How Glenn McGrath and Steve Harmison exploited the Lord’s pitch

On the Ball by S Rajesh and Arun Gopalakrishnan21-Jul-2005A day which began magnificently for the hosts turned pear-shaped by the end entirely due to the efforts of one outstanding individual. Before this Test, Glenn McGrath’s Lord’s stats read: 17 wickets in two matches at 12.76. One day into his third game at this venue, and the numbers look even better – 22 wickets at an incredible 10.82. McGrath has already won the Man-of-the-Match award in his first two Tests here, and if today’s performance is any indication, he’s well on his way to a hat-trick.As always, McGrath’s control over line and length was impeccable. The pitch, with its inconsistent bounce, was tailor-made for him, and McGrath exploited it to the hilt, homing in just around off stump, nipping it either way, and allowing the vagaries of the track to do the rest.A look at McGrath’s pitch map tells the story – 71 out 78 balls pitched on a good length, that’s a mind-boggling 91%. Fifteen of his deliveries pitched on or outside leg stump, but 14 of those were to left-handers from over the wicket, which meant that the angle of delivery would have forced the batsmen to play at them. Against right-handers, McGrath’s control was stunning – 52 good-length balls out of 58, with one ball which drifted further on side than off stump.McGrath’s virtuoso performance completely overshadowed Steve Harmison’s heroics earlier in the day. He was expected to be Australia’s biggest threat this Ashes, and so he proved on the very first day of the series with a fiery spell of 5 for 43. The key was the length that he bowled: of the 68 deliveries Harmison sent down, only three were pitched up, and they disappeared for 11 runs. He learnt quickly, and kept it on a good length or just short – on a pitch of varying bounce, that was the perfect way to bowl. Of the 51 good-length balls, 32 were back of a length, and all the 20 balls which pitched outside leg were to left-handers from over the wicket.The Australians didn’t help their cause by playing in one-day mode – they let only 71 out of 254 deliveries go through to Geraint Jones. A more cautious approach might have been the need of the hour on the first-day Lord’s pitch, but then Australia only play their cricket one way.

A review of the Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack Australia 2005-06

Peter English24-Nov-2005

© Getty Images
Edited by Greg Baum, Hardie Grant Books, A$55 (available from Cricshop for £19.99)
Click here to order a copy from CricShopThe southern hemisphere’s cousin of the Almanack burst into a full-colour cover-drive last season and the bright outlook has been maintained for 2005-06. A new editor has arrived in Greg Baum, but Shane Warne again appears on the front and this summer his left-arm is draped around a dejected Ricky Ponting in Ashes consolation. Warne is a popular topic but the Ashes are the big issue as Gideon Haigh leads the tour coverage and Baum passes verdict in his .”The Australian dynasty, like all empires, has seemed so invulnerable for so long that the idea it might be at an end comes as a shock,” Baum writes. The age of the team is one concern – he notes the two oldest players are its best – and he also attempts to understand the polarised opinions of supporters towards Warne at home and in England. “It is like the difference between family and friends,” he says. “You can secretly love the roguish genius in another family, but you fret about the one in your own.”Warne is also a subject of Charles Davis, a Melbourne scientist, who looks beyond basic averages to compare him to Muttiah Muralitharan using a maths book full of statistics. “If the figures are to be trusted,” Davis writes, “Murali is the greatest bowler of our time.” John Benaud, the former selector, also writes in the comment section about dealing with criticism and bias, the first glimpse of Twenty20 in Australia is analysed and Keith Miller is remembered through Tony Charlton’s eulogy-in-chief.Geoff Lawson pens a tribute to Glenn McGrath, the Cricketer of the Year, Michael Bevan’s record-breaking summer is recognised with the Pura Cup Player of the Year award and there are the invaluable statistics, match reports and player profiles. “Last year got an exciting makeover,” Baum writes. “This year, we have consolidated and fortified the strength of the publication … we flatter ourselves to think that the mix now is pretty damned good.”

Andrew Miller looks back on ten of the greatest momentum-seizing matches in Anglo-Australian history

Andrew Miller07-Jul-2005The 2005 Ashes is England’s best opportunity in a generation to reclaim the prize that has eluded them for the best part of two decades. As the preparation for the series hots up, Andrew Miller looks back on ten of the greatest momentum-seizing matches in Anglo-Australian history

Only Test, 1882, The Oval

The match that spawned the legend itself. Until Fred “The Demon” Spofforth intervened with 14 wickets in a low-scoring classic, England had generally scoffed at the notion of a defeat against the “Colonials”. But, in a bad-tempered thriller that caused one spectator to chew through his umbrella handle and another to drop dead with heart failure, England were set 85 to win … and failed. Not for the last time, Australia were galvanised by England’s haughty attitude – especially when WG Grace ran out Sammy Jones as he stepped down the pitch to repair a divot. The Sporting Times spoke for a shocked nation when it published its mock obituary of English cricket, and concluded that “the body will be cremated and the Ashes taken to Australia.”Fifth Test, 1926, The Oval

England fans think they have had it bad for the past 16 years, but few victories can have been so gratefully received – or felt so long overdue – as England’s series-clincher at The Oval in 1926. As was the case throughout the 1990s, England must have feared they would never again get a whiff of the Ashes. Since the Great War, Australia had won 12 Tests to England’s one, and after four draws in succession, the call went out to an unlikely hero – the 49-year-old Wilfred Rhodes, who had not played a Test for five years. His veteran status was offset by the youth of Harold Larwood, making his debut at the age of 21, but it was the old firm of Hobbs and Sutcliffe who broke the deadlock. Their twin centuries in England’s second innings established a commanding advantage, and Rhodes swept up with four wickets to spark the celebrations.

Third Test, 1932-33, Adelaide

England took a significant step towards reclaiming the Ashes, but came perilously close to losing an Empire, in one of the most controversial matches in history. Douglas Jardine’s ruthless leadership had but one aim – to stop Bradman in his tracks – and so he packed his leg-side field and instructed Larwood and Bill Voce, his fast bowlers, to bowl short and into the ribs. The sides were locked at 1-1 going into the third Test, but when Bill Woodfull was struck a sickening blow over the heart and Bert Oldfield sustained a cracked skull, the series erupted. “Only one side is playing cricket,” a furious Woodfull told MCC’s manager, Pelham Warner, as cables flew backwards and forwards between Lord’s and Adelaide, and mounted police had to be sent in to quell a seething crowd. Anglo-Australian relations would never be quite the same again.First Test, 1946-47, Brisbane

England’s post-war fortunes might have been transformed in an instant had one of the most keenly disputed catches in history been upheld. At the age of 38 and in poor health, speculation had been rife about Bradman’s future in the game, and during a nervy start to the first Ashes Test since the war, he did his utmost to bat himself into an early retirement. On 28, Jack Ikin at slip claimed what appeared to be a legitimate catch, but the umpires were unconvinced and with that reprieve, Bradman relaxed. He added a further 159 in an Australian total of 645 to lay the foundations of an innings victory, and sow the seeds of the Invincibles, who would tour England 18 months later.

Second Test, 1953, Lord’s
“The Bailey block” was one of the most celebrated (non-) strokes among schoolchildren in the 1950s, and never was it better exemplified than at Lord’s in a magnificent series-turning stand. England had slipped to 73 for 4 with most of the final day remaining when Trevor Bailey came together with Willie Watson, who was playing in his first Ashes match. Victory was out of the question but defeat, with Australia having held the Ashes for 19 years, was unthinkable. A grimly defiant stand of 163 in four-and-a-half hours staved off defeat and turned the tide of a series that England would eventually clinch, amid jubilant scenes at The Oval, three Tests later.Second Test, 1954-55, Sydney

England’s grip on the Ashes was looking distinctly dodgy as they were swept to an innings defeat in the opening match of the series, and they hardly looked fit to mount a fightback when Australia skittled them for 154 in the first innings of the second Test – especially when their strike bowler, Frank Tyson, was knocked cold by a Ray Lindwall bouncer. It was, however, the costliest delivery that Lindwall would ever send down. Revived and inspired, Tyson bowled like the wind for the remainder of the match, and again in the next Test at Melbourne, as England won a thrilling series by three Tests to one.First Test, 1974-75, Brisbane

Forty-one years on from the Battle of Adelaide, Australia exacted their revenge for the Bodyline series with one of the most brutal muggings ever carried out on a cricket field. Ironically, Australia were perceived to lack firepower coming into the series. Dennis Lillee had been sidelined for much of the year with a grievous back injury, while Jeff Thomson was, apparently, a no-mark surfer-dude with one wicketless Test to his name. But, from the moment that Tony Greig decided that a bouncer barrage was the way forward, the die was cast and England never knew what hit them.

Third Test, 1981, Headingley

The greatest heist in the history of the game, and the moment that catapulted Ian Botham into the Ashes pantheon. One down in the series and following on, England had slumped to a miserable 135 for 7 and were still 92 runs from avoiding an innings defeat when Botham, England’s recently deposed captain, was joined by Graham Dilley. Ladbrokes was offering an infamous 500-1 on an England victory as the pair decided to make merry with some “pure village green slogging”, as Mike Brearley memorably put it. Slowly but surely, the impossible became a tantalising reality, as Botham’s unbeaten 149 secured a slender target of 130. It turned out to be just enough, as Bob Willis, seemingly in a trance, charged down the slope for the spell of his life.First Test, 1989, Headingley

It seems hard to recall now, but England actually began their annus horriblis in 1989 as favourites. By the end of the first innings of the series, that perception had been changed forever. Australia were asked to bat first and amassed a vast 601 for 7 declared, with centuries for Mark Taylor, in his first Ashes Test, and Steve Waugh, who had begun to despair of ever reaching three figures, after failing to do so in his previous 41 innings. Waugh would go on to make 393 runs before being dismissed, England would go on to use 29 players in the series, and had rain not intervened at Edgbaston and The Oval, Australia could have been looking at a 6-0 whitewash. It really was that bad.Third Test, 1997, Old Trafford

That man Waugh would be a recurring theme in England’s Ashes nightmares of the 1990s, but this was surely his finest hour. Contrary to all expectations, Australia had been caught cold in the early part of the summer, losing all three one-dayers plus an astonishing match at Edgbaston. Lord’s would surely have been a series-leveller had rain not intervened, but Australia were still searching for inspiration as the series reached its midway mark. A bold decision to bat first from their out-of-form captain, Taylor, gave Waugh a blank canvas on which to craft a masterly 108 out of 235, and he followed up with another hundred, 116, as the conditions eased second-time around. England were overwhelmed, and a sniff of an opportunity was lost.

Jonathan Rice reviews 19-90: Jim Laker by Brian Scovell

Jonathan Rice03-Sep-2006

Jim Laker’s astonishing feat at Manchester 50 years ago has a very strong claim to be recognised as the greatest cricketing achievement of all time. No batsman has ever dominated a match so single-handedly and no bowler has so completely demoralised and destroyed the opposition. Nineteen wickets in a match – it defies belief.Yet today Jim Laker is rarely mentioned among the pantheon of the truly greats of cricket: there is a feeling that somehow the wickets were doctored in his favour, or the opposition were not up to much, that he was a one-match wonder or that nowadays no mere finger-spinner could inflict much damage. Offspin is the poor relation of the bowling battery and English cricket-lovers, raised on a diet of solid triers like John Emburey, Peter Such and Robert Croft, cannot imagine an offspinner as a world beater.Jim Laker was a difficult man, which did not help his cause. Even Brian Scovell’s sympathetic treatment cannot hide the fact that he was a hard man to get to know and one who did not always forgive and forget. But his background and early experiences, which Scovell delves into more deeply than any previous biographer, help us understand a man who was, more than most of his generation, unwilling to show his real feelings. The story of his banishment from both The Oval and Lord’s, largely through the machinations of one man, Lord Monckton, needs to be told, as does the background to his feud with Peter May, another brilliant but insecure cricketer. His relationship with Tony Lock was odd, too. Only in their final years, long after they finished playing, did they become friends. After Laker’s 19 wickets Lock said nothing to him for about a month. The tales of his final seasons at Essex, while still in MCC’s bad books, are a revelation. Brian ‘Tonker’ Taylor is even quoted as saying “we had plenty of laughs” from the moment Laker arrived in 1962. The Essex dressing room must have been a very dull place in the 1950s.This is a good, enjoyable read, written by a man who ghosted Laker and thus knows him as well as anybody. It is a pity, therefore, that the editing is so poor that it looks a bit of a rushed job. At least 10 stories are repeated in different parts of the book and there are long passages quoted from other books, which makes it look like a cut-and-paste job, which it certainly is not. Scovell lists well over 60 people whom he interviewed for the book and their contributions are telling.The first Test match I ever saw live was the fifth Test of 1956, at The Oval, a few days after Laker entered into immortality at Old Trafford. Yet all I really recall of that game was the dampness, Keith Miller’s hair, the bowling of Tyson and the catching of Lock. I do not remember seeing Laker bowl that day, although Wisden tells me he did. I am grateful to Brian Scovell for re-establishing my memories of Jim Laker, one of the greatest bowlers of all time.

The West Indians didn’t blow India away with devastating pace, nor did they deceive them with guile and swing. Instead, they kept plugging away in the channel outside off stump and India kept edging at regular intervals

George Binoy02-Jun-2006After picking six batsmen – seven if you include Mahendra Singh Dhoni – Rahul Dravid won a good toss, considering the run-fests Antigua has produced over the years. However, Brian Lara said that he would have bowled first anyway and his bowlers backed his words with a disciplined performance, bowling a nagging line just outside off stump and getting the ball to swing and cut off the pitch. Apart from a brief passage of play when Virender Sehwag raced along, West Indies successfully dried up the runs and induced easy edges to the wicketkeeper and slip cordon. The first ten overs produced 50 runs but Sehwag’s wicket clipped a soaring run-rate. The following graphic shows the line bowled by the West Indian fast bowlers and the % of dot balls played out by the Indian batsmen.The West Indians didn’t blow India away with devastating pace, nor did they deceive them with guile and swing. Instead, they kept plugging away in the channel outside off stump and India kept edging at regular intervals.The Indian batsmen played out a staggering 435 dot balls in 88 overs. That’s almost five an over. The fast bowlers bowled 399 balls – that’s also almost five an over – wide outside off stump or on a good line, making the batsmen go after the ball to keep the score moving. Dwayne Bravo and Corey Collymore, who took 4 for 37 and 3 for 37 respectively, bowled 197 balls out of 223 (88%) on or outside off stump. For a while the batsmen resisted, sometimes even succeeded in getting it away for runs, but eventually low confidence and a lack of footwork induced the edge. Six of the top seven batsmen were caught behind the wicket. Sehwag, VVS Laxman and Mahendra Singh Dhoni were done in because of poor footwork, and Dravid, who got bogged down after scoring just one run from his last 21 balls reached for one he would have normally left alone.

After the fireworks of the first two days, the cricket slowed down with neither side making a push for a win

George Binoy at the Chinnaswamy Stadium10-Dec-2007

If you were at the Chinnaswamy Stadium over the weekend and, having soaked in two hundreds, a double-century and a five-wicket haul, told a friend not to miss the third day, you can expect an irate phone call. The third day of the Bangalore Test couldn’t have offered a starker contrast to the preceding two: the run-rate was relatively slow, wickets did not fall regularly and there were no spectacular individual performances to leave lasting memories. Though the momentum shifted from one side to the other, it was almost by default – more conceded than captured – with neither side doing much to push for a result.Seen in isolation, without taking into context the situation of the match and series, Pakistan were better off on the day. They scored 283 runs and lost only four wickets but the pace at which they batted – 3.14 runs per over – did little to enhance their slim chances of securing the win that would draw the series. It was always going to be difficult once India scored 626 in the first innings and Pakistan had to produce an exceptional batting display, combining steadiness and aggression – and they had only to look back to what Sourav Ganguly and Yuvraj Singh did on Saturday. Ultimately, they had the steadiness – all their batsmen got starts – but not the aggression and, though Shoaib Malik later said they wanted to first avoid the follow-on and then accelerate, they may have left themselves with too little time left to dismiss a strong Indian batting line-up and then chase a target.India were already in a position of advantage in this Test thanks to their excellent batting over the first two days but they weren’t able to drive it home. Their bowlers, though economical, didn’t look dangerous enough to take wickets in a bunch and two of the four wickets – those of Younis Khan and Mohammad Yousuf – came through poor shots rather than probing bowling. The ball didn’t swing for Irfan Pathan; Ishant Sharma struggled with his run-up, and therefore his rhythm, early on but improved as the day progressed; and Anil Kumble and Harbhajan Singh failed to get any fizz out of the surface. They got a couple of rough decisions but largely struggled on a pitch that kept low at times without offering significant assistance. Kumble had two slips and a gully for the fast bowlers and men round the bat for the spinners for nearly the entire day but rarely did they come into play.Perhaps it was the pressure of responding to a huge total while needing to win and the worry of losing quick wickets, but the Pakistan batsmen, though they proved hard to dislodge, did not dominate the way the situation demanded them to. Butt, who made an excellent fifty last evening, stagnated this morning; he middled the ball consistently and his defence was solid but he failed to find the gaps and hence the run-flow began to ebb.Younis Khan, once again Pakistan’s most assured batsman, had seen out a tense passage of play last evening but this morning he batted with a different purpose, driving Sharma firmly down the ground and cutting him between slip and gully early in the contest. It was a typical Younis innings, full of improvised reverse sweeps and upbeat body language, but the situation needed something more spectacular than a solid 72-run stand with Mohammad Yousuf.

Those shortcomings were due to their inability to meet the demands of a tremendously challenging situation rather than exceptional bowling. Twice India had Pakistan on the spot, when Younis and Yousuf were dismissed in quick succession followed by Faisal Iqbal, 25 overs later; twice they let them off. At those two junctures, the opportunity presented itself for India to decisively seize the game but, despite the buffer of a huge total and fielders surrounding the bat, none of the bowlers beat the bat or induced false shots or, indeed, created any pressure on the batsmen.In any case, the pressure would have dissipated given Dinesh Karthik’s poor wicketkeeping. Perhaps it was because he was keeping after a while, and the low bounce contributed significantly, but Karthik’s 31 byes took India to the threshold of breaking the record for most runs in an innings. Apart from the duties expected from a wicketkeeper, he plays a crucial part in keeping the team upbeat through his body language; by the end of the day, though Karthik’s downcast mood was reflected in the low intensity levels in the field.The game is still in the balance; India know that one wicket will expose Pakistan’s tail and increase the possibility of another huge first-innings lead. That tail, however, has been difficult to dislodge on a few occasions in this series and Pakistan will be confident of scoring the necessary 57 runs to avoid the follow-on. Assuming they do, though, what then?

Will Luke looks at how Canada fared in 2007

Will Luke23-Dec-2007

Umar Bhatti celebrates his hat-trick in the Intercontinental Cup final. It was about the only cause for celebration in a wretched match© ICC
It was a mixed year for Canada both on and off the pitch. They struggled in one-day cricket with four wins out of 16 matches while in the ICC Intercontinental Cup they lost four out of five. And as they move into 2008, the lack of money continues to blight their progress.Their performance at the World Cup was predictably dire, only ever showing glimpses of potential and competitiveness. After losing to Kenya, they took on England and made a decent stab at chasing 280 with Ashif Mulla cracking a quickfire 58. In their final match against NewZealand, John Davison – Canada’s bristling opener and only batsman with the gumption and class to take on the best – smashed 52 from 31 balls in his farewell ODI.Things didn’t improve in four-day cricket either when they were humiliated by Ireland in the Intercontinental Cup final at Leicester carried over from the previous season. Their preparation was poor, blighted by lost baggage and missed flights, and lost a horribly one-sided contest inside five sessions. They struggled in subsequent matches from patchy availability and a lack of preparation as players, already struggling to take time off, often found themselves underprepared on unfamiliar surfaces.The coach, Andy Pick, left in May and urged Canada’s board to appoint his replacement quickly, to aid their path to qualifying for the next World Cup. Pubudu Dassanayake was finally chosen five months later, and he has a battle on his hands to squeeze what little money he canfrom a ring-fenced set-up.New man on the block
A familiar name in Canada’s youth squads, Trevin Bastiampillai is one of the next generation and in 2007 put together some useful scores. He made 71 in Canada’s innings victory over UAE, adding 141 with Mulla.Fading star
John Davison, Canada’s standout batsman, played his last match in the Intercontinental Cup final rout, and two months earlier he bowed out of ODIs at the World Cup with a typically audacious 52 from 31 balls. He might yet return but, at 37, and with Canada’s selectors looking to thefuture, it appears unlikely. They, and Canada’s fans, will sorely miss him.High point
Ashish Bagai shone in the World Cricket League in Nairobi. He scored 137 not out – his first hundred in senior cricket – against Scotland and added a second ton against Ireland four days later. His 345 runs at 86.25 meant he ended the tournament as the leading run scorer and was named Player of the Tournament. He was later shortlisted for the ICC Associate Player of the Year.Low point
Canada’s loss to Ireland in the Intercontinental Cup final summed up their year. Dismissed for 92 and 145, the only crumb of comfort they gained was the performance of Umar Bhatti who took a hat-trick (and very nearly four in four) as Ireland’s first innings fell away. The news that Bagai had taken up a work position in London and was likely to largely unavailable in 2008 was another blow.What the future holds
With the appointment of Atul Ahuja as Canada’s first chief executive, hopes of the government funding Canadian cricket have increased. Like other Associates, they receive a payout from the ICC but, as Pick found out, access to the funds is limited – and this is one area that Ahuja might be able to help in his first year as chief executive. Similarly, Pubudu Dassanayake, Pick’s replacement, has a tough task on his hands to improve consistency.

ODIs 16 4 12 0 Twenty20 – – – – Intercontinental Cup 5 1 4 0

Rahul Dravid joins the 10,000-run club

Mathew Varghese29-Mar-2008

With the 80th run during his 111 in Chennai, Rahul Dravid became only the sixth player – and the third Indian, after Sachin Tendulkar and Sunil Gavaskar – to reach the coveted milestone of 10,000 runs in Test cricket. He hasn’t been at his best of late – this hundred was his first since last May – but Dravid’s determination came to the fore yet again; perhaps it was fitting that he brought up the milestone with a typically characteristic knock, stonewalling his way to a hundred while Virender Sehwag stole the thunder with a blazing 319.Dravid reached the landmark in his 120th Test and 206th innings, and although both Brian Lara and Sachin Tendulkar required lesser number of innings, Dravid has achieved the same in the shortest time span, a few months under 12 years, almost two years lesser than Lara. With an average of 55.41, Dravid has the best average among those with over 10,000 runs.His career average is only bettered by two Indian batsmen, neither of whom has played more than three Tests. With a cut-off of at least 500 Test runs, Dravid’s average is the highest among Indians.

*Consistency has been a hallmark of Dravid’s batting: South Africa is the only opposition against which he has less-than-impressive numbers – his average is below 40 both against and in South Africa. He averages 45.78 against Australia, but against all the other seven Test-playing teams his average is more than 50. (For Dravid’s career batting summary, click here.)Like Stephen Fleming, who retired recently, Dravid too relishes the prospect of an overseas challenge. (He averages much higher that Fleming, though, managing over 50 both home and away.) Dravid’s home average is 51.75, while in overseas matches it shoots up to 58.50. Among those with at least 1000 away runs, Dravid’s average is fifth on the list. Don Bradman is far ahead with an average of over 100, while three England batsman – Ken Barrington, Wally Hammond and Jack Hobbs – occupy the next three spots with averages of 69.18, 66.32 and 59.91. Increase the cut-off to 4000 runs and the only batsman ahead of Dravid is Hammond, and the list of 15 offers a good comparison of Dravid’s away record against other profilic run-getters.

The innings in Chennai was Dravid’s 150th at the No. 3 position. No other batsman has achieved the mark, and it’s no surprise that Dravid has scored the most number of runs at the position, closely followed by Ricky Ponting. In terms of averages, though, Bradman, Ponting and Sangakkara have higher numbers.

Dravid performs better in the first innings than second innings, but unlike quite a few other batsmen, his performance doesn’t crumble in the fourth innings of a match. He averages 46.17 in the fourth, while his third-innings averages is only marginally better at 47.67. Dravid has scored a total of 1293 runs in the fourth innings, but more significantly 878 of those have come in wins and draws, with his average nearly touching a hundred in those games.

Dravid averages drops to a rather poor 27.27 in the 36 matches India have lost through his career, but he more than makes up in wins and drawn matches, averaging over 70 in those. His average in non-losses is among the best among the most prolific batsmen in Tests, making him one of India’s best match-winners with the bat.

A feature of Dravid’s Test career has been his ability to string partnerships. He’s been involved in the most 100-run stands in Tests. Dravid has been part of ten century stands with three other batsmen in India’s middle-order – Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman. Gavaskar is the only other batsman who has had ten century stands with three partners.

Dravid’s last 1000 runs have taken the longest: he needed 30 innings to move from 9000 to 10,000. He required 24 to move from 4000 to 5000, and took 23 for his first 1000. Tendulkar was a slower starter than Dravid, but he caught up and got to 10,000 in 11 fewer innings.

For a period during the afternoon session it looked as though England were heading out the series, but then their new wicketkeeper – Tim Ambrose – stood up with a fine attacking innings to shift the momentum

Andrew Miller in Wellington13-Mar-2008
Never flustered: Tim Ambrose responded to England’s collapse with controlled aggression © Getty Images
Rarely has the value of a fresh perspective been so starkly demonstrated than on the opening day of the Wellington Test. After last week’s chastisement in Hamilton, England came out with a positive intent – they really did – but in a captivating capitulation in the first hour after lunch, those first-Test frailties were laid bare for all to see once again. It took the clear mindset of a rookie in only his second match to show the way for his senior players and maybe, just maybe, transform their fortunes in the series.Tim Ambrose, by his own admission, is not the nervous type. He unwinds by playing the guitar, and though he claims never to have been in a band, he clearly loves performing in front of an audience. His only thoughts in the dying moments of the day, with Jacob Oram bearing down on his outside edge, was to notch up the three runs he required for his maiden Test century as a reward for the crowd who’d backed him all the way.That’s a pretty ballsy approach from a man who has passed three figures only four times in a 76-match first-class career. But Ambrose’s innings was not about stats, or even the status of the match. “I watched the other batsmen who were ahead of me, and they seemed to be having difficulties in keeping balls out,” he said. “But I thought from quite early on in my innings I was seeing the ball quite well, and that I had to make sure that if it was in my area, I did not miss out.”See the ball, hit the ball. It’s a simple philosophy, but one that England had singularly mislaid until Ambrose reminded them how it’s done in this afternoon’s session. Nothing exemplified their struggles more acutely than the strangulating success of Jacob Oram, a wicket-to-wicket trundler who has conceded 54 runs in 47 overs in the series to date.”I’m the slowest of all of us and maybe they like pace,” said Oram, whose final spell was played out to an ironic chorus of “boring boring!” from the Barmy Army. “I was copping a bit from the crowd and fair enough, because I’m not trying to bowl bouncers, yorkers, outswingers and inswingers. I try to do my job which is go for as few runs as possible and let the guys attack from the other end.”With his height and accuracy, Oram – like England’s own Angus Fraser of yesteryear – was always liable to cause England problems if the pitch offered him any assistance, but they did not help their cause with the tentativeness of their strokeplay. Michael Vaughan was slow coming forward to the ball that trimmed his bails, as he demonstrated by falling a half-step forward moments after the ball had beat his bat, and Alastair Cook was similarly flat-footed when he hung his bat out to dry.And those were the two batsmen who really got a start. Once they were out of the equation, the demons in the dressing-room did for the rest – even for Kevin Pietersen, whose form slump is showing no signs of being arrested. The counterattack that Ambrose initiated was the one that he would once had taken as a matter of course, but by the time Mark Gillespie beat him with a straight one, Pietersen had gone nine innings without so much as a half-century.And thereafter it was all about Ambrose. Mind you, a word of caution needs to be uttered before his praises are sung too loudly. England’s recent wicketkeepers have made a habit of starting their careers with a bang, only to fade alarmingly thereafter. There was Ambrose’s former Sussex team-mate, Matt Prior, of course, who larruped the West Indians with a thrilling debut century at Lord’s last summer. And before him, even the maligned Geraint Jones got in on the act. His scintillating century at Headingley in 2004 came in his third Test, and second on home soil. It too came against New Zealand, and then as now, the cut was his signature shot.But comparisons are odious, and they cannot diminish the majesty of Ambrose’s performance, nor its importance. England have been crying out for a counterattacking No. 7 in the mould of Adam Gilchrist or Brendon McCullum, one-and-a-half names that have caused lesser men to buckle. “He played his natural game under pressure,” said England’s coach, Peter Moores. “He can take a real pat on the back for that because when the ball was there to hit he was prepared to go after it.”New Zealand will be better prepared when they next face him, starting with tomorrow morning’s first session. “As a shorter guy, I suppose the lengths you are accustomed to bowling are on the short side to him,” said Oram. “He has an ability to play the cut shot pretty damn well. He got a few of those away and we bowled a bit too wide to him, and I’m not sure why that is.”As a group, we didn’t quite have the same rhythm and consistency as we showed at Hamilton, and that’s disappointing,” said Oram. “We were really proud of our efforts on a flat one in Hamilton, and we had better conditions to bowl on here, and couldn’t produce the same efforts.” In truth, they weren’t allowed to produce the same efforts, thanks to a chivvying, disruptive 137-ball masterclass from a man whose cricket was as fresh as his mindset. England are a freer side this evening, and the series is – for the moment – right back in the balance.

The Delhi opener talks about making his peace with not being selected for India despite an exemplary last season

Interview by Nagraj Gollapudi24-Sep-2008

Last year you spoke of how you had stopped thinking about getting back into the national reckoning and instead started enjoying your game. Your runs in the last two seasons are clear evidence that you’re doing just that. How has it worked for you?
I’m sticking to that formula. Each time you go in to bat, you want to play for the country. But after I got dropped I wanted to make a double-century every time I went out to bat, which didn’t happen and won’t happen either. But when you are doing well, like I have been in the last couple of seasons, then you build a lot of pressure on yourself where you think, ‘Okay, fine, now I’ve scored runs and now I’m so close to getting back to the team.’ That can probably get you in the same rut again. But I realised the reason I play this game is I enjoy it and beyond that it’s not in my hands and I’ve made peace with that. Yes, I would be lying if I say that I don’t feel disappointed when I don’t get picked, because if you score runs you want to get picked, and if you don’t get picked it’s human to feel bad. It is probably important to feel bad, because you are playing for some purpose – you are not just turning up and not hoping to achieve anything bigger.You’ve spoken about how hard you work during the off-season. What did you do before the season started?
I wanted to take a break. Last season was a nine-month long, rigorous one, so I took a break, which was a first, when I didn’t touch the bat for three weeks. I didn’t play but I was doing my training and gym. I thought that was necessary so I could come back recharged, refreshed, with my desire back again.I also realised that peaking at the wrong time or peaking too early, when there is no cricket, can actually ruin things, and I wanted to avoid that. Now when I’m picking the bat up, I’m as hungry as I was when I started to play cricket – it’s that exciting.How’s your book coming along?
The book is one thing that has taken my mind away from the game for a while in a very good sense – it has given me time to reflect on what I did last year. When you go through the chapters you know where you were wrong, what things you did right, and how it worked, and how you felt at that point. It gives you perspective because you tend to forget a lot of things and remember what you want to remember, but when it is documented it refreshes the memory. It gave me something to do.So have you been taking care of your personal life rather than only focusing on your professional life?
During the IPL [Tatenda] Taibu told me that whenever you don’t do well there are three check-boxes to tick. One, are you hitting enough balls in the net or are you working hard enough ? Two, is there a fear of failure? And three, is everything fine in your personal life? If you are not doing well, invariably one of these boxes is not ticked. If you are not content in your personal life, it is very difficult to play naturally. So I took care of that this off-season by spending a lot of time with my family. Watched a lot of movies, did a lot of stuff I wanted to do, spent time with friends. At times playing sport day-in-day-out adds nothing but pressure and boredom creeps in and it becomes monotonous.

Four years ago you played your last Test and it was against Australia. Which areas of your game have changed in this period?

I’ve evolved as a player. In my batting I’ve worked hard. When I played for India I played in a certain manner, which was right at that point of time. Couple of seasons after that, I got dropped. I was a confused, confused man. From 2005 to mid-2006 I didn’t bat the way I used to bat. I was too preoccupied with getting back into the team, and secondly, I thought the only way to score runs was to go out there and bat the whole day and exercise patience, but it didn’t work out. So I got bogged down and I didn’t do myself any favours and I didn’t make enough runs. Without playing a single rash shot I was getting out, so there must have been something wrong somewhere. Then I decided to loosen up and start enjoying my game. So that brought a change in attitude.As far as batting goes, instead of looking to occupy the crease and play out time, I’ve started to open up, dominate the bowlers and look for runs at every given opportunity. And if the opportunity isn’t there, try to create one and not be afraid to fail. I’ve also started to use my feet a lot more. That has helped me to play my best cricket in the last two seasons.You’ve dealt with disappointments. Obviously, each time the Test squad was announced, you expected your name to be there, but were there any particular instances when you especially felt you deserved the opportunity?
I wouldn’t say I was expecting a call every time the team was announced, but when India toured Australia [2007-08] I was near 100% confident that I’d make it, for the simple reason that my name was in the 24 probables. The only other opener was Gautam Gambhir and he got injured. And I had scored nearly 800 runs in the domestic season. A week before the team was announced I’d scored my second double-century of the season, against Himachal Pradesh. So that was very disappointing. I didn’t know what more to do. The last time I played for India I was picked on my domestic performances. You can sulk, crib and cry and it will never make a difference to anyone else.Did any of the selectors ever call up to explain where you fell short?
Not one selector has ever spoken to me.Players these days seem to be vocal with their disappointments. Is that a good approach?
It’s probably right. As a player I need to know what more I should do to get picked. I’m not asking why they didn’t pick me, and I respect them, but at the same time people need to talk to the player.As a player, you have to put disappointments behind you because there is no other way. It doesn’t really matter to anyone in the world except for yourself and your family whether you play for India or not, or if you ever play for India again. Cricket will go on. I’m not blaming anyone, because no one should care. It’s your pain, your joy, your happiness.Has the thought that you might never play again for India crossed your mind?
Yes, that thought has crossed my mind. It would be really disappointing if that happened. Bigger picture: I’ve played for India and no one can take that away from me. So I’ve made my peace with that.

Last year you spoke about how Rahul Dravid met you at Hove and said you were in contention for the opener’s slot still. What has Virender Sehwag’s advice to you been?
Viru will always give you a perspective in as few words as possible. You might like it or might not but he has your best interests at heart. For example, when I wasn’t picked this time for the Australia series, he said “Aakash, you’ll play for India. If myself or Gautam [Gambhir] don’t make runs in the next four Tests, your name might come again, but if both of us make runs then your name will not come up.” He is black and white always in what he says or does. And you need to take him at face value.There are many cricketers who are in positions similar to the one you’re in. What would your advice to them be?
Michael Atherton once told me that at the end of the day you need to remind yourself why you started playing the game. The basic reason was that you actually wanted to play. Any game has to be enjoyed, and as long as you can keep that enjoyment going, you should keep playing. One should always aspire, but not at the cost of enjoying the process of making it to the top.A year after I was dropped from the Indian team, there was this pertinent question: “When will you be happy?” I always thought that I’d be happiest when I played for the country. But happiness doesn’t lie in one particular achievement. We tend to believe that. We tend to pin it on that one moment, which is not actually moment. You will never achieve that one certain thing. That is what I’ve learned after being dropped. There are more reasons to be happy in day-to-day life.Did you ever think that not playing ODIs has hurt your chances?
It does. If you are playing ODI cricket, it does automatically enhance your chances for playing in the longer form. I know playing one-day international cricket for India is probably not going to happen for me. Having said that, I will not agree to the criticism that I’m not an ODI player. In List A games my average is in the mid-40s and my strike-rate is right up there. I scored three run-a-ball centuries for Delhi last season with an average of 332. So it’s not that I cannot play ODIs. The difference between me and the people who play in both forms in first-class cricket is not more than seven runs. But that perception remains. If I go out and do a Shaun Marsh and score the maximum number of runs in the next IPL, I’ll play for India in ODIs. My performances in the Deodhar Trophy and Ranji one-dayers count for nothing.Where do you rank yourself as an opener in the national reckoning?
Logically there are two people who are opening for the country at this point of time, who are the best at the moment. But the other side of it is that there could be someone who deserves to be playing but is not. I might be wrong, but I don’t know. But I think I should be right up there given the number of the runs I’ve been scoring. Also, I’m made to believe I’m in the loop, since I’ve been called for national camps. More importantly, I’ve been knocking loud enough when the opportunity has come. Anyone who has scored three double-centuries a season will play for the country. It was just unfortunate.