Australia want their gloveman in the top order as well and that’s going to be a squeeze with Steven Smith also to fit in. Matthew Wade had the gloves throughout the series and in the last match slotted in at No. 3 having previously opened and produced his best knock of the five games. Josh Philippe played two very good innings in his debut series – and may well be the man for the 2022 T20 World Cup – but for now Wade looks to have the running. With the bat he may yet be used in a floating capacity both because of his experience and the fact that he’s a left hander.Marcus Stoinis played a spectacular innings in Dunedin but the make-up of the middle order remains a debate•Getty ImagesThe finisherThis has been a perennial debate around Australia’s T20 side. Given Ashton Turner wasn’t tried in the series before returning home early for the birth of his child it would appear to be between Marcus Stoinis and Mitchell Marsh (it’s tricky to see how both play when all the batsmen are available). Stoinis played one standout innings – the 78 off 37 balls that almost stole the game in Dunedin – and it could be his spot to lose although, like so many in this line-up, his best work domestically comes at the top of the order and at times he can still soak up too many dots. Marsh’s best innings came when batting at No. 4 in the first match, albeit in a forlorn cause, and in three of matches found himself down at No. 7 below Ashton Agar in an attempt to split up the left and right handers. He also didn’t bowl in the series following another season of injury. Daniel Sams showed what he is capable of with 41 off 15 balls in Dunedin, but the feeling is he has to compete as one of the five bowlers. Agar, whose role with the ball is vital, has yet to convince he can quite hold the batting position needed of him.It can’t all be on MaxwellRelated to the above is the fact that it still feels as though too much of how the middle order performs (in whatever order they bat) rests on the brilliance of Glenn Maxwell. It came off spectacularly in the third game when he had the ideal mix of a platform to work with and time left in the innings as he hammered 70 off 31 balls. Either side of that he made 23 runs in four innings and Australia need to have the ability to soak up those sorts of days more easily.Riley Meredith made a good impression in his first series•Getty ImagesPace-bowling pecking orderMitchell Starc and Pat Cummins will be locked into the side which probably leaves room for one more frontline quick in the XI. It could well be a horses-for-courses approach depending on conditions and opposition. The possibility of larger World Cup squad due to Covid-19 protocols also means the tough calls may not need to be made at the outset. Riley Meredith’s first appearances for Australia certainly caught the eye, twice beating Kane Williamson for pace to win lbw appeals, and his development at the IPL (if he plays) will be watched with interest. Kane Richardson remains a hugely versatile performer and perhaps the most dependable behind the big two. Jhye Richardson, on his international comeback, showed glimpses of the late swing that make him so dangerous. Does Josh Hazlewood come into the mix as well?Did Australia try enough? During the series both Finch and coach Andrew McDonald spoke of the valuable “information gathering” that had gone on even if, from the outside, it did not look like much was changing pointing to things like altering batting orders and Adam Zampa bowling more Powerplay overs. There was only one personnel change in the five games: Meredith replacing Sams after the first two matches. In truth, the series finishes with largely the same questions as it started. Five of the squad who were there the end – D’Arcy Short, Ben McDermott, Andrew Tye, Jason Behrendorff and Tanveer Sangha – did not get a game although so many extra players wouldn’t have been on tour under normal circumstances.

Why Rahul Chahar's four-for was more impactful than Andre Russell's 5 for 15

So where does Russell’s exploits with the ball in the match rank in terms of Bowling Impact?

ESPNcricinfo stats team13-Apr-20211:44

Dasgupta: Krunal and Chahar brought MI back into the game

It’s not often that a five-for ends up being the subplot in a T20 game. Andre Russell’s record-equaling five-for in 12 balls was among the quickest five-wicket hauls taken in the IPL, but it was Mumbai Indians’ Rahul Chahar who was adjudged the Man-of-the-Match for throwing Knight Riders’ chase in disarray with a four-wicket haul.ESPNcricinfo LtdESPNcricinfo’s Smart Stats endorses Chahar’s impact on the game. Chahar earned 117 impact points for his bowling efforts (he earned six points for his valuable 8 with the bat). His impact on the game was 31 points clear of the next most impactful performance in the match. Chahar came on to bowl in the ninth over with the Knight Riders firmly in control of the chase. Each of his four overs produced a wicket: the top four of the Knight Riders’ batting order, including the in-form Nitish Rana. According to Smart Stats, Chahar’s four wickets in the game were worth 6.34 smart wickets. Smart Stats gives each wicket an impact value based on the quality of the batsman and the stage of the innings at which he is dismissed.ESPNcricinfo LtdIn contrast, four of Russell’s five victims were lower-order batsmen. Three of those wickets came in the last over of the innings, when the damage the Mumbai tailenders could’ve done was limited. Kieron Pollard’s wicket was the most valuable wicket that Russell took considering the context of the game. There were 17 balls left in the innings when Pollard was dismissed potentially stopping him from playing a match-changing innings. Pollard’s wicket fetched Russell 1.57 smart wicket value. However, his other four wickets contributed just 1.83 smart wicket value. In all, Russell’s five wickets in the match considering the match situation (based on the impact the batsmen dismissed by could’ve had) was worth 3.4 Smart Wickets. In fact, Russell’s exploits with the ball in the match ranked fifth in terms of Bowling Impact. Pat Cummins’ 2 for 24, Krunal Pandya’s 1 for 13 and Trent Boult’s 2 from 27 were considered more impactful than Russell’s given the context of the game.ESPNcricinfo LtdOverall, Suryakumar Yadav’s 36-ball 56 had the second-highest impact on the match with 92.4 points, followed by Krunal Pandya’s efforts with the ball and the bat, which fetched him 79.9 impact points.

Tim Southee swings it New Zealand's way after Kane Williamson steadies the ship

Trademark six-hitting from No. 9 followed by key incisions lifts New Zealand hopes

Andrew Miller22-Jun-2021As Kane Williamson left the field on the fifth afternoon, taking with him a pitch-perfect innings of 49 from 177 balls that had telegraphed the relentlessness of India’s seam attack while at the same time rising above it, he turned to his batting partner Tim Southee and uttered a few pointed words of encouragement. The lead was a slender four runs, with two wickets standing, and more than 40 overs remained scheduled for the day. It didn’t take a lip-reader to translate the captain’s orders.For Southee likes to lump it. He has been hitting sixes with a unique alacrity, almost from the day he arrived on the international scene as a precocious 19-year-old, 13 long years ago in Napier. He cracked nine on that final afternoon against England in 2008 – almost exclusively mown over midwicket, as he announced his arrival with a Nathan Astle tribute knock of 77 from 40 balls from No. 10, to cause improbable jitters in a monstrous chase of 553.The scenario could hardly have been different on this occasion, but the levers remained true. Lump it Southee did, two hulking swings through the line, high over his favoured leg-side, as New Zealand’s remarkable tail attempted a repeat of the trick that had set them apart in their home series against India in early 2020.Related

  • A sun-soaked reserve day is what the WTC final needs to bloom and glow

  • Williamson 49, Shami four-for and Southee's strikes set up intriguing final day

  • Fans ejected from Ageas Bowl over 'abusive behaviour'

Southee’s six-hitting exploits are well known but bear repetition – his tally is up to 75 now in 79 Tests, and at a ratio of 1 every 27 balls which has no equal in the game. His nearest “rival” by that measure, astonishingly enough, is none other than his new-ball partner and No. 11, Trent Boult, who’s picked off 30 to date, at roughly 1 in 40 balls. By contrast, the great Ricky Ponting, whom Southee pulled clear of in his short-but-sharp innings of 30, faced more than 52 overs for each of his 73 thumps over the rope.But therein lies the difference between great batters and great hitters, for in truth the fireworks didn’t quite come off as planned. India’s otherwise under-employed spinners picked off the last two wickets for a slender deficit of 32, but given that their own lower order had been docked to the tune of three wickets in four balls in India’s first innings, the difference in potential for the spicy end of this contest was plain enough to see, even in a rare passage of accelerated action.”It was just a bit of reminder to keep going and eke out as many runs as we possibly could,” Southee said of his chat with the outgoing Williamson, whose preternatural technique had once again calibrated the risks and rewards throughout a morning session in which New Zealand, trailing by 116 overnight, had a game to lose but nothing yet to win. “It was about trying to hang in with Kane for as long as we could, and once he left, the way that we play our best is with that freedom as bowlers and as tailenders.”Williamson scored 7 from 75 balls before lunch, dogged and dour – occasionally shaking his right elbow which was stiff with cramp, but seemingly untroubled by the left joint that has caused him such bother in recent months. He had never before faced so many balls in a Test innings without reaching a half-century, but the logic to his attrition was indisputable.”Steady the ship,” as the sailor-hat tributes among the Kiwi contingent would put it, let others bat around him during that dicey morning period, in which Mohammad Shami in particular was hounding the edge with a pent-up fury, as he finally earned some reward for his years of toil in English conditions.”It was crucial,” Southee said of Williamson’s durability. “It was a tough time this morning, the Indian bowling asked a lot of tough questions and put us under a lot of pressure, and he was able to hang tight and dig deep and battle his way through. He’s a class player, and he’s got a very sound defence that he was in full trust with.”Williamson began to up his tempo against the new ball, more than doubling this total in his final 36 balls as India’s fatigued trio of quicks found their discipline beginning to flag. But it was the men around him who kept nudging the score towards parity – Colin de Grandhomme, whose 80-plus strike rate is up there with Adam Gilchrist and Virender Sehwag, and Kyle Jamieson, whose levers are even more imposing than Southee’s, and whose average continues to hover above 40 after another front-dog dominant display.”You always probably want more than what you got, but it’s shaping up for an intriguing day tomorrow,” Southee added. “To have two of their more attacking players as well, it’s nice to see the back of them.”Rohit Sharma shouldered arms to a Tim Southee delivery•Getty ImagesThat’s putting it mildly. For it was Southee the bowler who completed the job that Southee the batter had started, prising out the vital scalps of Shubman Gill and Rohit Sharma to a pair of subtly different inswingers – the first with his so-called three-quarter-seam drifter, the second a more simple flipping of the shiny side as Rohit fatefully shouldered arms on a fourth-stump line – to ensure that New Zealand are the only team for whom attack is a broadly risk-free option going into the historic day six.In the first innings, Southee had bore the brunt of both his victims’ pugnacity, as India hurtled off in a 62-run opening stand that was the only moment to date in which New Zealand seemed out of control with the ball. This time he sought to be fuller and more menacing, recognising that the tables had turned since Williamson’s morning vigil, and now it was his opponents who had nothing to gain from aggression.He’s always had his outswinger, right from that Napier debut, when four of his five wickets were a consequence of his natural bend – three catches in the cordon plus the prized maiden scalp of Michael Vaughan, pinned lbw by the one that didn’t move. By his own admission, the inswinger has been a trickier beast for him to tame down the years, but in arguably the most important Test match of his long and storied career, he chose an opportune moment to confirm his hard-earned mastery.”As a player you’re always looking at different ways to expand your game, and that’s been one of the ways I’ve looked to develop over the last little while,” he said. “Especially with the Dukes ball, being able to swing it that a little bit more.”The Gill dismissal was Southee’s 600th in all internationals – a milestone he acknowledged was “nice” to have ticked off. But having picked up a five-for in his first Test of this England tour at Lord’s, he knows he’s in the form to make India’s life more uncomfortable yet, as New Zealand seek to turn the screw on a slender lead of 32.”The Indian side probably had their most challenging period when the ball was slightly older,” Southee said. “Hopefully tomorrow morning, it will swing a little bit more and we can ask a few questions early on.”

Ireland host Zimbabwe with T20 World Cup preparation in mind

Neither team has played much T20I cricket of late, and both have many niggles to sort ahead of bigger challenges

Firdose Moonda26-Aug-2021Focus on Stirling and O’Brien
For Ireland, the need is more urgent. They head to the T20 World Cup in less than two months with scant match time under their belts. Since the start of the pandemic in March last year, Ireland have only played three T20I games, against South Africa last month, and lost them all. There, they were asked to chase on each occasion, twice targets of 165 or lower, and once, 190. Ireland never managed more than 140 in reply.Related

Getkate, Kevin O'Brien star as Ireland level series

'If Ireland don't qualify for World Cup, we've got no excuses'

Curtis Campher gets maiden Ireland T20I call-up

Sean Williams to step away from international cricket

Batting big, and batting quickly, will be one of their chief aims in this series and they will pin their hopes on the two big names: Paul Stirling and Kevin O’Brien. Stirling struggled against South Africa but batted the Southern Brave to a trophy-winning total in the men’s Hundred, and Irish captain Andy Balbirnie is hoping he brings that confidence and form into this series.”Paul is so down to earth, you probably can’t even tell when he is on cloud nine,” Balbirnie said. “He should be playing in every T20 league in the world. He is that good. Apart from his parents, I am his biggest fan. This team is a much better team with him in it.”O’Brien is a bigger concern. He managed just two runs in three innings against South Africa, with two ducks, but Balbirnie is banking on him turning that around. “He is a confident guy, we all know that. He didn’t get the scores he wanted against South Africa but he is someone who is very important for this group. He has lots of runs in the bank and hopefully he can produce the goods.”This is Curtis Campher’s maiden T20I call-up•Getty ImagesThe search for match-winners
If the stalwarts don’t step up, Ireland have some youngsters waiting in the wings. Balbirnie confirmed that left-hand batter Neil Rock and South Africa-born allrounder Curtis Campher will both make their debuts in the series opener, with William McClintock set to feature at a later stage. “Exposure (for the new players) is an important thing,” Balbirnie said. “We want these guys to experience it (international cricket) here rather than on a big stage. This is a unique series in that we have a World Cup at the end of the summer and we want to make sure we have 15 players who can all win games.”Ireland will be without their most successful bowler from the South Africa series, Mark Adair, who will sit out the first few matches as he recovers from a back spasm. They have Craig Young, Josh Little and Barry McCarthy in the squad to make up the pace attack.The Williams factor
Zimbabwe’s gaps on the team-sheet are more glaring, with Test captain Sean Williams sitting out the T20 series ahead of his decision to step away from the international game after this tour. Williams arrived in Ireland six days after the rest of the squad and will only be available for the ODIs, leaving the squad without the experience of 47 caps. While newly appointed captain Craig Ervine was hesitant to be drawn into commenting on Williams’ decision, saying only “that is for him and Zimbabwe Cricket to sort out”, he stressed the need to have senior players in the squad. “It’s important to have senior players here. Having guys like Brendan Taylor, Sikandar Raza and Sean Williams helps because they bring experience,” he said.Sean Williams and Lalchand Rajput have a chat during a Zimbabwe training session•Abu Dhabi CricketCoach under pressure?
Among the rumblings over Williams stepping away is an unhappiness with coach Lalchand Rajput. Zimbabwe media has reported that Williams is among several players who cannot see how the team will progress under Rajput and the stats may indicate why. Since he took over in August 2018, they have won two out of ten Tests, four out of 24 ODIs, and seven of 28 T20Is, making the shortest format their best. Rajput’s contract is up at the end of next month and it’s difficult to see him staying on unless results improve.For Ervine, the focus needs to shift to long-term planning for the 2022 T20 World Cup and 2023 50-over World Cup, sooner rather than later. “We have to look ahead and try to get as many games as possible. We also have to test out different areas,” Ervine said. “I don’t think we can wait to do that, especially because while the T20 World Cup will be going on, it will be a quiet period for us. We must use these T20s wisely.”While Zimbabwe are well aware of what their familiar names can do, now is the time for the next batch to stake their claim. Wessley Madhevere and Blessing Muzarabani are their headline acts but the likes of Tinashe Kamunhukamwe, whose career is just 14 white-ball matches old, Milton Shumba, who has played three Tests at the age of just 20, and Tadiwanashe Marumani, who has made his international debut this year, need to show they can step up.The five-match T20I series starts with two games in Dublin before moving to Bready, with the ODIs due to be played in Belfast.

Game
Register
Service
Bonus