More »
 |
| click on cartoon to enlarge |
Showing posts with label England vs Australia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label England vs Australia. Show all posts
Protective Gears – Then and Now
Let us transport ourselves to the days of Jardine`s bodyline series made famous by the sheer speed and accuracy of Harold Larwood and Bill Voce. It is reported that the fastest ball by Larwood was recorded at 96 mph (remember miles not kilometers) with only the not so precise electrical instruments of the thirties, but players of his time vouched him to be even faster.
The essence of the bodyline theory was to attack the batsman with short rising deliveries rather than aim at the wickets. The purpose was to intimidate the indomitable Don and prevent him from scoring as many at such furious rate. It succeeded to a large extent, because Bradman failed in the series, but only by his lofty standards. His average in the series stood at 53 point something as against his grand average of 100 minus fraction. But his average of 54 for the bloodiest series is as good as, if not better than the average of all the modern gladiators- Lara and Sachin included.
But…
Bradman played in only four of the five match series and scored a century, a fifty plus (73, I Believe) and two near fifties in the eight innings he played in the series. Not a bad job for a man facing missiles hurled at him in excess of 150 kmph constantly by the deadliest combination of Larwood and Voce.
Of course he did take quite a few body blows, so did the old Bill Ford and the versatile Macabe. But they scored runs, not enough to win the ashes (they lost the series 1-4), But enough to show some fight and determination.
Let us consider the protective armor that Don and his contemporaries had.
The pads that protected the longest single bone of the body that carries the frame on it.
The pair of gloves that protected the maximum number of bone joints in our body.
Then the abdomen guard that protected the human race.
Some preferred to have a cap to protect against the sun-glare.
A pair of buck-skin boots to protect the toes and they had spikes to give a good grip.
Contrast this with the gladiatorial gears of the modern day professional. A helmet to protect the skull. A chest pad to protect the chest. The arm guard to protect the fore arm. The conventional box to protect the vitals. Then a thigh pad that covered the part of the leg above the knee. The conventional pad to protect the legs.
With a donkey’s load of protective gear the best average of all the greats of the fully armored men of modern times just about matches the scantily protected Bradman and the co exposed to the ‘bodyline attack’ of the bowlers hurling down constantly in excess of 150 kmph.
Perhaps the pre-gladiatorial men are driven by fear. How else can we explain the craze for more and more of protective gears? Added to the satiety of the protective gears is the senseless law (added quite recently) restricting the fast bowler to bowl no more than one short rising delivery aimed at the batsman.
The fast bowler has become near irrelevant. A few McGrath’s still command respect, but these are the men of Gubby Allen pace, not the express pace of Larwood.
If KP’s switch hit and the now more often used reverse-sweep are legitimate , why should the bowler be obliged to inform the umpire and the batsman if the is going to bowl over around the wicket. Let the bowler run up and deliver the ball from whatever angle he wants.
Why should law prevent a bowler from wearing some rough plaster around the fingers of his bowling arm to get better grip of the ball. Why should law prevent a bowler (or a quiet captain like Atherton) from applying some foreign matter to one surface of the ball or lift the seam (a la Tendulkar) with the nail.
If law could be silent about new arrivals in a batsman’s protective gear, it has to go silent about what adds to the advantage of a bowler. Or it is not cricket. (Both in the literal and in the figurative sense)
by M Rajagopalan
The essence of the bodyline theory was to attack the batsman with short rising deliveries rather than aim at the wickets. The purpose was to intimidate the indomitable Don and prevent him from scoring as many at such furious rate. It succeeded to a large extent, because Bradman failed in the series, but only by his lofty standards. His average in the series stood at 53 point something as against his grand average of 100 minus fraction. But his average of 54 for the bloodiest series is as good as, if not better than the average of all the modern gladiators- Lara and Sachin included.
But…
Bradman played in only four of the five match series and scored a century, a fifty plus (73, I Believe) and two near fifties in the eight innings he played in the series. Not a bad job for a man facing missiles hurled at him in excess of 150 kmph constantly by the deadliest combination of Larwood and Voce.
Of course he did take quite a few body blows, so did the old Bill Ford and the versatile Macabe. But they scored runs, not enough to win the ashes (they lost the series 1-4), But enough to show some fight and determination.
Let us consider the protective armor that Don and his contemporaries had.
The pads that protected the longest single bone of the body that carries the frame on it.
The pair of gloves that protected the maximum number of bone joints in our body.
Then the abdomen guard that protected the human race.
Some preferred to have a cap to protect against the sun-glare.
A pair of buck-skin boots to protect the toes and they had spikes to give a good grip.
Contrast this with the gladiatorial gears of the modern day professional. A helmet to protect the skull. A chest pad to protect the chest. The arm guard to protect the fore arm. The conventional box to protect the vitals. Then a thigh pad that covered the part of the leg above the knee. The conventional pad to protect the legs.
With a donkey’s load of protective gear the best average of all the greats of the fully armored men of modern times just about matches the scantily protected Bradman and the co exposed to the ‘bodyline attack’ of the bowlers hurling down constantly in excess of 150 kmph.
Perhaps the pre-gladiatorial men are driven by fear. How else can we explain the craze for more and more of protective gears? Added to the satiety of the protective gears is the senseless law (added quite recently) restricting the fast bowler to bowl no more than one short rising delivery aimed at the batsman.
The fast bowler has become near irrelevant. A few McGrath’s still command respect, but these are the men of Gubby Allen pace, not the express pace of Larwood.
If KP’s switch hit and the now more often used reverse-sweep are legitimate , why should the bowler be obliged to inform the umpire and the batsman if the is going to bowl over around the wicket. Let the bowler run up and deliver the ball from whatever angle he wants.
Why should law prevent a bowler from wearing some rough plaster around the fingers of his bowling arm to get better grip of the ball. Why should law prevent a bowler (or a quiet captain like Atherton) from applying some foreign matter to one surface of the ball or lift the seam (a la Tendulkar) with the nail.
If law could be silent about new arrivals in a batsman’s protective gear, it has to go silent about what adds to the advantage of a bowler. Or it is not cricket. (Both in the literal and in the figurative sense)
by M Rajagopalan
Listen to KP speak.
There’s clarity, swift thought, quick talk. None of that “at the end of the day” repetition he gets to when the chips are down. When KP lost game after game in India, he ended many days, one-day after the other.
Listen to KP now. He sounds good enough to start scoring 158 again. KP on song is good for English cricket, the IPL, Mallaya’s investment, test cricket, yeah, most of all test cricket – he will come down the wicket, break his ribs, break the bowler, break it down again.
If he gets going in tests, the average paranoid Nasser Hussein will first look at him going beyond fifty. The Aussies, they will, never mind. I’ve always considered KP to be a bit of a Jatman – he has the madness to use the bat like a luth (stick) – in him, I also see a bit of Yuvi.
There is the desire to dominate, to whip the enemy into shape – kill the air with his fists, howl that mad war cry, these are the Beowulfs – they are already part of legend, no matter what they do or don't do from here.
English cricket craves KP, just as Indian cricket continues to crave Yuvraj. It’s a grand obsession, a pagallpan.
The Ashes T20 Final
A year ago, we had proudly predicted an Ashes T20 Final but sadly it wasnt to be.
Never mind, Life always gives a second chance. So, we are on the brink of an ashes T20 final this time, and what's more, England are actually looking competitive.
Very often, when you watch re-runs of tournaments, hindsight provides you clues from the league and semis where the winning team had some magic moments. In 2007, it was the way providence kept saving India, with the Bowl-out win, Yuvraj going ballsitic when it looked like the total will just be competitive, and Rohit Sharma taking India to safety after a top order failure in the Semis. Then, there was Sreesanth with that delivery to Hayden.
So, this time I applied that hindsight in advance, and it seems to me that team that have had that magic this time are Australia. Thrice, their top order failed, and thrice, there was magic with someone or the other putting their hands up and rescuing them. Portents? I think so. I would be extremely surprised if Australia dont make it to the finals, atleast. Considering England's form, it wont be that big a surprise if they beat Australia in the finals. Nevertheless, it is going to be tough for England. They'll be hoping to have Pakistan in the finals. Lightning doesnt strike twice - I dont think Pakistan can repeat last year's feat. So, it is either England or Australia. An Ashes Final.
In retrospect, it is alleged that the 2007 T20 WC was fixed to revive Cricket in Sub-Continent. Should we do the same now if there is an Ashes final? Wouldnt it be a great fillip to England Cricket, if England win the WC now? I suggest let's all start using the same tactic as western media and allege that this was fixed to revive English T20 and LOI cricket :-)
Sickening
Swann scalped five, and I was unfortunate enough to watch him turn it up like he’d won five. At six nil, is it wrong to expect muted celebrations?
It was downright disturbing: not as much to see Brett Lee bowled but Swann’s reaction; for heaven’s sake man, that was Lee not Lincoln that you cleaned out.
Worse, that Johnson fellow had just been Swanned in the same over. If it’s any consolation Swann did not make the winning runs. He did however win the Man of the Match, which thankfully I refused to see. Had I, I would have been see-sick again, you know what I mean.
93.3 mph
Brett Lee makes a case for a nutcase sport called one-day international cricket.
No way I was going to watch it all, but Lee’s overs I’d booked. Lucky to walk in on him prising Luke Wright out, the edge was faint, the batsmen were faint of heart.
The speeds were what you call speed – 90 mph plus, 150 kmph. And the trademark Lee air-punch, shove that clenched fist downwards, repeat; they need a soundtrack for that baby. Brett’s band should play.
There was Rock ‘n’ Roll in a one-dayer after a long time. The short of length bazookas at 93 mph were fierce enough to press an alert batsman’s fear buttons, and thrill the most languid of cricket watchers.
There was a shorter one that zipped past Bresnan’s benign head – nobody was expected to score, survival would suffice.
Endgame:
46.1: England 210/9, Lee in to Collingwood @56.
Brett unleashes the fireball yorker @93.3mph.
Sometimes it’s a pleasure to be knocked over, that was one such ball.
Move over Mitchell Johnson, that blonde kid who refuses to age is back.
Boom Boom Brett Lee!
Good stuff on Freddie and Broad.
"Good morning all and welcome to our coverage of the second ODI. The news is that Stuart Broad's out of the match with a neck strain, so it's good to see he's taking his role as Andrew Flintoff's replacement seriously."
Cricinfo does outdo itself sometimes.
Beer Cricket.
The ball behaved like a hooligan. Streaked past the boundary and then knocked the beer of its perch. The beer stumbled, emptied itself on the ball. Beer and ball frolicked on the grass, it was a moment. The bereaved (the beer-eaved) was overcome with shock and media glare excitement.
Then the beer-ball was dried, and bowled with.
Minutes of tweets, 2nd Day Ashes:
Beer on ball. Look out for beamers.
In spite of the beer, the ball kept low.
Rudi though was high as a kite. Guess he drank the ball.
If that didn’t make sense, well, neither did Rudi.
On the rebound
On my return with my shades’ case, mithai, crumpled paper napkins in one hand, key in the other. On cue, the case is airborne, out of my hand, ready to drop, but unlike Flintoff, I catch it on the rebound. It’s only minutes later that I watch the Flintoff drop, and hear Gower rue, it could have been five wickets. Now it is, Clarke gone.
mithchell johnson's woes: one could see it coming
as early as march 2009 during south africa's tour of australia...we at BCC! observed that it won't take johnson long to turn turtle the way he is taking the load...much like brett lee...
this is what we noted then...
he has bowled nearly 450 overs in his last 9 tests...club that with the time spent while batting...and you can imagine the herculean effort he puts in for australia match after match...innings after innings...
but till when?
we have already seen what happened to brett lee...he succumbed to the relentless workload of carrying the attack after the retirements of stalwarts like warne and macgrath...
...and it won't be long before johnson too will burn out that last ounce of energy left in him...
the scenario can't be ruled out when it will be time for fully fit brett lee raring to go at opponents...johnson will be cooling his heels in a quiet rehabilitation room...
this explains...?
australia could have been 1-1 but for ponting...
face it ponting...
but for your never ending mid pitch conferences with bowlers and your itchy penchant to discuss game with umpires when other captain would get on with his job...you could have been 1-1...despite flintoff's heroics...and not even strauss could have done anything with his 'time wasting' tactics then...
This could be Lord’s or this could be Mohali!
Right now I’d like to be on a flight to London, minor issues of visa notwithstanding. There is an almost magnetic pull to some test matches – like Mohali, October, 2008, the 5th day. India on the verge, Australia on the edge. And here we are again, Lord’s, July, 2009, the 5th day, England on the verge, Australia, you know where they are.
4th day, Mohali, Australia finished 5 down (ditto Lord’s) – Clarke and Haddin still there. That series though, neither Haddin’s mind nor feet were moving. Now, Haddin is uncluttered, and batting with him is, Clarke boy again.
Looking back, Mohali, like Lord’s, followed a drawn test. Both 2nd tests, and in both tests, Australia’s adversaries had the follow-on option, which they did not use. Useless I say.
In both tests, Australia was set a target in excess of 500. (516 and 522)
That 5th day in Mohali, you remember what Zaks did – he did Australia in. Who will do them tomorrow?
You know what I'm thinking: Really miss Teri Maa Ki - that was the the Teri 'Marquee' series!
Post Match Note - Both matches were lost by Australia pre-lunch. That's food for thought.
ashes: england should send flintoff one down...
england should send flintoff at one down with the license to go for kill...
it will serve them two purpose with one stroke...
while ball being relatively hard he can flex his muscle without doing all the running...and even if he gets out...will give him more time to recuperate that ailing knee...to be used properly as bowler...
To follow on or not to follow on is that the question?
By batting on, and averting the follow-on, the Aussie tail-enders could be doing England no small favour – for one, it takes the dodgy decision making out of England’s itchy hands. That’s fine, as England don’t look too hot on decisions. This way, it’s pretty simple – England bat again, and more importantly, KP and the other duds can work at redemption.
Also, there's this not so minor issue, how much has Freddie left in the tank? You don't want him to retire like Kumble, in the middle of a match. Don't want to be even tempted by a follow on, do you Strauss?
Just go out there with a clear head skip, not thinking about no follow on.
A stray thought, what's the max a captain should bowl his boys, before eliminating the follow on option - 75 overs?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
