IPL threes: Presenting the NSR Half Measures
Submitted by rickeyre on March 13, 2010 - 8:32pmWith all the unsubtlety of the smashing of sixes and fours in the third Indian Premier League, I am curious to see how many batsmen plays shots that are worth three runs in this year's series. The all-run three must surely be the antithesis of the Crash! Bang! Wallop! philosophy, and in my opinion far more entertaining.
I started keeping track in last year's IPL, but - as you will probably understand - got bored. Let's see if I can make the distance this time.
So, instead of the DLF Maximums (Maxima?), I give you the NSR Half Measures. (NSR standing for No Sponsor Required).
In Game One (KKR v DC), no threes were scored.
Follow the progress of this tally throughout the tournament (or until I get sick of it) in the comments below.
Tags:
How long is a piece of match fee?
Submitted by rickeyre on March 6, 2010 - 11:44pmThe International Cricket Council is one of those organisations which will never truly satisify its public with the way it runs the game. No number of ex-politicians fed through the presidential revolving door will change that, but not all of the criticism is warranted. However, the ICC's approach to player discipline seems to win very few friends indeed.
One case study of the ICC's questionable disciplinary practices comes from last Wednesday's ODI between New Zealand and Australia at Napier. NZ match-winning batsman Scott Styris became entangled in a heated exchange with his frustrated Australian bowling victim, Mitchell Johnson. At one point in proceedings, Johnson nudged his head forward in a muted head-butting action, making contact with Styris's helmet, before probably realising that even his hard head would be no match for the metallic grille.
Johnson was charged by the umpiring team of Rudi Koertzen, Tony Hill and Chris Gaffaney with "inappropriate and deliberate physical contact between players in the course of play" - a Level 2 Offence under the relevant Code of Conduct. With a maximum penalty of a suspension for either one Test or two ODIs, Johnson pleaded guilty, thereby saving match referee Ranjan Madugalle the trouble of conducting a hearing.
Madugalle responded by giving Johnson a fine of, in the words of the ICC statement, "equivalent to 60 per cent of the player's match fee". Styris, for his part, pleaded guilty to a charge of a Level 1 offence, and was fined 15 per cent of his match fee.
Having seen the video of the incident, I believe that Johnson should have received nothing short of a suspension. Physical contact in anger with an opposing player should not be tolerated to any degree. Johnson has, instead, been issued with a fine, and one towards the lower end of the scale, 50 per cent of match fee being the minimum punishment for a Level 2 offence.
I have a huge problem with this kind of punishment by imposition of a fine. What is the "match fee", and how can we feel confident that payment of a portion of the "match fee" is a suitably chastening punishment for a player?
There is an answer. Maybe. In appendix 3 of the "ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel", the "designated Match Fee" for men's Tests, ODIs or T20Is is defined as:
"A country-specific amount which is to be determined by the ICC’s Chief Executive’s Committee in consultation with the relevant National Cricket Federations."
Yes I found it just as helpful as you did. What about bonuses? What about prizemoney? What about a cut of the team's series or tournament winnings? I can understand the need for country-specific pay scales because of the different economic levels in different countries, but don't we deserve a little more transparency than this?
What proportion does "60 per cent of the match fee" represent in terms of the player's annual earnings? Does he actually pay the fine or does a mate, sponsor or wealthy WAG do it for him?
When does the fine get paid? And does the ICC send the Sheriff around to collect if the player hasn't paid up?
Most important of all: Does the player actually feel as if he has been punished? And will he do it again?
For the record, here's the ICC Naughty Book, with details of all the Code of Conduct hearings since inception in 1992, together with all the slaps on the wrist penalties handed out.
Why John Howard is bad for world cricket
Submitted by rickeyre on March 2, 2010 - 9:06pm"Howard's future in retirement? I've come up with three options:
(a) A ceremonial role (eg: patron, no.1 ticket holder, mascot) with one or more of the Australian Rugby Union, Cricket Australia or the Australian Olympic team...."- Rick Eyre, 1.12.07
How can the selection of a nomination for International Cricket Council vice-president be so long and exhausting? How can a man so clearly the heir apparent be overlooked? How can a man so lacking in experience be chosen? The answer to these three questions, in order: Dunno; Because he's a New Zealander; Because he's John Howard.
Today, Cricket Australia and New Zealand Cricket have jointly announced that John Winston Howard will be their nominee to become ICC vice-president in the middle of this year, and thereby become its president for two years from 2012 to 2014. The announcement came only after a selection process in which Howard was chosen over New Zealand Cricket's preferred choice, Sir John Anderson.
Howard, a practising solicitor for twelve years after graduating in law from Sydney University in 1961, was elected to Federal Parliament in 1974 becoming Prime Minister from 1996 until 2007, when both his government, and he personally, were thrown out of office by voters. More recently, Howard has been busy on the conservative think-tank public speaking circuit.
Howard has no adult experience as a competitive cricketer, nor in sports administration. His interest in cricket as a fan received much public exposure while he was Prime Minister.
John Anderson (not to be confused with the leader of the National Party who was Howard's deputy prime minister from 1999-2005), has been chairman of New Zealand Cricket from 1995 to 2008 and NZ's representative on the ICC executive. Six years younger than Howard, he started out as an accountant and stockbroker before founding a merchant bank in 1972, which through mergers and acquisitions, led to him eventually being the executive director of the ANZ Bank in NZ. Among his former chairmanships is the NZ branch of the WWF.
John Howard's influence on Australia in the past decade and a half has had a polarising effect, and I should note that I have written many thousands of words over the years sitting on one of those poles. The fact that he is so disliked among so many Australians represents one reason why his nomination to the ICC, initiated by Cricket Australia, is such an embarrassment.
His lack of any appropriate experience, when put alongside New Zealand's Sir John Anderson, is bemusing, even if age is not considered a factor (Howard will be 75 when his term as ICC president expires - Anderson will be 70 then). In January former NZ Cricket CEO Martin Snedden said that Sir John Anderson's appointment as future ICC president should be a "no-brainer".
So why was Howard, of all capable Australians, the choice of Cricket Australia? And why have they so aggressively pushed his claims against those of Anderson's?
One wonders how conciliatory a president he will be when his time comes. He maintained a ruthless discipline over his Liberal Party whilst Prime Minister. Can anyone imagine how the BCCI and PCB will sit with that style of presidency?
There's another reason why I believe John Howard is an inappropriate choice for the ICC presidency. His nomination gives Antipodean endorsement to the notion that there is a place for self-serving politicians to indulge in sports administration as a part-time hobby. For example, Sharad Pawar, the man who John Howard will be following, who also happens to be the man for whom the compromise VP-progressing-to-President arrangement was created, who also happens to be Indian Minister for Agriculture and Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution.
This news report from the ABC contains eight minutes of audio from a press conference John Howard gave this afternoon, despite having earlier said in the official press release that "he would make no further statement at this time". Howard's superficial knowledge of the intricacies of world cricket are laid bare, along with his cloying vanity. He continues to cling to Mark Taylor's jocular 1998 description of him as a "cricket tragic" as if it were a Doctorate of All Cricketing Expertise.
One thing for sure is that John Howard has a steep learning curve before he steps up to a post that ought to make him the equal of Jacques Rogge, Sepp Blatter or Bud Selig. I wish Sir John Anderson well in his retirement.
Youtube do dia: Kristina Keneally, She's Good Value
Submitted by rickeyre on March 1, 2010 - 11:16amOnly fifty-six weeks till the New South Wales state election on March 26, 2011 and the inevitable removal of a rancid Labor government for whom acting in accordance with the wishes of its voters is far less important than scheming its own self-preservation.
The latest (and hopefully last for a while) product of the Sussex Street Sausage Machine to be thrown to the lions as State premier is Kristina Kerscher Keneally. (Please do not dwell on those initials - that's actually her maiden name in the middle.)
Over the weekend NSW Labor (the polite name for the Sussex Street Sausage Machine) has given Brand Keneally a new product launch. There's a new website which, apart from the fine print at the bottom of the page, denies any reference to the political party to which she belongs.
And then there's this sixty-second commercial in which Nevada-born, Ohio-raised Premier Keneally almost apologises for her American heritage. Another product from the party branch that gave you the immortal "Barrie Unsworth: He's Good Value" campaign from the 1988 election (alas, not on Youtube as far as I can tell)
Tags:
We return you to your irregularly scheduled chaos
Submitted by rickeyre on February 27, 2010 - 8:11pmNovember 19, 2009 - the long, complex, logistical exercise was at a climax. It was the day that The England and Wales Cricket Board released its full domestic program for the 2010 season. Eighteen counties, visiting teams from seven nations. Five months packed with three domestic competitions plus 80 days of international cricket.
Lots of work ahead for two dozen multi-million pound professional sporting clubs. Many tickets to sell. Much to look forward to, from the first university matches on April 3 to the forty-over final on September 18.
February 10, 2010, 11.59am GMT - Champions League Twenty20 Commissioner (and Indian Premier League Commissioner) Lalit Kumar Modi issues a press release via his favourite method, Twitter:
"Champions League 2010 - dates are finalised as Sep 10 - Sep 26 this year."
(source: Twitter)
This announcement, not to mention its method of delivery, left the ECB and all of the counties dumbfounded. A direct clash with the last week of the county season for the two English teams expected to be invited to play in the Champions League. A clash including the semi-finals and final of the "Clydesdale Bank 40" as well as the last round of the county championship. Not to mention the entire five-match England v Pakistan ODI series.
And the identity of the two qualifying teams would be known only once the finals of the Friends Provident Twenty20 are held on August 14. The Guardian, The Times and the Telegraph report some of the reaction.
Modi subsequently said that he had "consulted" the ECB prior to making the announcement and had asked them to somehow tweak their season. He also claimed that the tournament had to be held between September 10 and 26 as the Australian team was playing a one-day series in India commencing October 2.
That last assertation raises two so far unanswered questions:
1. If the India v Australia ODI series begins on October 2 why, then, have neither the BCCI nor Cricket Australia made any announcement to that effect?
2. If no announcement had been made of the venue of the Champions League (and as at February 27 this still hasn't happened, despite rumours that it will be staged in South Africa), then why the fuss about a clash of dates with an ODI series in India, while a clash with an ODI series held in England is not a concern?
Another concern, yet to be reported as resolved, was the non-payment of the winner's prizemoney to 2009 Champions League winners, New South Wales by tournament organisers, Global Cricket Ventures (a joint venture of the BCCI 50%, Cricket Australia 33.33% and Cricket South Africa 16.67%), as reported in January.
For many people, it is hard to delineate between the Indian Premier League and the Champions League. While the BCCI are entitled to name whoever they like to their half-share of the Champions League board, it is a completely unacceptable conflict of interest for Lalit Modi to be personally Commissioner of both events. Sometimes, it sounds like he himself can't tell the difference between the two.
Postscript: Commissioner Modi gave his justification for Announcement By Twitter in a reply to a tweeted question on February 18:
"its the fastest way to get to everyone.Press release takes time to reach.We do that too.This allows us to get info to u real time"
As I said the other day, methinks the commish doth tweet too much.
Sachin Tendulkar 200
Submitted by rickeyre on February 25, 2010 - 11:52am(This article also appears at The Roar)
Back on May 21, 1997, I was logged into that great 20th century social medium, IRC, when Saeed Anwar smashed 194 against India to break Viv Richards' thirteen year-old record for the highest score in a One-Day International. The big question that was being asked by the Indian fans, who made up the vast majority of IRC participants following the game that night: How soon until Sachin Tendulkar claimed the world record and became the first to break the 200 barrier?
Now we know the answer. It took Tendulkar another twelve years and nine months to pass Anwar's milestone and reach 200. He scored exactly 200 not out on Wednesday evening as India went on to defeat South Africa by 154 runs at Gwalior. What is amazing is that no one, in the intervening years, beat Tendulkar to it, despite Zimbabwe's Charles Coventry drawing level last year.
Tendulkar's latest achievement is a delightful and, frankly, unexpected twist in the long career of one of the sport's true geniuses. If it had been premature to do so before, I think we can now finally proclaim Sachin Tendulkar to be India's Don Bradman.
Sachin is 37 in April, and the body is well past its peak. How much more is there for Tendulkar to achieve? For India, there is a number one Test ranking to preserve, subject to the whims of the BCCI's erratic scheduling philosophy. More definite, however, is India's campaign at home in the 2011 World Cup.
For himself, there are already world record run aggregates to build upon (13447 in Tests and 17598 in ODIs). Not too far into the future, there are the milestones of fifty Test centuries and fifty ODI centuries (he currently has 47 and 46 respectively), and, by extension, the attainment of 100 centuries in all full internationals combined.
There's also the prospect of an Indian Premier League triumph for the Mumbai Indians. This seems far less important, and perhaps there's a message in that somewhere.
How long will Tendulkar's 200 world record last? It could be quite a while. Take a look at the list of highest individual innings in ODIs. Only Anwar, Coventry and Tendulkar have yet surpassed Richards' 1984 mark of 189 not out. Clearly the onset of Twenty20 hasn't inspired its exponents onto greater heights in the slightly-longer-form game. Indeed, it may be discouraging batsmen from having the patience to bat that long.
Looking at the way the record has developed, you could mount an argument to say that we will be waiting till 2023 (if the goose that laid the golden T20 egg hasn't been killed long before then).
But there's another statistic from Wednesday's Gwalior ODI that is possibly very instructive. Tendulkar's 200 not out (achieved, incidentally, as an opening batsman) was part of an Indian fifty-over total of 401 for 3. That's 49.87 per cent of the team total. Compare that with Richards (189 from 272, 69.48%), Saeed Anwar (194 from 327, 59.33%) or earlier record-holder Kapil Dev (175 from 266, 65.79%). With 400-plus team totals more common these days, is an individual ODI 250 a possibility?
Despite the expansion of the ODI circuit to include the top six Associate nations since 2006, we have yet to see any massive individual scores by anyone in a "Minnow versus Minnow" ODI. I'll stick my neck out and predict that Tendulkar's world record will be broken in the near future by someone from Afghanistan.
Methinks the commish doth tweet too much
Submitted by rickeyre on February 24, 2010 - 10:47pmThere is much I dislike about IPL Commissioner Lalit Kumar Modi, but one cannot doubt his eagerness to connect with his public via his chosen medium of Twitter. I personally appreciate the fact that he took the time to engage in conversation with me on Twitter last October over an op-ed piece of his that was published in the Times of India.
He has been up front in breaking news about this year's third Indian Premier League. Sometimes, however, he can be too eager. One particular (subsequently deleted) tweet in January attracted the ire of Chris Cairns and his lawyers and is currently the subject of further action.
Modi has made frequent visits to the twitterverse in recent weeks to deny reports of franchise sales and other financial dramas, but over the past hour or so we've witnessed a remarkable tirade in response to claims that players might withdraw from IPL3 because of security concerns, or that the IPL may again be relocated.
Here's a transcript, sourced from the @LalitKModi Twitter feed. I have not included messages which are replies to other twitterati:
Security - seems to be the new mantra of Players association to arm twist us of sitting on the table withg us. We inform all boards.
The government has already given ample assurances for safe conduct of games. We are working with all agencies in this direction.
Dlf ipl will be played in india. World cup hockey is on as we speak and so is south africa tour. All are satisfied with the arrangements.
If a few players play into the hands of the fica and not show up - no issues.
We will allow replacement for those who decide not to show up. They risk being in future IPL. The call will be there's.
We will not be dictated by players associations where to play. DLF IPL will be played in India.
I have been sent messages thru various quarters to entertain Fica Preisdent Tim May. Unfortunately we do not recognise Fica or any agents.
Been told Ricky Ponting pressuring players not to come. Maybe its due to the fact he was dropped from KKR.
Chances Champions League will be in India - will teams say they will not come ??? Doubt it.
Australia tour to india in oct - will australian players association dictate them not coming then ? Doubt it.
South african players - touring india as we speak - securtity is fine for them now as provided by the Governement. All happy now.
How will that situation change in two weeks - so what's the motivation about these issues being raised now is the question one needs to ask.
Aussies arrived at the end of the tournament in 1st and 2nd season. This year too they are due to arrive in last two weeks.
We allow only 4 intl players per team. Few miss - no issues. We have great talent in each team. More oppertunity for replacement to others.
We have 98 players on the waiting list eager to get called in for replacement. So they have hope now if some drop out.
DLF IPL is for India and will remain for India. No one can dictate to us how we should conduct our tournaments and on there terms.
IPL is for our Fans in india and globally people who love the game of cricket. We have set new standards and are proud of it.
Lots to note there, but for now, let me just repeat that statement that "Unfortunately we do not recognise Fica or any agents."
Could be very unfortunate. Methinks the commish doth tweet too much.
Tags:
Youtube do dia: Curling
Submitted by rickeyre on February 18, 2010 - 2:30amIt's Winter Olympics time again. The Vancouver games are with us. And I care for no reason other than to follow the curling. And, by extension, to take part in that rarest of my indulgences - namely, to cheer for a British national team.
For an explanation of the sport of curling, look no further than this video from Current TV, shot on location at that Home of Winter Sports, San Jose, California:
Afghanistan joins the big time
Submitted by rickeyre on February 16, 2010 - 1:33pmAfghanistan defeated Ireland at the Dubai International Sports Centre on Saturday night to win the final of the 2010 ICC World Twenty20 Qualifying Series. Both have earned a place in the ICC World Twenty20 in the West Indies in a couple of months time, but it's the Afghan rise to the big time that has gathered all the attention.
Here are three reports from the excellent Al Jazeera English covering Afghanistan's progress through the ICCWT20Q's last week. (total running time approx 8 minutes - story continues below)
Pity, then, that there has been next to no reportage on the event from the US media, even with the clash against the USA during the week. Presumably the networks have assigned all their Sporting Tearjerker Units to Vancouver for the Winter Olympics.
To be fair, the American ABC's Pakistan correspondent Nick Schifrin did blog about the Afghan team on his network's website last Thursday, and later tweeted that there would be a story on Saturday's Good Morning America - though I can find no further reference to this.
I've linked to some of the reportage of Afghanistan's ICCWT20Q victory through my Newsvine site. Afghanistan will be grouped with India and South Africa in Group C of the carefully-titled ICC World Twenty20 this May. Contrary to popular perception, it's not a world cup and not a world championship. Just a tournament called the "World Twenty20". Tell that, of course, to India (winners 2007) and Pakistan (winners 2009).
Before then Afghanistan have two one-day internationals against Canada in Sharjah, the first of those later today, followed by a four-day ICC Intercontinental Cup fixture against the Canadians, also at the former Home of Middle East Cricket, starting Saturday.
I just hope they use wisely the Nissans that each player has reportedly received after winning the ICCWT20 qualifiers.
Ireland deserve congratulations as well, and they had the rougher end of the draw on Saturday, having just an hour's break between their group match against the Netherlands and the final against Afghanistan. Still, I have trouble sympathising with the complaint of the Ireland coach, former West Indian all-rounder Phil Simmons, as reported in Sunday's Belfast Telegraph:
"Five matches in six days was ridiculous"
That's five Twenty20 games we are talking about. All up, they batted and fielded for a total of 190.5 overs in the whole week of the tournament. Overwork, Simmo, is not something to complain about.
Tags:
Afghanistan beats USA. Send in the ICC.
Submitted by rickeyre on February 12, 2010 - 10:10pm"QUESTION: ... This is about sports. Afghanistan cricket team defeated American U.S. cricket team in Dubai in the Twenty/20 match. Cricket is not very popular here, but it is very popular in Afghanistan. Any comments on that? People are very happy in Afghanistan about this, defeating a U.S. team in cricket.
MR. CROWLEY: Well, I am not familiar with the result. But certainly we always are good sports, and congratulate the victors."
- from a media conference call with Philip J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs, US Dept of State, 11.2.10
"At the International Cricket Council World 20 Qualifier in Dubai, Afghanistan defeated the United States by 29 runs, 135-to-106. The loss eliminates the US from the tournament."
- fourth and last item in KLIV 1590 Silicon Valley's sports update, 11.2.10
As a cricketing encounter there was absolutely no surprise when Afghanistan defeated the United States of America by 29 runs in their Group A match of the ICC World Twenty 20 Qualifiers in Dubai on Thursday. Afghanistan came close to a shock qualification for the 2011 World Cup when they performed well in the fifty-over qualifiers in South Africa last year, and had won their two previous matches in this tournament (against Ireland and Scotland) to finish top of their group.
USA, whose team song should be Bruce Springsteen's "One Step Up And Two Steps Back", were surprisingly plucked out of the depths of ICC World League Division Five and given a unique wildcard entry in this tournament. They did manage an upset win over Scotland on Tuesday, but returned to true form the next day, being 11 for 5 and 25 for 6 before losing by 78 runs to Ireland.
One thing that could not be said about Thursday's game, however, that it was "politically charged", despite some of the more nonsensical efforts to beat it up. Iran v USA at the 1994 FIFA World Cup this was not. Nor was it the USSR v Hungary in the 1956 Olympic Games water polo. Nor, indeed, each and every cricket match between India and Pakistan.
It should be noted that not one member of the USA team in this match was American-born. Forget playing that other Springsteen song.
The rise of the Afghan national team over the past couple of years is a great story of triumph over adversity, even if they don't make it to the twelve-team World Twenty20 in the West Indies in April. (And as I write this, they've just suffered their first loss of the tournament to the Netherlands.)
The USA team's next gig begins in Kathmandu on February 20, as one of six teams competing in ICC World Cricket League Division Five. (Their opponents are Bahrain, Fiji, Jersey, Singapore and host nation Nepal.)
Effectively, the USA is ranked number 30 in the world of fifty-over cricket. Afghanistan is 15, with the Test nations 1-9.
President Obama, are you watching? At least get someone in your State Department to take an interest, hey?
Tags:
