All posts by n8rngtd.top

As Pakistan and Zimbabwe meet in Brisbane on Sunday, an important part of their strategies will be crafted by two men who have been on the other side – Grant Flower and Dav Whatmore

Firdose Moonda in Brisbane28-Feb-2015In a modern era where video material can be shared with the simple click of a smartphone’s send button – just ask Tinashe Panyangara about that – the surreptitious spy is going the same way as the sub-300 first-innings total. But Pakistan and Zimbabwe are two teams who’ve always enjoyed a bit of the old school so it’s hardly surprising their ‘secret’ weapons are in their dressing rooms.Grant Flower, a man as Zimbabwean as they get, is Pakistan’s batting coach while Dav Whatmore, the man who led Pakistan through one of their more consistent periods, is Zimbabwe’s head coach. You may not find two men more different involved in such different outfits trying to achieve the same thing.Whatmore is a teddy-bear of a man who offers players support through a wealth of experience across continents, conditions and cultures. Flower is a person you’d rather shake hands with than hug, if only so you can see for yourself what fingers that have been broken 14 times – by his own count – look like. Whatmore is the favourite uncle, Flower the class nerd. Between them, they have infused two limp outfits, who claimed to be frustrated by a string of poor results, with enthusiasm. But now they need results.Flower had a few when Pakistan’s batsmen repaid him with nine centuries and a Test series win against Australia. Afterwards Younis Khan – who scored three centuries in that series – said it would be “unfair not to mention” Flower’s role in their success. “He worked very hard with all the batsmen. Grant was the key to our improved batting performances – he has played a role in changing our attitude towards batting,” Younis said.Ahmed Shehzad echoed the praise a few days later. He said Flower had helped Pakistan’s batsmen “raise the bar” through hard work. Pakistan are more easily linked to unpredictability than industriousness but Flower began to change that notion by bringing to them the only method he knows to be foolproof: if you lose, train; if you win, train harder.When Brendan Taylor, a beneficiary of Flower’s tireless work ethic, saw the compliments, he chimed in with one of his own on Twitter. He posted a message saying Zimbabwe were “lucky” to have had Flower as their batting coach for three years. “Great guy, great coach,” Taylor said.At that point, Zimbabwe were in the midst of sinking to an all-time low. They were on tour in Bangladesh, a series in which they lost every match they played, and their unhappiness under a strict disciplinary regime was obvious. They returned home embarrassed and in need of uplifting. Few in world cricket are capable of the latter as much as Whatmore.Having spent the bulk of his coaching career under the pressures only cricket in the subcontinent can subject someone to, Whatmore knows how to separate the very-serious from the not-so-serious. He knows when it’s time to panic and when there has just been an exaggeration, and he knew that Zimbabwe’s issues were exaggerated by the panic.From the moment his interest in the job was made public, Whatmore was calm. He used words like “sincerity” and “genuineness” to explain the Zimbabwe Cricket administration, words that have long been considered antonyms for an organisation drowning in debt and drama. He injected a sense of belief into players who had no reason to trust even themselves. He allowed them to just be, in every sense, even by letting them play football warm-ups although it gives him the heebie-jeebies for fear someone will break something.”Dav has brought a lot of positives into the team and everyone is comfortable, everyone just wants to express themselves and play the best cricket that they’re capable of,” Chigumbura said.From the distance of the opposition dugout, Flower will know that if Zimbabwe play to potential, they could be too much for Pakistan. He was part of Zimbabwean teams that beat Pakistan, both as a player and as a coach. From that same vantage point, Whatmore will know that even if Pakistan don’t play to potential, they could be too much for Zimbabwe. He saw that himself when he was in charge of them.What both men know about the other’s team is enough to prepare their own sides to win but to actually win, both Zimbabwe and Pakistan will need more than just inside knowledge. They’ll need some old-school grit and guts and the Gabba will bear witness to who has more.

Plus, six centuries in a first-class innings, and using nine bowlers in an ODI innings

Steven Lynch03-Mar-2015Both Sri Lanka’s openers were out for golden ducks in their World Cup match against Afghanistan. Has this ever happened before? asked Zaheer Ahmed from the UAE

Lahiru Thirimanne fell to the opening delivery of Sri Lanka’s innings against Afghanistan last week, then Tillakaratne Dilshan was out to his first ball, during the second over. It turns out that this has happened only once before in more than 3600 one-day internationals: in Georgetown in May 2006, Zimbabwe’s Piet Rinke was out to the first ball of the innings, and Terry Duffin followed to the first ball he faced, later in the same Fidel Edwards over. In all there have been 37 instances now of both openers falling for ducks in the same ODI innings.Wahab Riaz scored a fifty then took four wickets against Zimbabwe. Has anyone done this in the World Cup before? asked Maneck Patel from India

Wahab Riaz’s all-round achievement – he scored 54 and then took 4 for 45 against Zimbabwe in Brisbane – was the 54th occasion that someone had done this particular double in a one-day international. Only seven of those had come in the World Cup, though – including the first such instance overall, Duncan Fletcher’s 69 not out and 4 for 42 for Zimbabwe v Australia at Trent Bridge in 1983. It has since been done in the World Cup by Ian Botham (1992), Neil Johnson (1999), Maurice Odumbe and Feiko Kloppenburg (both 2003), and Yuvraj Singh and Tillakaratne Dilshan in 2011. Shahid Afridi (three times), Abdul Razzaq (twice), Aamer Sohail and Shoaib Malik had previously achieved this particular double for Pakistan in all ODIs.AB de Villiers reached 150 in 64 balls the other day. Who are the four below him in the race for the fastest 150 in ODIs? asked Amit Kumar from India

After reaching three figures in 52 balls – the second-fastest World Cup hundred, after Kevin O’Brien’s in 50 for Ireland against England in Bangalore in 2011 – AB de Villiers needed only 12 more deliveries to reach 150. His 64-ball effort smashed the record for the fastest 150 in one-day internationals, in 83 deliveries by Shane Watson for Australia against Bangladesh in Mirpur in April 2011. Earlier this year Luke Ronchi reached 150 in 92 balls for New Zealand against Sri Lanka in Dunedin, while Sanath Jayasuriya took 95 to get there for Sri Lanka against England at Headingley in July 2006. Fifth on the list at the moment is Ricky Ponting, who reached 150 in 99 deliveries for Australia v South Africa in Johannesburg in March 2006.What’s the record number of runs in a single World Cup? Strikes me that record could be smashed this time! asked Tim McAllister from New Zealand

The man at the top of the list at the moment is Sachin Tendulkar, who scored 673 runs in the 2003 World Cup. Tendulkar also scored 523 in the 1996 tournament. Four other batsmen have scored 500 runs or more in a single World Cup: Matthew Hayden hit 659, Mahela Jayawardene 548 and Ricky Ponting 539 in the 2007 competition, while Tillakaratne Dilshan made exactly 500 in 2011. Just to keep the hard-pressed bowlers happy, the record haul for one World Cup is Glenn McGrath’s 26 in 2007. Muttiah Muralitharan and Shaun Tait took 23 in 2007, as did Chaminda Vaas in 2003, when Brett Lee claimed 22.Zimbabwe used eight bowlers in their win over the UAE. Is this the most bowlers in a World Cup innings? asked Stuart from South Africa

Zimbabwe’s eight bowlers in their World Cup victory over the United Arab Emirates in Nelson turns out to be one short of the record. There have been 13 instances overall of nine bowlers in an ODI innings, and two of those were in the World Cup: by England in a convincing win over Sri Lanka in Peshawar in 1987, and by New Zealand as they sought a breakthrough in vain against Pakistan at Lancaster Park in Christchurch in 1992. For the full list, click here.Six batsmen from the Holkar team each scored a century in the same innings in the 1946 Ranji Trophy semi-final. Is that still a national/world record? asked Dinar Gupte in India

Holkar’s first effort in that Ranji Trophy semi-final in Indore in March 1946 remains the only first-class innings to contain six individual centuries. Kamal Bhandarkar made 172, Chandra Sarwate 101, Madhavsinh Jagdale 164, CK Nayudu 101, Bhausaheb Nimbalkar 172 and Pratap Singh 100 as Holkar piled up 912 for 8 before declaring. Mysore were then bowled out for 190, and then made 509 for 6. There have been only three other first-class innings which included five hundreds, two of them in Tests: by Australia against West Indies in Kingston in 1954-55, and Pakistan against Bangladesh in Multan in 2001-02. The other instance was in the Sheffield Shield in 1900-01, when New South Wales’ 918 against South Australia in Sydney included centuries from Frank Iredale, Monty Noble, Syd Gregory, Reggie Duff and Les Poidevin.

Stats highlights from the second day of the second Test between West Indies and Australia at Sabina Park

Bishen Jeswant13-Jun-20152 Previous instances – in the last five years – when West Indies’ pacers have taken nine (or more) wickets in a home Test. Five of the last 10 instances of West Indies’ pacers doing this in a home Test have come at Sabina Park.3 Australian batsmen who have been dismissed on 199 – Matthew Elliott, Steve Waugh and now Steven Smith. Overall, eight batsmen have been dismissed on 199 in Tests.20 Number of times West Indies have been bowled out for 150 or less against Australia, the joint-most for them against any team along with England. West Indies are currently 143 for 8, giving Australia the chance to hold the record on Saturday.3 Five-wicket hauls for Jerome Taylor at Sabina Park, the joint-most for any bowler at this venue. Corey Collymore and Wes Hall have also taken three five-wicket hauls each in Kingston.6/47 Taylor’s career-best figures. Each of Taylor’s three best figures in Tests have come in Jamaica – against Australia, England (5 for 11 in 2009) and India (5 for 50 in 2006).0 Times in the last 15 years when Australia have lost a Test match against West Indies after making a 300-plus score in the first innings. This last happened in Barbados in 1999.49.9 Percentage of Australia’s runs (399) scored by Smith (199). The highest percentage of runs scored by any batsman in a completed innings is 67.3%, by Australia’s Charles Bannerman (165* out of 245) in the first ever Test match in 1877.

ESPNcricinfo staff15-Jul-2015Sachith Pathirana brought Sri Lanka back into the game with two wickets on debut. Milinda Siriwardana got the wicket of Babar Azam as Pakistan fell to 96 for 3•AFPAzhar Ali and Shoaib Malik resurrected Pakistan’s innings with an 83-run stand, both making half-centuries•AFPShoaib Malik was dismissed in the 37th over for 51 and two more quick wickets followed as Pakistan were soon 217 for 6 in the 43rd over.•AFPMohammad Rizwan made the third half-century of the innings as Pakistan surged to 287 for 8 – scoring 88 runs off the last 10 overs•AFPKusal Perera blitzed the Pakistan attack from the outset, smashing a 17-ball half-century – the second-fastest in ODIs and joint-fastest for Sri Lanka•AFPThe opening stand was 92 in just 50 balls before Kusal was caught for 68, but Tillakaratne Dilshan carried the chase for a while with a measured innings•AFPDilshan and Upul Tharanga added 48 for the second wicket before Tharanga was bowled for 28 in the 19th over•AFPSri Lanka lost a clump of wickets, including that of Dilshan, as 155 for 2 soon turned to 159 for 5•AFPHowever, the hosts’ lower middle-order contributed with handy cameos as Sri Lanka completed a tough chase with two wickets and 11 balls remaining•AFP

Yorkshire have won their second successive County Championship. Do you think their first-choice XI would beat the Rest of England?

ESPNcricinfo staff10-Sep-2015See how Yorkshire compares with the Rest of England, and take the poll below.

ESPNcricinfo staff03-Sep-2015Adil Rashid removed Burns with a full toss after an opening stand worth 76•Getty ImagesDavid Warner played with a little more caution but still went to a half-century from 57 balls•PA PhotosRashid got Warner shortly after, however, and continued to chip away at Australia’s middle order•Getty ImagesMark Wood had Glenn Maxwell caught down the leg side…•Getty Images…and the run-out of Shane Watson left Australia in trouble at 193 for 6•PA PhotosHowever, Matt Wade’s punchy, unbeaten 71 from 50 balls dragged Australia up to a total of 305 for 6•PA PhotosJason Roy made his maiden international half-century as England got off to a good start in reply•Getty ImagesAlex Hales had fallen with the score on 70 and Roy then went in Maxwell’s first over for 67•Getty ImagesJames Taylor was bowled for 49 as England’s innings began to hit the buffers•Getty ImagesWatson removed Taylor and he also got rid of the key wicket of Eoin Morgan•Getty ImagesTwo wickets in two balls from Nathan Coulter-Nile effectively sealed England’s fate•Getty Images

Mohammad Amir opens up about his impending return to the highest level of the game, and what his exile taught him

Interview by Umar Farooq05-Jan-2016How do you feel after being selected for the national side again?

Getting a second chance is unbelievable, and as a Muslim I thank Allah for creating another opportunity for me. I do believe in second chances.The feeling inside me can’t be explained. I know what I have gone through, and it isn’t easy for me ahead. It’s a tough task and I am obviously a different Amir this time since my previous stint. My previous span of cricket is all over. It’s a new start for me. I have to achieve more as a person, let alone the cricketing goals.Did you believe you could return?

To be honest, I almost quit, as there were moments that discouraged me from playing cricket again. I had serious thoughts that I shouldn’t be playing cricket and that I should just part myself from it, but my family and some close friends kept me awake and motivated me. My family never let me down, otherwise I thought that five years being away from cricket are a lot and I wouldn’t be the same as before.What made you believe?
I started to feel rusty and thought my skills as a bowler had faded away after five years. I didn’t know if I would be accepted back or not, and I didn’t want to wait that long. I even considered resuming my studies. For a while I was distracted because I wasn’t playing cricket, so nothing was making sense and I could have lost faith easily, but like I said, my family and my legal team kept me alive and motivated and made me believe in my return.The way I was backed by ICC and PCB – the support was amazing, otherwise I couldn’t have made it. The road map they made for me to become a better person left all negative thoughts behind. Through the rehabilitation programme I managed to reach out to youngsters and share my experiences. That gave me a reason to stay on course.

“Money is important but it is not everything. After all, in the last five years I didn’t die starving”

Do you get the feeling you are being pushed back into cricket hastily and you need more time?
No, I don’t think that. This might be the case if wasn’t playing cricket at all but I have been back in the system for almost a year now. Played club cricket, selected for Grade 2 cricket, played domestic cricket from scratch, played first-class cricket, and then went to the BPL, so I am comfortable with all this. There is plenty of cricket under my belt and I feel ready for international cricket.Do you think you can win back the trust you lost?

I don’t know about the future and nobody knows what will happen next. As a professional sportsman I can only give my best shot to win it back. I know it is a slow process and I will definitely win it back with my performance. I am not saying or even thinking that I will come and just prevail at once within one or two matches, but I surely have to be on top of my game to win everything. I am determined to do this for the fans who stood by me, and I have to do it for them because now it’s all about their pride and I will be the guardian of their trust.Why should people trust you again?

This is tricky. If anyone says you are bad, this means he wants you to be good. I am here to be good and I want to be good. If they say I have done bad then they should also give me a chance to change myself. I need their support and I will prove to them that I am a changed person.I chose cricket and I know people madly in love with cricket got hurt and they now should trust me only because I want to repay them by watching me performing. I want them to trust me because they had something because of me, and I want to give them back with my whole heart and soul.How have you changed?
My vision of life has changed and now I am more positive. Obviously I am five years older, but I am still in my early 20s and I have experienced a lot at such an age. It was a tough time and during this ban I really learned about life in bad times. At times when everything is good, you enjoy your peak, but you are sometimes not able to differentiate between right and wrong – everything seems to be good even if you know it’s bad. So this is what I have learnt. I am more focused now towards my goals.”If I don’t have the courage to face the crowd, then I shouldn’t be coming back. I have to handle the pressure”•AFPWhat thoughts went through your mind while serving your punishment?
Anger, of course. It’s natural, and as a fast bowler it’s in the blood. But yes, they were very frustrating years, though with time I became more positive, and at the end of the day the support from everyone around me kept me focused and never let me be carried away by negative thoughts.How did it feel when Mohammad Hafeez and Azhar Ali stood against your reintegration?
Everyone has their opinion and I respect that. It’s their right to express whatever they felt and I am not hurt at all. You can’t push and force people to do what they don’t want to do. If things need to change it has to be gradual. Whatever they said, it was their opinion and I believe if there are issues, it should be addressed, discussed. But credit should be given to the board as they intervened to unite us all together.In the camp I met everyone and I am happy they all heard me, and I am lucky they understood me, and now the atmosphere is good around me. I think it’s more of a communication gap. Five years are a lot. I think when you mix with them and talk to them, they automatically see that you are a changed person, so I think with time, things will be good to great.How do you feel about being in a team or playing environment where some of your team-mates are against you?

They are not against me and I’d like to believe that. It’s their opinion and what I can say about it is, it’s their right to accept me or not. You might understand that sometimes even in a home, a mother or father might tend to favour one child or the other in the family, so I am not worried about it. With time it will be covered.

“I almost quit, as there were moments that discouraged me from playing cricket again”

Do you think the punishment you went through was fair for what you did?
I never challenged the ICC verdict. This means I accepted my punishment. It is mentioned in Islamic law that you have got to be punished if you commit a mistake. What is important is that I have learnt my lesson. Now I wish no one gets into the sort of trouble that I was in.What is your philosophy about money now?

Money is important but it is not everything. After all, in the last five years I didn’t die starving. We as professionals earn money and obviously I will play cricket for Pakistan and I will earn money because nobody is working for free, but what is more important is the trust of people. Money will come but it’s the lost time that will not come back, and it’s not money that wins you trust.Do you think you are ready for your second chance?
As a professional, you have to adjust in every situation. You become a legend only when you know your goal, role and situations. It will be tough and definitely there will be immense pressure on me when I come out onto the ground again. But I know what the requirements are and I have made up my mind. If I don’t have the courage to face the crowd, then I shouldn’t be coming back. I have to handle the pressure and I know I can do it.So you want to be a legend in cricket?
I don’t set big goals. I believe in setting small goals and achieving them, and then at the end of the day when you collect them, it becomes big. If I manage to play another eight to 10 years of cricket then I might end up in the category.On Mohammad Hafeez and Azhar Ali: “It’s their right to express whatever they felt and I am not hurt at all”•AFPDo you think you were a little arrogant on the field when you dismissed Mohammad Hafeez in the BPL?

My attitude is restricted to the ground. As a fast bowler you’ve got to have aggression, otherwise you don’t deserve to be a fast bowler. In the field you don’t have friends and buddies because you have to give 100% effort.You are being purchased in the leagues, they are giving you respect, and this is all for what? This is for performance. They want your skills and your wholehearted efforts in the field, and regardless of whether you are playing against your own countryman, you’ve got to be serious and keep yourself up in the field. A fast bowler should be like this.Tell us a little about your ongoing development as a fast bowler.

I think I clocked 145kph in the BPL and my average speed was about 142kph. For a fast bowler, rhythm is important, and the more I bowl, the more I will open myself. After five years I have come with a fresh body, and I have played ample cricket to get into tempo before being selected for the New Zealand series. And if I bowled at 144-145kph in Bangladesh this means that will go up in conditions like New Zealand, where pitches are helpful for bowlers. So I am satisfied with my bowling.Did you follow cricket throughout the five years?

I followed cricket throughout. Learnt a lot watching it. In fact, you learn a lot by watching it on TV because you observe it very closely. Cricket obviously has changed in the last five years, become faster in every format. Teams are scoring 350-plus runs in Tests in a day. In ODI cricket, two new balls from both ends is another change fast bowlers have to adjust and adapt to, but to me the basics haven’t changed, they never will, so I have covered my basics and the rest I have to just handle the situation according to the format.Would you understand if some around England cricket do not forgive you?

I think time will tell. But I know when they see me playing they will see good things, and I hope they will accept me. Playing cricket in England is what I am looking forward to in my career ahead, and I would love to bowl at Lord’s again. Fans, no matter where they are, in Pakistan or England or wherever, they were hurt, I know that, and the most important goal is to win them all.

Picking singles and twos are as vital to a T20 strategy as boundaries, and the series against Zimbabwe so far has shown it’s an area that Bangladesh need to work on

Mohammad Isam in Khulna17-Jan-2016Bangladesh were hardly challenged in the second T20I in Khulna as they crushed Zimbabwe by 42 runs. The win leaves them free to experiment more in the remaining two matches, with no risk of losing the four-match series. There was, however, an old problem that continued to dog the home side.Of Bangladesh’s 167 runs, 69 came in singles and twos while they scored 92 off boundaries. The opening partnership of Tamim Iqbal and Soumya Sarkar played out 18 dot balls and took eight singles in their 45-run stand that ended in 5.5 overs; they could not score off nearly half the balls they played in that stand.At No. 3, Sabbir Rahman was at the crease for 14.1 overs but faced only 30 balls for his 43. He contributed six runs to the 30-run second-wicket partnership with Soumya and nine to the 39-run unbroken fourth-wicket stand with Shakib Al Hasan. It was only in the partnership with Mushfiqur Rahim that Sabbir got a bit more of the strike.Against Zimbabwe in November last year, Anamul Haque’s 51-ball 47 had reportedly drawn criticism from the team management, as he continued to bat at a lower strike rate. Anamul is not a part of the current T20 set-up even as Bangladesh have looked to fill up their batting order with batsmen who start quickly, in an effort to address a problem seen across ODIs and T20s.The inclusion of Shuvagata Hom and Nurul Hasan for the first two T20s in Khulna, Sabbir Rahman’s promotion, and the sidelining of Imrul Kayes from the playing XI are all indications that the coach Chandika Hathurusingha wants busy batsmen who can find gaps upon arrival at the crease.In the last 12 months, on an average 53.7% of Bangladesh’s runs have come off boundaries. In the first match of this series, nearly half of their runs came in fours and sixes. While it is key to look for boundaries in T20s, it is not the only strategy. Picking singles and twos are as vital to building a big total in T20s as they are in ODIs. So when Tamim and Soumya were playing attractive shots in the second match, the score didn’t rise accordingly.When taking regular ones and twos, a batting side ensures that the fielders are in two minds whether they should be holding back on top of the circle and at the boundary rope, or walk in to save the ones and twos. When the opposite happens, however, the bowling side always has a chance. Zimbabwe had periods of play in the second match when they tied a batsman down at one end but their own lack of experience did not help them.Towards the end, as Shakib failed to connect many balls, it looked as if he could have given the strike back to the more set Sabbir, and this may have helped Bangladesh move past 180.Bangladesh captain Mashrafe Mortaza said that they are focusing on improving on lack of singles in their batting approach, which he felt had to be covered through fours and sixes.”In T20 cricket, it is difficult to play a perfect match,” Mashrafe said. “There are times when singles don’t come and you have to play boundaries to cover the score. But if you can take as many singles it is good, especially when the odd boundary is already coming. That’s an area which we are focusing on.”Since Bangladesh are in the process of learning more about their T20 abilities, they should keep in mind the importance of taking singles and twos. Explosive batsmen are important, but these small percentages will help them stay ahead of the opposition.

No Indian batsman in the Kings XI line-up is close to threatening a spot in the T20I team, and it showed in the way they tied themselves in a mess in the middle overs against Gujarat Lions

Sidharth Monga in Mohali11-Apr-20161:26

‘Bravo’s spell was the turning point’ – Finch

Two yorkers. One fast, one slow. Both at the base of the stumps. Glenn Maxwell and David Miller gone. It will be tempting to surmise that Dwayne Bravo, rightly being hailed as arguably the best bowler in this IPL, won Gujarat Lions the match in one over, but it is important to also look at events that led to this big over and those that followed it. Kings XI Punjab’s Indian batsmen – not one of them is anywhere close to threatening a spot in the Indian T20I side – will have to take a lot of the blame.M Vijay and Manan Vohra got off to a dream start with the new ball coming on to the bat, when all that was required to do was clear the infield. In T20 cricket, especially on Indian pitches, the bowling side is not overly bothered by these kind of starts, so long as the batsmen are going at under 10 an over. The best bowlers are saved for the overs immediately after the Powerplay. This is when lesser T20 batsmen get stuck.There is no time for batsmen to relax in a T20 game. If you do have a slow period in the middle, you better trust your game as much as Virat Kohli does, and you better be that good. If you cannot hit boundaries, you should be able to keep working the twos and be able to go at a strike-rate of about 120 before you can open up again. As they got stuck into Sarabjit Ladda and Pradeep Sangwan, Vijay and Vohra took Kings XI to 52 for 0 in six overs. Then, Gujarat Lions went to their best bowlers: Ravindra Jadeja and Bravo.In the sixth over, Vijay hit his final boundary. Until then Vijay batted beautifully, his flicks languid, his drives free-flowing. Even opponent Aaron Finch said for some time it was beautiful to watch. In T20s, though, there is not much room for the niceties of the high elbow.Vijay eventually fell in the 11th over, trying to hit Jadeja inside-out – a low-percentage shot unless you are playing with a wet ball or on a perfectly flat surface. Vijay scored 10 off the last 14 balls he faced. Vohra enjoyed some luck in a slow start – he was dropped early by Bravo – but he too relied just on the big shots, and perished to the wily Jadeja. Ajinkya Rahane faces criticism for similar dismissals in T20Is.By the time Miller and Maxwell came together, Kings XI had fallen behind on a pitch where 190 was about par. They were ideally the men to be doing the big hitting at the end, but were obliged to look for those big ones earlier than they would have wanted. That task was made even more difficult because they came up against Gujarat’s best bowler, Bravo.Just before Miller was done in by the Bravo slower one, the field had changed. Midwicket had gone back, and third man had come in. It was apparent Bravo was going to bowl a slower ball. This was also the last ball of the over. Who knows if, in another circumstance, Miller would have just looked to pick a single? A proper batsman should not be getting so befuddled by a slower ball when it has been telegraphed.What followed was a reminder that Wriddhiman Saha, despite being a plucky Test batsman and despite one great IPL season, is a limited T20 batsman, especially when the field has been spread out. His 20 off 25 was one of the prime reasons Kings XI fell 30 short of a par score. They now have a problem at hand. Their Indian batsmen will have to pull their weight, and their two big star batsmen will have to pull themselves out of an ordinary run of form.

The ICC’s plans to bring meaningful context to the format and to expand its horizons have been rejected before, but this time things are looking up

Tim Wigmore13-Jun-2016Since it was first played in 1877, Test cricket has been a byword for conservatism. This image of a game impervious to shifting sands conceals how much has actually been altered: Tests have been scheduled over three, four, five, six or unlimited days, on uncovered or covered pitches; overs have been six or eight balls long, delivered by cricketers bowling underarm or overarm; the number of teams has risen from two to ten; and in recent years, the DRS and day-night games have been introduced. Evolution has been constant.Yet perhaps none of these changes are as significant as the ones that could be ratified at the end of June. The introduction of two divisions – seven teams in Division One, and five, including two new Test nations, in Division Two, playing under a league system to determine promotion and relegation every two years – would give Test cricket a context and structure that it has always lacked.Meritocracy would no longer be anathema to Test cricket. Any of the ICC’s 105 members would have the opportunity to reach the pinnacle, based on their performances. Order would be created out of Test cricket’s chaotic, disjointed and sometimes downright irrational scheduling. It would be the most radical move in the history of the Test game, and it is envisaged it will lead to Tests generating more interest and cash, safeguarding the longest format’s future.”Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it,” Mark Twain once bemoaned. The same has long been true about “protecting the primacy of Test cricket”: much talked about by administrators but seldom acted upon. Day-night Tests are welcome but don’t address how to give Tests greater relevance. The idea of points across formats in a series, introduced by England this summer, is an attempt to create more context, but how is a series super if it does not count towards anything?This time no one can accuse the ICC of modest tweaking while being oblivious to the fundamental issues Tests face, the administrative equivalent of debating the colour of the curtains while the house is burning down. Led by David Richardson, the ICC has come up with a plan that it believes can save Test cricket, and ensure it can peacefully coexist with T20.Each team in Division One would play every other side home or away over a two-year cycle. Most of these would be three-match series – so nine Tests at home and nine away every two years, 18 in total. Each match and each series would be apportioned a certain number of points. It could be as simple as three points for a win in a match, and one for a draw, though the details are still being thrashed out. These points determine the overall standings. At the end of each two-year cycle – the first would begin after the 2019 World Cup and end in early 2021 – there would be a winner of Division One, effectively a winner of the World Test League, and the bottom side that would be relegated.Unlike now, when the Test rankings have little integrity, and are fiendishly complicated, such a structure would be simple and easily understood, and build towards producing a clearly identifiable winner. Never again would we have a new No. 1 for bureaucratic reasons, as often happens when old results are discounted from the rankings every April and the Test mace changes hands.

Moving the World T20 back to every two years will raise $400-500 million in extra profit every eight-year cycle. These funds would be more than enough to bankroll the two Test divisions

Division Two would be structured similarly to Division One, but it would only include five teams, with each playing the other home or away, perhaps in two-Test series, amounting to eight Tests each every two years. The winner would automatically be promoted, while the side finishing second might have a playoff, against the team finishing sixth in Division One, to determine who would be in Division One for the next cycle.The bottom team in Division Two would face a playoff with the top team in the Intercontinental Cup, which would remain a first-class competition. The I-Cup would be played by six countries – playing two matches at home every two years and two away, with the final round played out concurrently in the UAE – and the bottom side would also face relegation, probably after a playoff with the leading team in the World Cricket League structure below the I-Cup.Aspects of this plan might sound familiar, and in many ways they are. Something similar was proposed by Rohan Sajdeh of the Boston Consulting Group in 2008 (which had been commissioned by Cricket Australia) but was rejected, partly because teams did not get enough freedom in the schedule to stage the most lucrative series. Two years ago Australia, England and India tried to introduce promotion and relegation, with eight teams playing Test cricket and the rest in the I-Cup. The only snag? The Big Three would be exempt from relegation.That would not be the case this time. “If we end up in Division Two, it is our own fault, simple as that,” ECB chairman Colin Graves recently said.The attitude shift is not only explained by the change in personnel among the Big Three. It also owes to the essential pragmatism of what is being proposed. The structure would only occupy about five months a year, deliberately leaving gaps in the schedule for teams to organise extra matches, including against teams from different divisions.The Ashes could remain a five-Test series played on its current cycle no matter what. If Australia and England were in the same division, then only three Tests would count towards the league standings. Or, less simply, each Test would be weighted to give the series the same overall points as a three-match series.The freedom to organise extra matches means that relegation to Division Two need not be catastrophic, especially as the mandatory schedule in Division Two would be light. If India were in Division Two, they would only be compelled to play four home Tests every two years – a minuscule obligation set against the 13 Tests planned for their next home summer – which would leave them ample time to organise more attractive Tests.Other countries in Division Two might also be able to arrange extra matches against Division One sides. If Bangladesh were in Division Two, teams could play a Test there as preparation for touring other countries in the subcontinent, just as they could play Ireland before touring England, or Zimbabwe before touring South Africa.With the prospect of teams like Ireland being invited to play Tests, cricket looks set to finally shed its insular image•Getty ImagesThe pragmatism of the envisaged reforms reflects the realities of world cricket; the ICC’s need is not to devise a utopian structure but simply a good structure that will secure enough votes to be made a reality. It is no coincidence that seven countries would be in Division One, and the proposals would need the vote of seven of the ten Full Member representatives in the ICC board to get through.Yet even teams in Division Two could have something to gain, especially if they negotiated deals with Division One countries guaranteeing some matches outside of the structure – an obvious sweetener to the three Full Members who would initially be in Division Two.Bangladesh and Zimbabwe play so few matches against the top nations now – Zimbabwe have been temporarily removed from the rankings as a result – that the chance to lift themselves up to Division One, and receive regular guaranteed matches, might appeal.The gravest concerns are for West Indies. Their place in Division Two would be a sobering reminder of how far they have fallen, and they have no geographical neighbours in Division One, perhaps making it harder for them to entice Division One sides to play there. Yet the WICB might view the chance to establish the side in Division One as something more appealing than them continuing to bumble along near the bottom of the Test rankings. The aspiration could also be a unifying force in the Caribbean.The ICC’s challenge is not merely to get a new structure passed but to work out how to pay for it. One favoured option is to introduce competition grants for each country playing Test cricket, covering the costs of each team’s matches within the structure, and then leaving it up to the nations to fund any extra cricket they arrange. Some of the money needed to fund the new structure could come from redirecting the Test Cricket Fund. The rest could be found by resolving the ICC’s imminent dilemma about what to do with all its extra cash.Moving the World T20 back to every two years will raise US$400-500 million in extra profit every eight-year cycle. These funds would be more than enough to bankroll the two Test divisions. Effectively, T20 would be subsidising Test matches, just as some TV stations use soaps to subsidise documentaries.More ambitiously, the ICC has tentatively discussed selling all Test matches within the structure collectively, although this would require many more months of negotiation even if two divisions are voted through.

If India were in Division Two they would only be compelled to play four home Tests every two years, which would leave them ample time to organise more attractive Tests

In the English Premier League and beyond, it is the norm for teams to sell rights collectively, which generates more money than them doing so individually. After it had given out the relevant competition grants, the ICC would then distribute surplus funds to members according to an agreed formula. India would still receive far more than any other country, but the hope is that everyone could be better off.Either way, a funding mechanism needs to be devised, so that sides do not lose out if their series with India in Division One happens to be away, depriving them of the proceeds of home TV rights.Even if the TV rights are not sold collectively, the proposed new structure would boost the economic value of Tests, believes Simon Chadwick, a sports business expert from the University of Salford. In sports the world over, fans have shown they are more likely to watch matches with consequences – those that are part of a competition rather than merely bilateral contests.The popularity of Rugby sevens has rocketed since the World Rugby Sevens Series was introduced in 1999. Hockey has just agreed to a new structure giving matches greater context. In cricket the soaring value of ICC events contrasts with the stagnating value for bilateral fixtures, including ODIs and T20Is.The reforms would also mean that supporters in one country had a stake in the results of other matches, as they could impact their prospects of winning the league or being relegated – and if even a tiny percentage of English or Indian fans had a new reason to watch New Zealand play Sri Lanka, say, the economics of the series could be transformed.If Full Member boards can be convinced of this financial argument, it bodes well for the ICC’s plans. Nothing drives votes quite like self-interest. Richardson has tried to introduce divisions in Tests since 2004. He and the rest of the ICC’s management have been frustrated more than they would care to remember. This time could just be different.