All posts by h716a5.icu

New Zealand's hour of madness

After three days of competing with England on an even footing, Brendon McCullum’s side collapsed in a manner reminiscent of their Cape Town horror show

Nagraj Gollapudi at Lord's19-May-2013In the end all those imaginary fears of countering Graeme Swann and the footmarks never materialised. It took just two England fast bowlers, albeit two of their best ones, to crush New Zealand in under two hours. Their 112-minute struggle with the bat resembled a terrible silent film, with not even one of the 11 New Zealand actors able to voice a challenge let alone put together some opposition.How did New Zealand’s batsmen slide from capable in the first innings to speechless two days later? On Saturday evening, after Tim Southee had put England on the back foot with a spirited spell in the dying light, he pointed out that he would have to return to finish the job to restrict the England lead. True to his word, he delivered: exerting the same control and maintaining the same discipline he had shown throughout the match with the ball, Southee engraved his name twice on the visitors’ honours board. Now it was the turn of the batsmen.Until then, Brendon McCullum’s men had made sure they were alive, if not ahead, in every session of the match. Trent Boult and Southee, along with some tight bowling from left-arm spinner Bruce Martin, had taken advantage of England’s cautious approach on the first day to restrict them to a small total. Friday was lit up by Ross Taylor’s assertive half-century. Although they let England take a slender 25-run lead, Southee had helped New Zealand wrest the initiative back.Barring their defeat to South Africa in 2012, England have been undisputed champions at home in the last few years. So for New Zealand to start the day with a possible victory on their mind was clearly a remarkable achievement. Yet, they could not afford to get carried away, especially considering the target was a steep one.And as much as they had been impressive, New Zealand’s batsmen had not been convincing against good swing and seam bowling in the recent past. During the first innings, Taylor and Kane Williamson had taken advantage of some wayward bowling to raise a challenge. But when England’s bowlers turned up with a more disciplined approach – fuller lengths allied to the swinging conditions on Saturday morning – McCullum and the rest of the New Zealand lower order caved in.

“After South Africa we looked at how we strip things back and work out the balance and make-up of our team. We have shown significant gains with that strategy. It would be foolish to throw out after one hour of mayhem”New Zealand captain Brendon McCullum

A day later, New Zealand’s collapse proved they had still not managed to work out a counter strategy. When the opening pair of Hamish Rutherford and Peter Fulton walked in, their first big test was if they could survive the hour or so before lunch. Fulton left the first five deliveries of the innings, from James Anderson, safely before taking a single from the sixth. But in the next over, facing Stuart Broad’s third ball, he chased a delivery that he could have easily let go and gave a simple offering to Matt Prior. Rutherford hit two fours against Broad, but his off stump was sent flying by one of the best deliveries in the match. For the second time, New Zealand had lost their openers inside seven overs.Against England in March, Rutherford and Fulton had scored three centuries between them in the three Tests and managed to thwart the new ball. Their success had managed to stabilise the middle-order’s failures. On Sunday, though, the whole New Zealand house lost its foundations. In a matter of minutes all the momentum gained during the drawn series at home seemed from the distant past, as New Zealand plunged into the same abyss as during the 45 all out in Cape Town last year.The big question is, have New Zealand really picked themselves up post Cape Town or are they still frail against high-quality bowling? “It is pretty tough to explain at this point of time,” McCullum said, trying to find reasons for the collapse. “For so long during this game we were obviously up with the play and at times I felt as if we were dictating the terms. But within an hour the game turned on its head and England continued to grow in confidence as they kept picking up wickets regularly while our confidence started to subside somewhat. The difference between the two teams came to that one hour of madness.”Vettori may bolster injury-hit squad

New Zealand will assess their injury situation on Monday after ending the Lord’s Test battered and bruised. Daniel Vettori is in line to be called into the squad after Bruce Martin picked up a calf strain which would have stopped him bowling on the fourth day.

They will also consider bolstering their wicketkeeping resources after BJ Watling’s knee injury he sustained up attempting a run out on the third day and which resulted in Brendon McCullum taking the goves.

McCullum remains a reluctant keeper in Test cricket these days and although Tom Latham is a gloveman by trade doubts remain over whether he would be ready for the role at Headingley. Luke Ronchi, who is due to arrive with the one-day players early this week, is an option if a reserve is required.

The pristine visitors’ dressing room had suddenly been converted into an emergency room. McCullum described how players had to rush to get their “pads on and pads off quickly” during that chaotic period. “You are looking for a calm presence, whether that is out in the middle or in the change-room. There was plenty of calmness about the guys in the change room. I just felt we were not quit able transfer that out in the middle. We have had many of these experiences before. We have put distance between the last one … We had taken some significant steps forward but today we stepped backwards.”Asked about a specific plan to approach the target, McCullum said there was none except remaining positive. “It was just about the guys playing their own games and finding the space in their minds to operate at their best,” he said. “We are a calm batting unit. We are not a unit that needs to be hyped up. We have a group of players who are learning their own games, but also have confidence in what they showed back home.”Yesterday we felt 230 was achievable, but you need a relatively decent start and six for 29 was certainly not the start we were after. Sometimes you lose a couple of early wickets and you just keep hoping to stem the flow of wickets. We probably started to panic and the gap between the two teams started to widen.”According to McCullum, both teams’ top-orders had a tough time batting in the conditions. “Both top orders have struggled a little bit against the swinging ball,” he said. “We were able to expose their top order as well to a certain degree. So they were certainly not good batting conditions, as the scores suggest. It is still important we remain consistent the way we go about things. After South Africa we looked at how we strip things back and work out the balance and make-up of our team. We have shown significant gains with that strategy. It would be foolish to throw out after one hour of mayhem.”The bigger lesson learned out of the episode for McCullum is stay solid and not slip your guard. “It is a matter of knowing that we as a team still need to be completely on song right throughout a Test match, rather than allowing an opposition of the quality of England to run through our batting line-up,” he said.

Ingram, Peterson star in poor parody

South Africa’s effort with the bat, and some curious decisions for the batting order, was neither amusing nor intelligent, and made people swear

Jarrod Kimber at The Oval19-Jun-2013The Book of Mormon is a musical parody of the Mormon Church. It takes apart the church block by block in an amusing and intelligent way as people swear, dance and sing. The crowd love it.South Africa’s batting display was a parody of South Africa. It was neither amusing nor intelligent, and made people swear. But it was a different kind of parody, one that was to imitate feebly. The South African crowd did not love it.The shots were a collection of comedy worsts that should be part of a Father’s Day DVD in the near future. Leaving and being caught behind. Swiping across a straight one. Wildly swinging at a wide one. Cutting a full one. Stumping yourself by slip. And whatever Faf du Plessis’s shot was.JP Duminy faced 11 balls. It seemed like he was dismissed on everyone one of them. At once stage every single South African batsman decided every single straight ball should be hit to the leg side with the bat faced closed off. It was madness. Horrible disgusting putrid madness.But even this madness should be evaluated. The shots were so poor, random and odd it is hard to even take them seriously. But their thinking, which wasn’t under pressure but would have been thought out of sober analysis and pre-planning, was just as bad.The repeated assertion that Colin Ingram couldn’t open died down a bit when he actually made 73 against West Indies. But it doesn’t change the fact that he is a makeshift opener with a first class average of 34.45 taking on a Test bowling attack in a must-win match. It’s not solid thinking. Ingram has been a success down the order and South Africa have a spare opener in the squad. With Alviro Petersen making runs in county cricket, opening with Ingram seems like a risk you don’t need to take.Then to back him up with Robin Peterson, who has batted in the top order six times in 72 matches is actually insane. Why back up a makeshift opener with a makeshift No. 3? The ball is moving, you have proper Test hundred scorers in your line up, and England are already on top with an early wicket. That Peterson spent any time at the wicket was a testament to what a strong gutsy cricketer he is. That he was eventually out when James Anderson bowled four straight outswingers and then one that didn’t was not a surprise, he did well to last that long.

To back up Colin Ingram with Robin Peterson, was insane. Why back up a makeshift opener with a makeshift No. 3.

In the place of Ingram and Peterson should be Graeme Smith and Jacques Kallis. You can’t replace them. Although if you are going to do so, adding a No. 9 at No. 3 and a makeshift opener is probably the worst way to try.But this team still had class batsmen. Hashim Amla is a God who cover drives among us. JP Duminy averages over 40 in ODI cricket. Du Plessis has started his Test career like an alien monster in a bad mood. And AB de Villiers can do absolutely every-damn-thing, except write pop songs that aren’t overly emotive. They were all there. All batting in the middle of The Oval. Facing England. As their country was reduced to 80 for 8.In the end, it was a T20 slogger with a first-class Average of 29.57, and a bowling allrounder who managed to delay the inevitable and ensure that the score was not so embarrassingly low that South African fans couldn’t see the number without vomiting in their mouth.David Miller played the sort of innings he is unknown for, a composed international sensible knock. A man with none of the pedigree of the rest of his batsmen, and less of the technique, managed to play the right shots to the right ball. He did it on an incredibly flat pitch once the ball had stopped swinging. Mind you, had any of his team mates struck around, they could have done the same. The player who stuck with him was Rory Kleinveldt. Who as a batsman is solid, dependable, and bats much like any No. 10 in club sides the world over. He’s clunky and unromantic, but you can’t help but enjoy any success he has.That partnership will help those two players. But it didn’t help the team at all. All it did was prolong their misery.De Villiers tried everything he could in the field. Had it been allowed, he would have suggested his bowlers try fancy dress and had his fielders singing Duckworth-Lewis Method songs in falsetto. His first three overs were by Chris Morris, Peterson and Duminy. After 11 overs, he’d tried five bowlers. He was essentially throwing bowlers at a wall, hoping one would fall down and trip the English batsmen. Few did.After the match Alastair Cook said South Africa didn’t choke, Gary Kirsten said they did. It doesn’t really matter; they don’t mark scorecards with choke or non-choke. If they did put random words on the scorecard, choke might be the most popular, but parody probably suits best. As whether it was in the satirical or imitating sense, that is what South Africa were doing today.

Team of the tournament

A Champions Trophy composite XI as selected by ESPNcricinfo writers

Andrew McGlashan24-Jun-2013Shikhar Dhawan – 363 runs @ 90.75, S/R 101.39
Barely put a foot wrong throughout the tournament. Began with commanding back-to-back hundreds against South Africa and West Indies and had a lowest score of 31 in the 20-over final. Flourishing a little later in his career than some India batsmen, but now looks primed for a long stint in the top-order and his re-emergence has helped the transition from Virender Sehwag. Immensely strong through the off side although may yet have to work on playing the short ball. No close challenger for the golden bat and also named Player of the Tournament.Alastair Cook – 161 runs @ 32.20, S/R 78.92
Just edged out Rohit Sharma to be Dhawan’s opening partner. He was not quite at his best with the bat, although the 47-ball 64 against New Zealand was an innings that helped keep England’s tournament alive. As a captain he grew during the event, maintaining his focus while issues such as David Warner’s punch at Joe Root and the ball-tampering accusations reared their heads. His next challenge is to move on from the disappointment of the final.Jonathan Trott – 229 runs @ 57.25, S/R 91.60
The source of many column inches and hours of airwave debate about his approach, but he performed the role he was selected for close to perfection. The harping about his strike rate is, on the evidence of this tournament, a little misguided too, as he ticked over at 91 runs per 100 balls. Looked in supreme touch during the semi-final and final; his dismissal against India was a vital moment.Kumar Sangakkara – 222 runs @ 74.00, S/R 80.14
Played one of the standout innings of the tournament with an unbeaten 134 against England and was the only batsmen to stand up to New Zealand in Sri Lanka’s opening match. As always, he was a joy to watch when playing through the off side or straight down the ground. Continues to shoulder a heavy burden in ODIs, with the keeping role and as an experienced helping hand for Angelo Mathews.Misbah-ul-Haq (capt) – 173 runs @ 86.50, S/R 73.61
The captain of a sinking ship. If it wasn’t for Misbah, Pakistan would have struggled to reach triple figures; his unbeaten 96 against West Indies was a fabulous rearguard innings, which almost gave his side enough runs to play with. He divides opinion back home for some of his captaincy decisions (although he is not the first cricketer to do that) but there do not appear many better batsmen vying for a place at the moment.Ravi Bopara – 118 runs @ 59.00, S/R 137.20 & 6 wickets @ 22.00, Econ 5.50
Became key to England’s side after they rebalanced the attack instead of going with five frontline bowlers – although Bopara showed he was not far off being classed as such. His striking in the middle-order helped compensate for the struggles of Eoin Morgan and Jos Buttler. Was on the verge of being the player of the final, but after three wickets could not quite absorb the pressure and see his team home. His international career, though, is revived.Ravindra Jadeja – 80 runs, S/R 148.14 & 12 wickets @ 12.83, Econ 3.75
A mixture of sliders, changes of pace and some which turned sharply made Jadeja a potent threat with the ball when he, perhaps, would not have been expected to play a major role in the tournament. He flummoxed West Indies with his 5 for 36 and also conceded just 3.75 runs per over. His powerful hitting down the order was rarely needed, but he delivered when required: his innings against South Africa and, especially, in the final against England were match-winners. It was fitting that he also had a crucial role to play with the ball to secure the trophy. Finished with the golden ball as leading wicket-taker.R Ashwin – 8 wickets at 22.62, Econ 4.41
Grew into the tournament on pitches that were increasingly responsive to spin. His parsimony in bowling four overs for 15 in the final was accompanied by the crucial wicket of Jonathan Trott but his contributions in the field were just as important, taking a sharp slip chance and two catches in two balls during the match-turning 18th over.Bhuvneshwar Kumar – 6 wickets @ 22.83, Econ 3.91
Kumar’s whippy, well-controlled seamers provided excellent control early in an innings for MS Dhoni. He had the lowest economy rate among pace bowlers to have sent down at least 20 overs in the tournament.James Anderson – 11 wickets @ 13.72, Econ 4.08
The classiest pace bowler on show. His opening spell in the semi-final was of the highest calibre (his set-ups of Colin Ingram and Robin Peterson were textbook) and he did not have a poor match. His ability to switch from outswinger to inswinger at will, and without losing control, was exceptional. Was one of the few bowlers who was able to move the Kookaburra.Mitchell McClenaghan – 11 wickets @ 13.09, Econ 6.04
Used very intelligently by Brendon McCullum as an out-and-out strike bowler, sending down short, sharp bursts which rarely failed to provide the wickets that were required, akin to what Geoff Allott achieved at the 1999 World Cup. His economy rate often reflected his attacking approach, but he had the pace and bounce to trouble batsmen and his emergence has added to New Zealand’s strong hand of pace bowlers.The ICC team of the tournament, incidentally, chosen by a five-strong selection panel, was: Dhawan, Trott, Sangakkara, Kohli, Misbah, Dhoni, Jadeja, McLaren, Kumar, Anderson, McCleneghan.

A record for de Kock, and one for Taylor

Also, stumps as souvenirs, fastest to 4000 ODI runs, T20 allrounders, and Sydney’s Brewongle Stand

Steven Lynch17-Dec-2013Quinton de Kock scored 342 runs in the one-dayers against India. Is this a record for a bilateral three-match series? asked Richard Webb from Australia
Quinton de Kock’s remarkable effort against India – 135 in Johannesburg, 106 in Durban and 101 ain Centurion – made him only the fifth batsman ever to score three successive hundreds in one-day internationals, following Zaheer Abbas (in 1982-83), Saeed Anwar (1993-94), Herschelle Gibbs (2002-03) and AB de Villiers (2009-10). And de Kock’s 342 runs overall did indeed break the record for a three-match bilateral series, which stood at 330, by New Zealand’s Martin Guptill (103 not out, 189 not out, 38) in England earlier this year. Virat Kohli scored 357 runs in India’s three matches – against different teams so not a bilateral series – in the Asia Cup in Bangladesh in March 2012.As I write, Ross Taylor has amassed more than 350 runs in consecutive Test innings without being dismissed. Is this a New Zealand record, or even a world record? asked Jez Brown from New Zealand
You obviously put the “commentator’s curse” on Ross Taylor, because he must have got out shortly after you wrote that! Taylor had successive innings of 217 not out, 16 not out and 129 in the recent Tests against West Indies – a total of 362 runs between dismissals. That is a record for New Zealand, beating Stephen Fleming’s 343 (274 not out and 69 not out against Sri Lanka in Colombo in April 2003, followed by a duck in the next Test in Kandy). But Taylor is a fair way down the overall list, which is headed by Sachin Tendulkar, who made 497 runs between dismissals early in 2004 – 241 and 60, both not out, against Australia in Sydney in January, 194 not out against Pakistan in Multan in March, then out for 2 in the first innings of the next Test in Lahore. He beat the long-standing record of Garry Sobers, who made 490 runs – 365 not out and 125 – in successive innings against Pakistan in 1957-58. Seven others have had sequences of more than 400 runs between dismissals in Tests: Michael Clarke (489 in November 2012), Kumar Sangakkara (479 in 2007), Rahul Dravid (473 in November 2000), Jacques Kallis (456 in late 2001), Brian Lara (453 – 400 not out then 53 against England in 2004), Daryll Cullinan (427 in early 1999) and Mark Taylor (426 – 334 not out and 92 in the same match, for Australia v Pakistan in October 1998).When did the habit start of grabbing souvenir stumps at the end of a match? Recently I watched a recording of the tied Test between Australia and West Indies, and noticed nobody grabbed the stumps after Joe Solomon’s direct hit ended the game … asked Hemanga Ranaweera from Australia
Actually the habit of grabbing souvenir stumps started well before that amazing match in Brisbane in 1960-61 – it was fairly well established even before a famous incident at the end of the first Test of the 1948 Ashes series, at Trent Bridge, when the controversial Australian opener Sid Barnes hit what he thought was the winning boundary, grabbed a stump and ran off. But actually he’d only tied the scores, and rather sheepishly had to come back – then took guard with the stump after handing his bat to the umpire to stick into the ground. Lindsay Hassett hit the vital single shortly afterwards, and because Barnes had to complete the winning run first he lost out in the scramble for souvenirs, and flung his bat down theatrically at the injustice of it all. I believe the authorities thought this sort of thing was rather unseemly, and tried to stop the practice for a while – which may be why no one went for the stumps at the end of the tied Test at the Gabba. Or they might just have been dazed by the remarkable finish – many of the players weren’t sure of the result until they got back to the dressing rooms.Hashim Amla reached 4000 runs in ODIs the other day. Has anyone got there quicker? asked Mukesh Apte from India
Hashim Amla reached 4000 runs in one-day internationals during his round 100 for South Africa against India in Durban last week. It was his 81st innings, in his 84th match – and both of those are easily records. Viv Richards reached 4000 in 88 innings from 96 matches: Virat Kohli also got there in 96 matches, but it took him 93 innings. The quickest to 4000 in terms of time was Rahul Dravid, in four years, minus about a week. MS Dhoni took about six weeks longer, and Kohli is next.Is Shahid Afridi the first player to score 1000 runs and take 50 wickets in T20 internationals? asked Ian Hugo from Nigeria
That’s a nice easy one, because the answer is a resounding yes: Shahid Afridi, who currently has 73 wickets in T20 internationals, completed 1000 runs in the format when he passed 23 during Pakistan’s match against Sri Lanka in Dubai last week. Only six other bowlers have reached the 50-wicket mark in Twenty20s so far, and of them only Umar Gul (160 runs) and Graeme Swann (106) have reached even three figures overall. The man closest to emulating Afridi’s double is his team-mate Mohammad Hafeez, who currently has 44 wickets to go with 1250 runs.Who or what is the Brewongle Stand at the SCG named after? asked Denise Johnstone from England
The Brewongle Stand, which was rebuilt in 1980, sits at the southern end of the Sydney Cricket Ground. For years I thought it got its name because “brewongle” was an Aboriginal word, meaning something like “camping place”, which perhaps reflected the fact that the SCG is in a big area of parkland. But a few years ago the industrious Sydney cricket historian Philip Derriman unearthed a more likely theory: that there used to be a tea-room inside the ground, where the new stand now is, called “The Brewongle”. The cafe was taken over by two unmarried Sydney ladies in 1894, and they appear to have renamed it after their father’s property outside Brewongle, near Bathurst to the west of Sydney. The father later sold up and moved to Sydney’s Double Bay, and called his house there Brewongle too.

'You'd pick Jacques for another year or two'

28-Dec-2013Shaun Pollock: “When he first came in, Jacques was a giggly kind of person and he used to laugh at a lot of things. He had a good sense of humour at times.”•Rob Cox/Action PhotographicsThe first time I heard of Jacques Kallis was when Western Province went on a pre-season tour to Australia. He scored a big hundred or 200. That was the first time there was talk of the ability he had and the fact that he could be a man for the future. Then I played against him a couple of times and went on the Under-23 trip to Sri Lanka, where I got to know him.Being a fellow allrounder and being of the same age, we gelled with each other and spent a lot of time together. From that moment, you knew Jacques was a class player. He didn’t take to Test cricket as quickly as he could have but thank goodness the selectors stuck by him.When he first came in, Jacques was a giggly kind of person and he used to laugh at a lot of things. He had a good sense of humour at times. On that Under-23 trip, he was struggling with the heat and he came in and said, “I need some petrol for my radiator,” which probably wasn’t right. He was also one of those guys who appreciated humour like, if someone would hit a shot and it would go and hit the rubbish bin, he would say, “That was a rubbish shot.” Or you’d hit it into the tree and he would say, “That’s a tree-mendous shot.” That was his kind of humour. He enjoyed a good laugh.In the 438-game, I didn’t play because of a back spasm. When the guys came back to the change room, it was a bad environment because everyone was really quiet. It was still. There was no humour. Jacques was the last to get into the change room and he said, “Well guys, the bowlers have done their job, they’re ten runs short of what they should have got. Let’s go and get it.” And everyone burst out laughing.As he got older, Jacques became very serious about what he wanted to achieve. I can remember him having a chat with Bob Woolmer where Bob said to him, “You need to take your standards to the next level. You are averaging a certain amount, you need to go to the next level,” and he did.There was no doubt he was the backbone. He understood, when he matured, that he wanted to be more significant in his contributions. We needed to him the backbone. He did change his game as the years went on and got really good at it.He has been the catalyst for many South African batsmen. Many guys were averaging around 40 and he raised the benchmark. Look at Graeme Smith, AB de Villiers, Hashim Amla, all the guys that came after set themselves new standards of what is a good average.Often Jacques used to get motivated by anger, but it was never outright anger. He used to channel that energy and used it to motivate him. Like that Sri Lanka game in the 1999 World Cup, he was angry for some reason and when we gave him the ball, he charged in and tried to bowl at the speed of light, and he did. That was what made his bowling special. He operated at 130 kph for his entire career and had the ability to go to 140 kph at times. He never shied from his duties as a Test bowler. One-day cricket, every once in a while it was like, “Do you really want me to bowl?” but in Test cricket he was fantastic. To have him as a fourth seamer, and then have a spinner in the second innings has been so vital to South Africa.Jacques has been lucky. I can think of very few injuries. He has had the odd hamstring. He has played the odd game where he has only been able to bat. I remember him having his appendix out in Pakistan in 1997. But that’s about it. He wouldn’t describe himself as a fitness freak, who ran and went to gym, but he did what he had to do and he was very successful.When T20 cricket came about, and even at the end of his one-day career, he had the ability to up the ante. There was a bit of criticism leveled at him at the beginning of his career that maybe his strike rates were too low, but he developed. Certain people can do certain skills well and others have to work at it. He was prepared to work at his game to get it to where he needed it to be.There were instances when there were certain comments passed. He would vent privately, or keep it to himself, or maybe make the odd comment to one of us. But he didn’t get vindictive about it. He would just use it as fuel to motivate himself to perform. He would be man enough to confront anyone on a certain issue but he wouldn’t make mountains out of molehills. Unless there was something that really upset him, he would just let it ride.

In the 438-game, I didn’t play because of a back spasm. When the guys came back to the change room, it was a bad environment because everyone was really quiet. It was still. There was no humour. Jacques was the last to get into the change room and he said, “Well guys, the bowlers have done their job, they’re ten runs short of what they should have got. Let’s go and get it.” And everyone burst out laughing

As international sportsmen you sift through criticism all the time. Jacques would have asked himself if it was constructive and whether he should change, or decided he was doing his job for the team. If he had any doubts, he would have probably bounced it off captains and coaches. He would have taken criticism on board, looked to adjust and try and be the best Jacques Kallis he could be.We talk about his bubble. It was his great strength. He stayed in his bubble for a long time. The best thing as a captain was to make sure he was in his bubble. Leave him in there and let him get on with it.He didn’t speak much but when he did, people listened. If Jacques was speaking, it was important. He wouldn’t come up and just give you an idea that was from left field. He would have put a lot of thought into what it should and shouldn’t be.If he is honest, he will say he was always someone who shied away from captaincy. He knew his strengths were in batting and bowling, and I didn’t think he ever wanted to take that extra responsibility of having to captain. He never had an issue about who was or wasn’t captain.A lot of people say he hasn’t got the accolades he deserved and I’ve often wondered why. The people you would be comparing him to are Ricky Ponting, Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara and maybe Rahul Dravid. Jacques was never a big one for the media, didn’t want to give too many opinions or go to too many press conferences. He tried to keep everything to himself and maybe that could be the reason why Lara, for example, got more recognition.Shaun Pollock: “Jacques will be missed. To replace a cricketer like him, you need two guys.”•Hamish Blair/Getty ImagesLara was flamboyant. He got two world records and that drew a lot of attention to him. Sachin, we all know, for coming in at 16 and having the reputation that he did in India meant that he got a lot of accolades. Jacques just did his business, being the backbone of our batting line-up for a long period of time.Even his bowling contributions, he would pick two or three wickets but there weren’t many performances that brought attention to him. He was always there doing his part and that’s why he always slipped under the radar. It’s also a case of maybe a prophet in your own land. We appreciated him here but maybe we didn’t give him as much attention as maybe someone like Sachin or Ricky Ponting got.Some of the pitches that we’ve had in South Africa haven’t been easy. Jacques made it look easy and managed to get big runs. I know that if I had played for India on some of those surfaces, I wouldn’t have had the average and career I had with the ball. So I’m sure if Jacques had played on some flatter wickets, maybe he would have had a better record. But you’ll never be able to say, and maybe he wouldn’t have got as many wickets.Jacques would have been thinking a lot about when to retire. You could see in the UAE, in the last Test match – he was always quite relaxed and reserved at the best times – but you did get the feeling that something was playing on his mind. Credit to him. I think the time to go is when you’re on top. You don’t want people to start talking about, is it time or isn’t it time?He also wouldn’t want to let anyone down. His mother passed away at a very early age so it was his dad and his sister. His dad made a lot of sacrifices for him and he supported him throughout his career. When he gets hundreds, he always acknowledges his dad. Jacques always came across to me as a very loyal person, whether it was to sponsors or to friends. He always respected people for the value they added to his life.Jacques will be missed. To replace a cricketer like him, you need two guys. You talk about a true allrounder as being a guy who can hold his place as a batsman alone or as a bowler alone. Jacques could do that. From a team perspective, he was wonderful to have around. You always knew what you were going to get, he never caused a stir or fuss in the change room.

I’m just happy he announced it before this Test match. Jacques is the kind of character who easily could have said after this Test, “That’s it, I’m done, I don’t want the fuss of what goes on.” I’m glad he is going to get some fuss because his efforts deserve it. I’m glad he has given people the opportunity to say thank you.

If he wanted to play in the next Test, you’d pick him. In fact, you’d pick him for another year or two. I think the timing for him is right. He realises the body isn’t capable of doing what he wants to do and I’m just happy he announced it before this Test match. Jacques is the kind of character who easily could have said after this Test, “That’s it, I’m done, I don’t want the fuss of what goes on.” I’m glad he is going to get some fuss because his efforts deserve it. I’m glad he has given people the opportunity to say thank you.Going forward, the key for the team is going to be balance. If you take Jacques out of this line-up, do you shift the batting order up and slide in someone like [Ryan] McLaren at No.7? Then you’ve got a bowling option plus some runs, and you’ve got [Robin] Peterson and [Vernon] Philander to contribute. We need to come up with a plan of how we can be successful without Jacques.Jacques is one of those guys who you may get in for a short period of time as a consultant. I’m sure he would love to help out guys with some of his ideas. Some of his thinking might be above what us mortals are used to implementing. Even when you used to hear him talk about his technique, you’d think, “I’ve never thought about it that deeply.” A man who has played as much cricket as he has would have some great ideas about how people can improve.He will move out of cricket quite easily. He is going to spend plenty of time on the golf course. He has always been a man who has enjoyed the luxuries of home and family and friends. Whatever he decides to do after that, he will do well. Jacques will find something to sink his teeth into.

Inverarity's hits and misses

After two and a half years in the job, John Inverarity has stood down as Australia’s chairman of selectors. ESPNcricinfo presents a selection of his winning decisions, and some of those that didn’t work out.

Brydon Coverdale02-May-2014HITSChris Rogers
For many years, it seemed that Rogers was destined to become a one-Test player, his only appearance filling in for an injured Matthew Hayden against India in 2008. But the departures of Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey left Australia in need of batting experience for last year’s Ashes tour and Inverarity called on Rogers, who at 35 would not have been considered by some selection panels, despite possessing nearly 20,000 first-class runs. A steady top-order influence, Rogers became the leading run scorer from either team across all 10 Ashes Tests in 2013-14 and added a fourth Test century to his tally in Port Elizabeth.David Warner
It is easy to forget that Warner was yet to make his Test debut when Inverarity’s panel first convened back in 2011. The first team they picked was for the Gabba Test against New Zealand and the absence of several key men due to injury meant there was no easing in to the job. Warner, James Pattinson and Mitchell Starc debuted and all eyes were particularly on Warner, who had played only 11 first-class games and had to prove he was more than a Twenty20 basher. In his second Test he carried his bat for a patient 123 that narrowly failed to deliver victory in Hobart, and a rollicking 180 followed against India at the WACA. Inverarity will depart with Warner at the peak of his Test powers, having made five tons and averaging 71.06 in the 2013-14 summer, and with Rogers and Warner a strong, established opening pair.George Bailey
Bailey the Test player may not have been such a success, although he contributed to the 5-0 Ashes clean-sweep, but Bailey the short-form batsman has been one of the triumphs of Inverarity’s tenure. Impressed by Bailey’s cricketing brain and his leadership with Tasmania, Inverarity installed him as the T20 captain in early 2012, before he had played for his country in any format. A place in the one-day side followed and it was there that Bailey proved himself a match-winning middle-order striker, comfortably topping Australia’s ODI run tally during the Inverarity era with 1647 at 53.12. The success of the T20 team under Bailey has been varied, although they were always likely to struggle in the past two World T20s in spinning conditions in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.Bringing Brad Haddin back for last year’s Ashes Tests proved a wise move•Getty ImagesMitchell Johnson, the comeback
Admittedly, this was due more to circumstance than the panel’s judgment, but the selectors still had to write Johnson’s name down in their 2013-14 Ashes squad and trust that his past struggles were behind him. Not picked for the tour of England, Johnson impressed the selectors with his pace in the one-day series in India that bisected the two Ashes battles and when they had to pick a Test side minus the injured Starc, Pattinson and Jackson Bird, they turned to Johnson. The rest – as well as a few England careers – is history.Brad Haddin, the comeback
Unlike Johnson’s return, the re-emergence of Haddin as a key Ashes player purely down to selectorial shrewdness. Having dumped an out-of-form Haddin for the younger Matthew Wade in 2012, Inverarity’s panel could have been expected to put a line through Haddin’s name and look solely to the future. But as they showed with Rogers, and with men like Brad Hogg and Brad Hodge in the T20 side, they were prepared to ignore age and focus on form and experience when the big moments arrived. At 35, Haddin was reinstalled ahead of the struggling Wade for the Ashes tour and made vice-captain, and while solid in England it was in the home series that he really thrived, rescuing Australia in nearly every Test with the bat. Only Warner scored more runs in the home Ashes.MISSESJohn Hastings
The Perth Test of 2012-13 will be remembered mostly for Ricky Ponting’s retirement, but it was also a low point for the Inverarity panel. The heavy workload imposed on Peter Siddle and Ben Hilfenhaus in Adelaide a few days earlier meant the controversial rotation policy, or as Inverarity called it, “informed player management”, was brought into effect. At least, that was how it first appeared. Only later did it emerge that Siddle and Hilfenhaus were less than 100% fit, but whatever the reason, the choice of Hastings as a replacement seemed odd when men like Jackson Bird and Ben Cutting were also performing well in the Sheffield Shield. Hastings posed little threat to the South Africans and finished his one Test with 1 for 153.John Hastings had little impact in his one Test appearance•Getty ImagesRob Quiney
In the absence of an injured Watson, Quiney was put in at No.3 for the first two Tests against South Africa in that same 2012-13 series for scores of 9, 0 and 0. But it was not just the failures of Quiney that caused consternation among fans, it was the feeling that he had been thrown to the wolves to protect Phillip Hughes, who was brought in for the following series against a friendlier Sri Lankan attack. “We did feel that throwing [Hughes] into a Test against the world No.1 with their attack was probably not the ideal set of circumstances for him,” Inverarity said when he announced Hughes was to play Sri Lanka.Xavier Doherty
Andrew Hilditch’s selection panel had discovered during the 2010-11 Ashes that Doherty was a limited-overs bowler who would struggle for impact in Tests, but that did not stop Inverarity and his colleagues picking Doherty for last year’s Test tour of India. The selectors said that Doherty’s one-day form had played a part in his selection, and not surprisingly when he was included in the side he looked a containing bowler rather than a wicket taker. The decision to include Doherty and Glenn Maxwell, who was promoted before he was really Test-ready, and to drop Nathan Lyon was made when Inverarity was the selector on duty. Lyon returned later in the series and took nine wickets in the Delhi Test.Ashton Agar
Another spinner who was thrust into Test cricket at the expense of the accomplished incumbent Lyon was Agar. And while he captured the imagination of the Australian public on debut with his 98 batting at No.11, and with his youthful exuberance, Agar was not yet a Test spinner and was dropped after two matches, by which time Australia were 2-0 down.Brad Hogg
It was worth a shot. Inverarity and his panel should be congratulated for their bravery in picking older veterans like Hogg and Hodge, men who are now T20 specialists, in the search for a World T20 title. But ultimately the inclusion of 40-plus-year-old Hogg for the tournaments in Sri Lanka in 2012 and Bangladesh in 2014 made no difference. Despite his teenage-like enthusiasm and BBL success, Hogg managed 2 for 186 across the two tournaments, while costing 7.75 an over, and one of the most adventurous selections in Australia’s recent history must be judged as a failure.

SA need to be careful with the ball – Domingo

South Africa either need to become more discreet in their management of the match ball or stop trying to manipulate it to their advantage, was the message from Russell Domingo

Firdose Moonda in Galle19-Jul-2014South Africa either need to become more discreet in their management of the match ball or stop trying to manipulate it to their advantage. That was the message from coach Russell Domingo in the aftermath of the Vernon Philander ball-tampering episode.”I’m sure other sides are probably a little bit better at doing it than we are and it’s maybe something that we cut out completely,” Domingo said after play on day four. “It’s not something that we pride ourselves on; it’s not the way we want to play it.”Philander was fined 75% of his match fee after pleading guilty to breaching clause 42.1 of the ICC’s match playing conditions which relate to changing the condition of the ball. Footage, which was not broadcast but was viewed by the match officials after play on day three, showed Philander “scratching the ball with his fingers and thumb.”Although the on-field umpires had not noticed anything amiss with the ball during the day, the evidence was considered “compelling” enough for a CSA source to reveal that it prompted Philander not to contest the charge. Domingo confirmed that the threat of a greater sanction and the existence of video evidence was what prompted Philander to admit guilt.”If didn’t plead and was found guilty, he’d miss a Test match,” Domingo said. “Admitting guilt is almost as though we’re saying ‘lets just move on and focus on what we are going to do here,’ and put it behind us. If they’ve got footage, nine out of ten times the footage will find you guilty so I suppose so it’s difficult to argue if they can see something that they think you shouldn’t be doing. So it’s probably just an easier route to admit guilt and move on.”Domingo has not seen the video evidence and he will not request it but maintained that he regarded Philander’s as unintentional even though it comes just nine months after another South African, Faf du Plessis was fined for the same offence. “We always try and play the game in the spirit thats its intended to. Its not something that we try to do,” Domingo said.”I don’t know if we are getting a reputation. It’s something we don’t try and intentionally do. It’s not that the side says, ‘this is what we are going to go and do.’ Vernon claims to have cleaned the ball and he has been seen on television scratching the ball. The umpires said the ball’s state hadn’t been changed at all and that says it all. We haven’t the seen the footage but it’s done. I don’t think a big distraction at all. It’s unfortunate. We’ve got to move on and focus on the nine wickets we’ve got to get tomorrow.”Sri Lanka’s coach Marvan Atapattu also regarded the matter closed. “It has been taken care of,” he said. When asked what he would say if one of them was charged with the same offence as Philander, Atapattu cheekily replied: “I don’t even have to think about it because I’m sure they don’t do it.”Atapattu was similarly jovial about the task facing Sri Lanka on the final day – to go where no team has gone before in Galle in search of the highest fourth-innings score at this ground. A lead of 369 was considered enough by South Africa to declare with four sessions left in the game and Domingo explained that time, not a target, was foremost on their minds.”In the game where Pakistan batted against Sri Lanka they needed 114 overs to bowl them out. We felt we would need 110 to 120 overs in the last innings,” Domingo said.Sri Lanka have already seen off 32 of those overs and have lost only one wicket. Ideally, Domingo would have liked to have them “three down overnight” but said the squad would “reflect on our plans and come back and bowl better than we did today.”Although Domingo did not say it, he would likely be expecting more of legspinner Imran Tahir, who has not yet come to the fore at this spinner-friendly venue. The presence of Tahir, JP Duminy and a third spin option in Dean Elgar in addition to their pace prowess gave South Africa the confidence to declare at a time that some have called earlier than expected.This match has already defied some expectations though and Atapattu was not surprised to see another assumption – that South Africa would opt for safety first – dismantled. “South Africa are renowned as a side that poses challenges to the opposition,” he said. “When you have almost everything in your attack – fast bowlers, swing, reverse-swing and a legspinner – it’s a fair declaration and it’s a challenge for us.”

Zimbabwe's seam attack built on patience

Zimbabwe recognise that they don’t have a bowling attack to blast out sides. Instead, they draw batsmen into making errors by sticking to disciplined lines and lengths over prolonged periods

Firdose Moonda in Harare10-Aug-2014There are a variety of ways to show skill on the cricket field. Modern spectators tend to prefer the emphatic ways of fiery fast bowlers, firmly struck boundaries and feisty fielding and are far less likely romanticised by an old-fashioned scrap. Watching Zimbabwe at work may force them into a rethink.The No.9 ranked Test team are held back by a lot of things including fixtures, finances and finely-tuned skills but they have learnt how to work within those limitations to push teams rated much higher than them as far as they can. What they lack in prowess they may make up for with pluckiness, a quality that has the ability to charm even the cold-hearted.That was evident on the first day when they stopped themselves from unravelling against a bowling attack whose reputation intimidates long before their actions do and emphasised on the second day with a bowling performance built on patience. Zimbabwe’s pack does not have out and out quicks or mystery spinners so they know they are unlikely to be able to blast teams out. They have to bore them out, and they’re happy to do that.That is why Tinashe Panyangara and Tendai Chatara adopt the Vernon Philander approach to discipline. They both bowl a good length outside offstump over and over and over again. A significant percentage of their deliveries can be watched as they go through to the wicketkeeper Richmond Mutumbami. They don’t make the batsman play nearly as much as they should and as a result they do not concede many runs.Between them, Panyangara and Chatara bowled 31 overs and conceded just 35 runs. Their message to the South African batsman was clear: if you want runs off us, you will have to come and get them and if you don’t want to, we will wait until you change your mind and when you do, maybe we’ll get you out.The third seamer, debutant Donald Tiripano, is still being schooled in those ways but he was the first to benefit from it when Dean Elgar chased one he would have left alone and was caught behind. Elgar had faced 146 balls for his 61 and the frustration mounted. That’s what Zimbabwe were banking on and it gave them three of the four wickets that fell.The lines and lengths Zimbabwe’s seamers offered and the surface they offered them on – a dry, slow pitch – tested will rather than willow, which is how Zimbabwe could claim some moral victories. Elgar admitted it took only a small lapse in concentration for Zimbabwe to break through. “I went out of my bubble a little bit. I had a bit of a brain fart and all you need is that one ball,” Elgar said.”They are very good bowlers in their conditions. The seamers are very patient. They stuck to the game plan well and are difficult to get away. They have no Dale Steyn, whose pace actually helps, but getting scoring opportunities is quite tough. They bowled well. We are lucky not to be more wickets down.”South Africa’s own laboured approach did not help them move the game forward but, like they said of the SSC two weeks ago, they were batting with brakes on because of the surface. “It’s a very subcontinent-like wicket,” Elgar said. “We felt like we were back in Sri Lanka.”South Africa’s focus on sluggish surfaces like this one is to spend as much time on it as possible and once again, the clock is on their side. After bowling Zimbabwe out early on the second morning, South Africa had the best part of four days to apply their strategy to win this match, which is to bat once, however slowly and leave enough time to bowl Zimbabwe out again.”Any runs ahead of their first-innings total is key for us. We’ve got to try and extend as much as possible tomorrow, even if it’s done slowly. We have to try and bat big,” Elgar said.Even if South Africa continue to score slowly, Zimbabwe will look to continue to bowl with discipline and eventually make some inroads. “Our plan is to keep it tight and do the basics right. If we can get two or three quick wickets we’d be happy,” John Nyumbu, the offspinner said.Nyumbu expects it to become “quite a bit more difficult” to score runs as the game goes on and although he did not say it, Zimbabwe will require a massive effort in their second innings to push for an unlikely win. They will not even tease themselves with that thought. What’s evident is that they are making the best use of their skills to ensure they are still in the game and making statements about it, however subtle those statements are.

No place like Arundel

When you spend your childhood in the shadow of a magnificent cricket ground, you tend to take it for granted. Revisiting helps put things in perspective

Will Macpherson21-Nov-2014Forty nine miles south of London, 18 west of Brighton, and home to 3500 people, Arundel could be like any other English town.It’s not. That’s clear before you’re off the train. The spectacular views across meadows and the River Arun afforded by the final minutes of the journey into the -style station at the town’s foot are enough to set a child’s imagination racing: sat proudly atop a hill Arundel could be the Emerald City or a faraway fort from German Märchen.There’s the steeply sloped high street, lined with traditional staples: butcher, baker, bank, plus antique and art galleries aplenty, tea rooms, restaurants, quirky clothes and book shops and cosy pubs. Photos a half-century, even a century old reveal few changes. Then there are the streets that snake off the high street, weaving round the river and through the hills, with their hotchpotch mix of Tudor cottages, Georgian townhouses and Victorian terraces. There are other pleasant quirks: a summer festival of art, theatre, music and food; that meandering river and its wonderful walks; the smell of sea air on a gusty day. This is England from the postcards.Arundel boasts three stunning Cs: the soaring cathedral that towers over the town, the medieval castle – built a year after William conquered Hastings, and home to the Duke Of Norfolk – that crawls through it, and the cricket ground that hides amidst downland in the quiet beyond woods and walls.Aesthetically, the ground is a thing of beauty; historically, it’s eccentric and grand; for character and originality, there’s no place quite like it.

****

I, happily, am one of those 3500. I’m no mullet – that’s the name given to folk born in the town due to the fish that fill the river, not the hairstyle – but I owe my passion for cricket to the town my family has called home since I was five.My school team trained in the indoor nets during winter and played in competitions on the outfield in summer. My strongest early memory of watching cricket came at Arundel in 2000, when nearly ten, as Brian Lara strode out, ton on the board, bat under arm and Victoria Sponge in hand, with myself and countless other nippers surrounding him after teatime revelry on the outfield with dads and pals.Twelve months on, it was Steve Waugh making a century and the year after that VVS a stylish 85. The serial record-breaker, the toughest man I’d ever seen, and the guy who had recently played the innings from the end of the earth to beat the seemingly impregnable Australians. All in my little home town? These are days pre-teens don’t forget in a hurry.

A summer festival of art, theatre, music and food; that meandering river and its wonderful walks; the smell of sea air on a gusty day – this is England from the postcards

I’m not the only local who goes giddy at the ground’s mere mention. Grown men, speaking of their chance to play there, express joy every bit as childlike as mine when a metre from Lara: I’d seen first-hand a friend’s anguish as, on his first appearance at the ground, he chopped a half-tracker onto his stumps four shy of a maiden century.When you hail from a small town, a poser arises whenever you’re asked where exactly you’re from. Brits from London or Manchester or Edinburgh have it easy: everyone knows where that is. If you’re from some quiet corner of middleofnowheresville, which, for its myriad charms, Arundel is, the answer is more vexing. Even in the UK, “er, Arundel” will prompt puzzled looks. I might try a mumbled “near Brighton” or “Sussex”.Yet it didn’t take long living in Australia and visiting New Zealand to clock that when in the company of cricket lovers, I could plough straight in with “Arundel” and they’d know exactly where I meant. These weren’t one-offs or simply in professional company. Many had even paid a visit. The ground represented the very essence of English cricket: a village-green feel, a festival atmosphere – all brass bands, pork pie-laden picnics, row upon row of deck chairs – and maybe an extra sweater, too.Upon returning to the UK after ten months, I decided to head home to a cricketing place whose proximity and old-worldliness has meant I’ve maybe taken it for granted since those impressionable early days. Even as someone who loved all he knew of the place, cricket in Arundel seemed the product of a bygone era, rather too quaint in an age when cricket jumpers have zips, an age of 82-page dietary dossiers, an age of Bunnings Warehouse Replays and Karbonn Kamaal Catches.I chat with John Barclay and James Rufey, respectively Director of Cricket and Coaching and Executive Secretary of Arundel Castle Cricket Club and Foundation. We sit in their tiny office overlooking the oval. It’s October, the season’s over and the weather’s turned, the lashing rain calling a halt to work on next season’s pitch.

****

Many will remember Johnny as an opening bat, offspinning jack-of-all who captained Sussex for half of the 1980s. Since, he’s remained quite the allrounder. He arrived at Arundel within months of his retirement in 1986 but is also chairman of the Sussex Cricket Board, has managed England tours, written three books, served as president of the MCC, and still sits on the committee at Lord’s.Prince Phillip bowls at Arundel in 1953•PA PhotosHe tells me the ground was built by Henry, the 15th Duke, in 1895 as a family luxury (“They did a damned good job,” he notes). There were other grand grounds at country houses that remain to this day, such as Goodwood, Blenheim and Chatsworth, where too aristocratic types would invite their friends, some stars, and gamble large amounts on games in their gardens.At Arundel it was all hosted and financed by the Duke, visiting players would stay in the castle, and there was an estate team made up of staff. All of which paints a convivial, if elite, picture: Arundel was a place known only to a privileged few: the Duke’s chums and those invited to play.Things opened up under Bernard, Henry’s cricket-mad successor as Duke, who would go on to be president of Sussex and MCC and was England’s tour manager for the ’62-63 Ashes. In 1953, the year of the Queen’s coronation, Bernard’s team hosted the Duke of Edinburgh’s XI. Both men played and a typically resplendent line up of stars received the ducal summons: Bill Edrich on the home side, Gubby Allen and Bill Voce for Prince Phillip. The match appears to have been played out in front of a crowd greater than usual – perhaps 10,000 – and it was this, according to Sussex and Arundel regular Robin Marlar, quoted in Sir Michael Marshall’s book, , that persuaded Bernard that Arundel was ready for a big step forward.That step came in 1956, when he invited the Australians – with Messrs Benaud, Harvey and Miller – to open their tour at the castle. “This,” agrees Johnny, “was the turning point for the ground in terms of publicity and fame.” Though the game was played in late April, a hardy crowd of 13,000 watched Australia take on a Duke’s XI containing Len Hutton, Alec Bedser and Colin Cowdrey – who would become a fixture at the castle, even making Bernard’s daughter Anne his wife many years on. Among that crowd, according to Marshall’s book, was “a large press contingent.” Word spread back to Australia, and so a tradition was born: England’s opponents would come to Arundel to open their tours. This happened almost every year until the memorable summer of 2005, when the Australians played the PCA at Arundel.Johnny recalls visiting as a boy: “I came in 1963, ’64 and ’66, with my grandparents, always sat over the far side, in front of the gap. It was late April and we would have to wrap up warm, although it never rained. There’d be a crowd of five-figures, all rugs, picnics, bottles of wine. There were no restrictions, people came up and enjoyed the cricket.”

The toss was rigged so the tourists would bat first. It was a festival, a curtain-raiser, an exercise in blowing away cobwebs in the most English of surroundings; complete with marching band, deck chairs and book stall

In 1993, that was certainly true as the gates eventually had to close with 16,000 in – including Prime Minister John Major – to watch Botham take on the Aussies. The nature of these games was friendly (Bernard’s wife Lavinia even thought it sharp practice to invite a team to Arundel and beat them). The toss was rigged so the tourists would bat first. It was a festival, a curtain-raiser, an exercise in blowing away cobwebs in the most English of surroundings; complete with marching band, deck chairs and book stall.Lyle Turnbull, part of the 1956 press corps, wrote in the : “Cricket has never been played in a more pleasant atmosphere… It was essentially a picnic match with broadcast announcements about lost dogs, lost children and even a lost wife.” Very little changed in the 49 years these games were played.”It was special, and completely unique,” Johnny continues. “Of those days as a kid I just remember watching legends, heroes of mine – Sobers and Bob Simpson and the Duke’s guests, Barrington, Dexter, Graveney. I was a young boy learning the game, I was impassioned by cricket. I was in thrall of it all.”Such recollections mirror those I felt upon juvenile visits to the ground. That calibre of star remained until the last, but eventually the fixture ceased to exist for obvious reasons: shorter tours with congested schedules, diminishing availability of guest players, and the perfectly reasonable desire of other counties to host games. Arundel couldn’t demand a fixture and, equally, couldn’t compete financially. Those names, though: Miller, Sobers. Botham, Lara. Golden sun sparkling on whites. The lushest of green ovals. In a “picnic match”. What a thing to have on your doorstep.

****

It seems an apt juncture to describe the place that grabbed me – not by the scruff of the neck, it’s gentler than that – and ignited my love of cricket. Johnny described it as “a work of art”, which is fair, although a spot of precision is required: this is a masterpiece.We’re chatting on a cold, wet day when it’s lying dormant and it’s perfectly serene. But on summer days, when filled with hordes of cricket lovers with blues, reds and whites thrown onto the green canvas, it’s a sight to behold.A ground for fantasists•PA PhotosThe approach takes in two colours, the grey of ancient stone buildings and paths, and the green of bush and tree. The oval is vast: a 3.5 acre amphitheatre flanked by meaty oaks. There are steep banks around a quarter, and an understated, red-tiled pavilion atop one such bank. From the pavilion to the pitch’s perimeter, there’s a wide wooden staircase. Glimpses are offered of the castle, sitting to the south-east, just visible through the trees, while the cathedral can be seen from the Park End, soaring above them. The freak, famous and utterly un-British hurricane of 1987 felled some foliage and altered the complexion of the ground – for the better, according to Johnny, the castle coming into view without sacrificing the sense of ringing. Overhead it’s not unusual to see birds of prey – buzzards, kestrels, kites – stalking.Then there’s the gap. There’s nothing cryptic or complicated about a simple break in the trees, but it’s a truly glorious reminder of exactly where you are. It’s absolutely intentional and provides a picture of the boondocks beyond, the great folds of rolling downland from which this ground is carved. Arundel is a cricket ground for escapists, for fantasists, with the trees providing seclusion and privacy, but the gap is a window out to the Weald beyond. The velvety oval and the rugged downland are dramatically juxtaposed.

****

Bernard died in 1975 and cricket at Arundel stood at a crossroads. Bernard had only daughters and thus no immediate heir, so the Dukedom passed to a different strand of the family, who were new to Arundel and no cricket lovers. Bernard’s widow Lavinia, however, would not allow her husband’s pride and joy to wither and die.In that spirit, she founded – with the help of Colin Cowdrey, Billy Griffith and Ronnie Aird (who she described as her “three musketeers”) – the Friends of Arundel Castle Cricket Club. Lavinia and her daughters were generous with their time and money. Membership had to be built and staff paid outside of the estate’s finances. Eighteen months after foundation, in spring 1977, the club had over 1250 members and 141 life members, had hosted Clive Lloyd’s West Indians and many other fixtures. It hadn’t been easy but the beautiful – and by now storied – cricket ground at Arundel had survived the passing of its patriarch and Bernard’s legacy was secured.Even with wealthy friends, drawcard fixtures and paltry rent, it was difficult to fund. It wasn’t easy to ask benefactors to pour money into a club. The solution was the establishment of a charity: the Arundel Castle Cricket Foundation. The two bodies – FACCC and ACCF – happily coexist to this day. Paul Getty, a man with his own stunning legacy at Wormsley, donated generously, funding the indoor school that I used as a kid. The charity’s motivations were to support disadvantaged youths and to foster a love of cricket

“The tourist match rolled on happily. I’d just ring the secretaries of the counties that weren’t playing and invite players down. None ever complained about money, and it was all friendly”John Barclay

Johnny, who was involved in the establishment of the foundation, says: “I don’t think the whole thing would have got off the ground without Getty. All the cash was volunteered by him, and it’s wonderful that this ground has a purpose and is giving something back all year round. The foundation blossomed. The aim was to get the young, many from inner-city backgrounds, perhaps who had a disability or for whom life was a struggle, down to Arundel to enjoy cricket, have a day by the seaside and in the country.”The tourist match rolled on happily. It was easy in those days – I’d just ring the secretaries of the counties that weren’t playing and invite players down. None ever complained about money, and it was all friendly. It didn’t take place – I think in 1999 – and that was an eye-opener and reminded us not to put all our eggs in that basket. When it did conclude, that was fine: between 2003-05 it hung on with the PCA’s help. It remained popular with fans and players but it was untenable, just politically impossible.”

****

So, to 2014. Once more, with the tourist match gone, cricket at Arundel has survived the passing of its rock. Sussex has used Arundel as a first-class outground – increasingly a rarity, these days – annually since 1990. This year, the Sussex Cricket Festival at Arundel saw Yorkshire visit for a four-day game, Somerset for a T20 and the county’s ladies play on Sunday. As a devotee of such fixtures, I can confirm they buck the hackneyed “one man and his dog” image of county cricket. The five figures of yore it is not, but the crowds flock in high summer to see top-level cricket at a ground as stunning as ever.”This year we had 14,000 across the week and 5000 at the T20,” says James. “We have our week, we enjoy it and feel we do it very well: we’ve a beautiful ground and an attractive town, which helps. You see people popping into town and there’s a slight upturn in the fortunes of local businesses. It’s great fun.Lavinia, Duchess of Norfolk, with Tony Greig, Greg Chappell and the Australian and England players at Arundel in 1977•Getty Images”But it’s not all about top-level cricket. We have 50 days cricket a year and many more foundation days. I’d say we cover the widest range of cricket at any one ground, not just in England, but in the whole world. Seriously.”This is a bold claim and I’m dubious, but the calendar’s out and we’re off: alongside the men’s and women’s first-class cricket, there’s top-level club cricket, England’s blind and deaf teams, touring sides, school matches, county 2nd XI, societies, varsity, a couple of commercial days, and many matches that have been played since Bernard’s days: Martlets, I Zingari, Combined Services, MCC. Add the 1500 children who benefit from the foundation’s philanthropic activity every year and the variation is staggering.”It’s about balance,” Rufey says. “We’re a small organisation with six staff and a desire to retain character. We’ve got 800 members with a core who’ll come to every day’s play. The standard is high but people come for a love of cricket and summer and all that constitutes. Sitting on the boundary, reading the paper, having a picnic – some of them take that very seriously!”A wander from the town to the ground on such a summer’s day remains special, a small splattering of spectators – modest obstruction to the players’ whites on the ground’s greens – simply soaking up the smells, the sun, the sport, the spot.Johnny continues: “In cricket, at every level, it’s hard to make ends meet. Whether you’re a county or a tiny club. We’re somewhere in that puzzle. It’s a balance between the commercial aspects of a business and maintaining the essence of the place itself. We see ourselves as unspoilt.”A glance over my shoulder, out the window is as good a reminder as any that this place sure ain’t spoilt.

What's in a rematch?

Why group-stage head-to-heads are a big deal when it comes to the knockouts. Or not

Andy Zaltzman04-Feb-2015You could write a book listing and explaining the reasons why the format of the World Cup is wrong. It might not sell particularly well, and your publisher might ask you to tone down some of the language if you commission someone from an Associate member nation to write an appendix about the ten-team format for the 2019 tournament, but it would nonetheless be a chunky tome to keep in your lavatory, use as a doorstop, or burn on a cold winter’s night.The format for 2015 – 42 matches, dragged out over a month, to painstakingly reduce the 14 teams down to the best eight, followed by a breakneck seven-game knockout to reduce those eight down to one, ensuring that the eventual world champions might well be decided in significant part by luck – is not without its benefits.There are a large amount of matches, which is good if, for example, you really enjoy watching cricket matches, a social category that, I assume, contains most of the readers of this column. It is an even better format if you enjoy watching matches that are not particularly important in the grander cricketing scheme of things, or one-sided drubbings.Best of all, the knockout stage will be gripping. One flare-up of a strong team’s Achilles heel could be enough to send them home; one surge of slugging brilliance could take a less-fancied team through; a few high-octane new-ball overs could negate a potent batting line-up; a three-game form-spike is all that is needed, which might even be within the compass of West Indies. Or England. Or the UAE. But probably not the UAE.. Definitely not the UAE. The tournament will end well, and dramatically. It will also have a significant lull in the middle weeks.In the last World Cup, after 30 days, we were left with the eight traditional Test nations in the quarter-finals. Bangladesh almost sneaked through, England almost sneaked out, and Ireland upset some applecarts, but, essentially, not only would you probably have correctly predicted the quarter-finalists before the tournament began, but you would also probably have correctly predicted them 20 years previously. Or 30 years previously, if you had correctly read the runes that South African politics was going to change a bit. A very big bit.The bookmakers’ odds suggest that there is approximately a 65% chance that all of the top eight teams will make it to the quarter-finals (and, conversely, that there is only a one-in-three likelihood of any of Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and the four Associate teams making it out of their group), which is not a massive amount of dramatic jeopardy with which to fuel a month of sporting tournament. Clearly, it must be difficult, if not impossible, to optimise both the commercial and sporting ideals of a tournament such as this in a sport with a limited number of top-level teams, but, whilst the 2011 and 2015 format is by no means the worst possible World Cup option (as proved by, for example, 2007), it is a significant distance away from being the best, or even good.Nevertheless, a World Cup brings its own weight and drama, especially one in which the host nations have realistic aspirations of victory, and the tournament begins with a flurry of heavyweight showdowns in which momentum, whatever that is worth, and form can be built up.More importantly, psychological points can be scored that might impact the latter stages. Might. Not will. But might. There is a reasonable chance that one or more of the final three matches at the end of March will feature of rematch of a group-stage game.There was only one in the 2011 edition – Sri Lanka’s semi-final win against New Zealand, in which they repeated a group-stage victory – but if such rematches do transpire in the semis or the final, the statistics suggest that the team that won the first game is highly likely to win the second.Seventeen World Cup knockout matches have been played between teams that had previously met earlier in the same tournament. Only three of those 17 have been won by a team that lost the first encounter against the same opponents – the 1999 final, when Australia thrashed Pakistan, after losing a tightly fought group match to Wasim Akram’s team; the 1996 semi-final, in which Australia avenged a group-stage defeat to West Indies; and the 1983 final, when Kapil Dev’s India beat the West Indians, although this is something of a rogue entry in this list, as the teams had played twice in the group phase, winning one and losing one each. As India had lost the second of the group matches, however, we will keep it in the stat. No arguments. This stat is now legally binding.Pakistan won the 1992 final against England, after having been saved by a rain-induced no-result while being comprehensively obliterated in a group match; and the 1999 semi-final between Australia and South Africa, following Australia’s dramatic Super Six win days earlier, was technically a tie, but since Australia went through on net run rate, it basically functioned as another win for the team that won the earlier contest.The other 12 knockout rematches have been won by the team that triumphed in the earlier match (13, if you include the 1983 Indians repeating their group win against West Indies) (which starts to get confusing) (that is excluded from the stat) (but replaced by the 1999 Australia-South Africa tied rematch, which I am now counting as a win). Furthermore, all of the seven rematches that have been played in the last three World Cups have been won by the team that won the initial game.Due to the changed format used in 2011 and 2015, such meetings are less likely to happen – just that one in 2011, as opposed to an inevitable three rematches in each of the previous three tournaments, when the Super Six / Super Eight format meant that the semi-finalists had played each other in one or other of the two group phases.Nevertheless the evidence suggests that although the month-long group stage somewhat inexplicably retained for this World Cup (while being simultaneously jettisoned for the next two tournaments) may serve little function other than to all-but-guarantee the presence of most or all of the more established cricketing nations in the knockout stages, a victory over a potential future semi-final or final opponent could be of considerable advantage. Even if that win occurs weeks and weeks before the climactic final few days, and no one can quite remember when, why or how it happened.A full list of World Cup knockout stage rematches:1975
West Indies beat Australia in group stage (by seven wickets) and in the final (by 17 runs).1979:
No rematches.1983
India beat West Indies (by 34 runs), then lost to them (by 66 runs), in group stage; then beat them again in the final (by 43 runs).1987:
No rematches.1992
Pakistan beat New Zealand in the round-robin (by seven wickets) and in the semi-final (by 4 wickets).
England beat South Africa in round-robin (by three wickets) and in the semi-final (by 19 rain-assisted runs).
[.]1996
Sri Lanka beat India in the group stage (by six wickets) and in the semi-final (by fire-aggravated forfeiture, whilst winning comfortably).
Australia lost to West Indies in group stage (by four wickets), but beat them in the semi-final (by five runs).
[]1999
Pakistan beat New Zealand in the group stage (by 62 runs) and in the semi-final (by nine wickets).
Australia beat South Africa in Super Six (by five wickets after Gibbs foolishly dropped the World Cup), then tied with them in the semi-final, knocking them out on net run rate.
Australia lost to Pakistan in the group stage (by 10 runs), then powerclobbered them in the final (by eight wickets).2003
Australia beat Sri Lanka in the Super Six (by 96 runs) and in the semi-final (by 48 runs (D/L).
India beat Kenya in the Super Six (by six wickets) and in the semi-final (by 91 runs).
Australia beat India in the group stage (by nine wickets) and in the final (by 125 runs).2007
Sri Lanka beat New Zealand in the Super Eight (by 6 wickets) and in the semi-final (by 81 runs).
Australia beat South Africa in the group stage (by 83 runs) and in the semi-final (by seven wickets).
Australia beat Sri Lanka in the Super Eight (by seven wickets) and in the final (by 53 runs (D/L).2011
Sri Lanka beat New Zealand in the group stage (by 112 runs) and in the semi-final (by five wickets).

Game
Register
Service
Bonus