Chennai Super Kings

Star: MS Dhoni. Look out for: SK Raina. Good pedigree – reached the final in ‘08 and semis last year. Boosted by the absence of Flintoff this year. Plenty of firepower (Matt Hayden averages 54 from 16 IPL games), but could be light in the bowling department – all eyes on Murali. If they were a boxer they’d be Ricky Hatton – big hitter, questionable balance.

Deccan Chargers

Star: AC Gilchrist. Look out for: MR Marsh. Adam Gilchrist-inspired reigning champions. Embodied the nature of T20 by being hopeless the first year and winning it last time around. Spent $720,000 on Kemar Roach at the 2010 auction – he shouldn’t struggle to be half as good as Kevin Pietersen, but might pull up short of being five-and-a-half Eoin Morgans. If they were a footballer they’d be Peter Crouch – used to be derided, before somehow suddenly becoming good.

Delhi Daredevils

Star: TM Dilshan. Look out for: WD Parnell. The chokers of the IPL? A little harsh maybe, but so far they’ve failed to back up strong group-phase performances in the knock-out stages. Packed with destructive batsmen, the bookies make them favourites – which probably means they’ll finish last. Paul Collingwood can often be found holidaying in Delhi around this time of year. If they were a tennis player they’d be Tim Henman – perennial semi-finalists.

Kings XI Punjab

Star: Yuvraj Singh. Look out for: YA Abdulla. The ones who look like they’ve been sent onto the pitch by Arsene Wenger. Any team that offers an injured Sreesanth a role as a ‘fan mentor’ must be worth keeping an eye on. Ravi Bopara starred in IPL ‘09 and will want to use this year’s tournament to cement his place in England’s World T20 squad. If they were an international side they’d be New Zealand - not good, not bad, easy to overlook.

Kolkata Knight Riders

Star: BAW Mendis. Look out for: AD Mathews. ”Last year we learnt how not to be losers,” says Shahrukh Khan in an introductory video on the KKR website. It’s a sentence which would be more accurate minus the “not”: at IPL 2009, KKR lost ten times and finished last. Their campaign was dogged by a captaincy rift and a phantom blogger (how do England players not feature for this franchise?), and this year they boast, in Rohan Gavaskar, the son of a man who once carried his bat for 36 from 174 balls in a World Cup match. If they were a tennis player they’d be Anna Smashnova – great name, but a bit rubbish.

Mumbai Indians

Star: SL Malinga. Look out for: AM Nayar. Can name a fielding God in their support staff (Jonty Rhodes), God himself in their batting line-up (Tendulkar) and a bowling God in the leading wicket-taker in T20 cricket (er, Graham Napier), not to mention a plethora of exciting allrounders. Arguably too many bit-part players, but at least with Harbhajan Singh around, dull moments should be in short supply. If they were a bible story they’d be Noah’s Ark – random bunch of species thrown together but with God on their side.

Rajasthan Royals

Star: GC Smith. Look out for: SW Tait. Warnie’s boys have gone from rags to riches, and now have their sights set on world domination. Despite a relative lack of star names, the Royals possess a well balanced roster as well as that guarantee of success, Jeremy Snape, who lurks in the background administering his Derren Brown mind tricks. Michael Lumb could prove a snip at $50,000 too. If they were a cricket administrator they’d be Lalit Modi.

Royal Challengers Bangalore

Star: DW Steyn. Look out for: V Kohli. Named after a liquor brand – how can you not love that? – they’re the ones who waited for KP to leave last year before becoming really quite good. Have been accused in the past of resembling (and playing like) a Test team, and with the likes of Dravid, Kallis and Boucher they’d make a rather good one. New signing Eoin Morgan should add some T20 urgency. If they were a football commentator they’d be John Motson – bit slow, but gets the job done.

“I don’t let spinners bowl to me,” Pietersen said bluntly. “I feel a little bit sorry for the little kid who bowled today but that’s just how I play spinners.”

That was Kevin Pietersen, three years ago to the day after bashing young Piyush Chawla to all parts at Mohali. The 2006 vintage of Pietersen was a fizzy bottle of tangy arrogance, the sort of confidence which overflows so quickly and without pause that he won admirers as quickly as he did enemies. It was difficult to warm to him as a person, but you couldn’t deny that he talked a good game and played an even better one. “Is this bloke for real?” was invariably met with “shit. I think he really is. Thank you, South Africa. Thank you so much. Got any more like him?”

Three years on and the foundation of his arrogance – his ability; his runs – has deserted him. Mediocre spinners are licking their lips; his bat isn’t coming down straight and where is the audacity, the skip down the pitch and the arrogant follow-through?

“I don’t let spinners bowl to me,” he said three years ago. What happened, Kev? Perhaps it’s time he opened the batting: the only safe position for him.

I don’t know why I’m telling you all this. Anyway, I want to garner your reaction to this year’s Modi Party, so wibble away to your hearts’ content.

To do so is to enter dangerous waters, particularly in the political circles in which I move. There, Not Being Racist is the greatest virtue. Often, it appears to be the only virtue still recognised.

And I can remember a journalist – can anyone tell me who it was? – getting into trouble a few years ago for suggesting that the variety of accents in the dressing room must mean that England lack cohesiveness and team spirit.

But that is not my worry and I am not sure it is even true. Plenty of football managers – Alex Ferguson of Manchester United, Jose Mourinho at Chelsea – have shown that it is possible to imbue a squad of players from extraordinarily varied backgrounds with a ferocious team ethic.

What I do fear is that the influx of foreign-born players will increasingly mean that the England team no longer represents the game in England.

Take rugby union, where sometimes this question seems even more urgent. You want to feel that one of the boys you see playing mini-rugby on a Sunday morning might one day play for England.

But if players like Lesley Vainikolo and Shontayne Hape are going to be brought into the team, not just from abroad but from a different game – rugby league –  then that it is increasingly unlikely to happen.

The question then becomes why, in cricket or rugby, we should care much about the national side when it has so little connection with the wider game.

You might say the rise in the number of foreign-born players in the England team is just a reflection of increasing globalisation and intercontinental travel.

And it is not as if that team has ever been wholly English born. I am thinking not just of the sons of empire-building families like Colin Cowdrey and Ted Dexter: there have also been players who learnt their game abroad, like Prince Ranjitsinhji and Basil D’Oliveira.

But it is possible to ask whether the increasing modern trend towards foreign-born England players is good for the game as a whole. Cricket and rugby union are both popular in a strictly limited number of countries. It would be good for both games to see that number increase.

But will Ireland ever make it to test status if their best players, like Ed Joyce and Eoin Morgan, become English as soon as they shown signs of exceptional talent? And we are not the only offenders, as was proved when Dirk Nannes suddenly proved to be Australian rather than Dutch.

It happens in rugby union too, where any player from the South Pacific Islands – which should surely be emerging as a power at test level by now – who shows exceptional talent plays for New Zealand instead.

And it even happens in soccer. The multiracial nature of the French team that won the world cup in 1998 was less a tribute to the wonderful diversity of French society than a reminder that the French government is happy to give citizenship to outstanding players from former colonies.

So that is why we should worry about the growing number of foreign-born players in the England cricket team. It threatens to weaken the connection between the national team and the wider game. And it makes it harder for new powers to arise in the game.

Jonathan Calder blogs at Liberal England

After yesterday’s 2 run defeat to Zimbabwe, he said this: “If we continue like this, Zimbabwe could beat us 5-0.” The anti-McGrath.

At least he can console himself with the fact that he’s rubbish at predictions.

Still, a potential eruption from mount Kieswetter, an ODI debut for Ajmal Shahzad, another chance for England’s pace-men to work out how to be threatening on the sub-continent and the continuation of Alastair Cook’s captaincy internship, awaited. Not to mention another chance to assess a certain number three batsman.

And so to the much-talked-about, uber-complicated, arguably-misunderstood, out-of-form elephant at the crease. Kevin Pietersen made a scratchy 22, before being pinned lbw by his chief poacher – a slow left-armer. He still hasn’t scored over 50 in an ODI since 2008, and this morning’s effort was not the corner-turn I’d hoped for as I stumbled out of bed to the news that England were batting first.

There will be calls for his head. But the opportunities left on this tour are few as it is, and cutting them further would be counter-productive. Providing he’s picked for the Tests, it’s possible that Pietersen only has three innings left this tour: a warm-up match and a couple of Test innings (batting twice is no guarantee in Tests against Bangladesh). Pietersen needs those innings, and if his recent form has hardly earned them, his first four years in an England shirt did.

A man who deserves a pat on the back, rather than an arm round the shoulder, is Craig Kieswetter. 107 in only his third ODI confirms many a suspicion about him. The contrasting travails of these two adopted Englishmen has added interest to a highly-watchable series, which on paper may have seemed anything but.

So too has the opposition. Allied to England’s unanswered questions was a final reason to disobey my body and heed my early alarm call: I like watching Bangladesh. Like many an Englishman, I’ve had a soft spot for them since 18th June 2005, and can’t help admiring the way that they’ve dealt with numerous setbacks and frequent defeat since then. They rattle through the overs at the rate everyone is supposed to, boast one of the world’s leading players, clearly enjoy what they’re doing and are getting pretty good at it. The home crowd is endearingly enthusiastic, to the point where they sometimes appear to be watching a different game. Local boy Tamim Iqbal raised the roof every time he so much as sneezed this morning.

I haven’t seen Afghanistan play cricket, so am in no position to comment on them, but it seems that they possess unbridled enthusiasm and no little skill. Despite gaping weaknesses, the same can be said of Bangladesh, and they’re getting better. The test for Afghanistan will be to see if, after a few inevitable thumpings at the top table of international cricket, they can maintain the same positive approach shown this series by Bangladesh.

I always knew he’d make it into the game eventually. He’s got the top job as ICC president, starting in 2012. For a man who can barely wipe the child-like grin off his face whenever he’s watching bat on ball, this is a victory sweeter than any he achieved in his political career.

However, this is the man who called Muttiah Muralitharan a chucker. He’s never been involved in sport in his life, to my knowledge, so apart from his obvious and healthy love of the game, and a career in politics, it’s a curious decision by the ICC. He will be surrounded by sport and cricket administrators, and though his experience in handling diplomatic and governmental matters will do him no harm, will he have the balls to stand up to India and the Asian bloc or take a hard line on excruciatingly sensitive matters like Zimbabwe?

In other words, will his being a fan hinder his presidency? It’s going to be fascinating to watch how he copes.

Lalit Modi: two words or four syllables which can invoke either nauseousness or sycophancy. He has abrasively dictated his terms on the game, and upon the ICC, so it’s perfectly understandable that he has courted bitter-sweet reactions of controversy and adoration. I quite admire him nowadays. He’s seized an opportunity like no one at the ECB could do, and though I’m uncomfortable with the power he has now obtained, some other canny sod would’ve done the same soon enough.

However, I made the mistake of subscribing to his Twitter feed the other day, and it’s been a fascinating – if at times uncomfortable – insight into his character. There are replies, snippets of gossip and general newsy things, but he seems to be using Twitter as a vehicle for teaching the world How To Be A Sports Administrator. Fascinating for some, perhaps. For the rest of us, it’s like listening to an unelected prime minister outline his visions for the game – and there’s nothing we can do to stop him.

Wait a minute. Have you ever seen Lalit Modi and Gordon Br…no. Forget it. Anyway, here’s what Lalit K Modi has been saying on Twitter an hour ago.

Its not a person who can revive a sport. It is fans like you who can. If people watch the game – money will come automatically. Watch hockey

If you all start tuning into any sports it will thrive. So fans play the most important role in survival of any sports.That’s the first step

Sports globally is supported by viewership and attendance. Once we get that sponsors will come. Off course good administration is needed.

Players in any sport need to be supported first as its there hard work and skill and endurance that makes a good team.

If players interest is not looked after – that sport can never thrive. Players need to believe there is a future for them to excel.

He’s been watching the hockey today, when India beat Mas 3-1 to lift the Azlan Shah Cup. And there was me wondering which sport he was next training his eye on…

Have they finally peaked? And why do I ask? What is it about human nature that appeals for failure, modesty, mediocrity? Or is it my fear that if the bubble bursts, it’ll never re-inflate? Who knows. I’m beginning to think, though, that that doesn’t matter any longer. They’ve achieved enough already. And let’s be honest: this is not merely a sporting accomplishment but one that impacts on a fractured, oppressed society. At least, that’s one of the things I’m trying to write about for Sports Illustrated magazine – in newstands in a month, folks!

Anyway. I don’t want them to fail, but watching this side pole-vault their way past opposition is a little like watching someone try to sprint on an icy pavement: you can’t help wondering when they’re going to fall flat on their backsides. But, flippin’ heck, it’s fun.

I’ve been pushing for us to do this for about a year, so it’s good to see it live.

Whether or not he’s ready for England is an issue that’s been widely debated, but surely a more answerable question is are England ready for him? My belief that they are is based on Matt Prior’s curious limited-overs batting form. England possess few finer looking batsmen that Matt Prior in full flight. He has, as commentators are fond of saying, been able to come to the party with either innings of substance or important cameos on several occasions in Tests. But rarely has the party been a pajama-clad one – the high expectations and frequent disappointments of his shorter-form batting efforts have had more akin with New Year’s Eve.

In 26 ODI innings since the start of 2008, he has passed 50 only once. It seems an odd regression for a man whose quick scoring capabilities earned him a first ODI cap in 2004. Having said that, over the last year he’s made giant strides in getting up to scratch as a Test-standard wicketkeeper, thus providing a solution to one of England’s most perennial problems. That place should be safely his for the time being. Kieswetter has work to do with the gloves before Test recognition comes his way.

With all eyes on stand-in captain Alastair Cook opening the batting, England could do worse than give him a partner suited to taking the lead from the off. It’s a role no one has played better for England than Kieswetter’s fellow Somerset opener, Marcus Trescothick. Time to see just how much he’s learnt from the best.

So India win by an innings, thus levelling the series. It’s all perfectly set up for a five-Test thriller. Can South Africa bounce back in the third? Will India’s victory carry them through? Can anyone get Hashim Amla out? What pitch will they prepare for the third and who will they pick? Will South Africa have the resolve to fight back? So many questions, none of which will be answered because this is, in nobody’s wisdom, a pathetically short two-Test series.

Today highlighted the modern sporting world. On the one hand, tradition waved its flag triumphantly: Test cricket again demonstrated its long-lasting appeal – even in India, the new home of Twenty20 and one of the fastest growing economies in the world, a rapidly evolving nation dealing with extraordinary change at social and political level. On the other, India (or the ICC – it’s difficult to be certain about how much control the governing body actually has these days) only had two Tests against supposedly one of the best teams in the sport. This should have been the ideal opportunity to showcase the prime format of the sport with a long, arduous, impossibly engrossing series which takes over the lives of the fans and keeps both the authorities and television execs happy.

Instead, we’re all left kicking our heels and feeling strangely empty, like reading a really good book and having it snatched away from you or the pages torn out. Worse, the very fact it was only two Tests completely put me off the series at the start. I couldn’t be bothered in wasting my energies getting excited when I knew the tablecloth would be whipped away just when I was tucking into the main course.

Tests cannot be brief dalliances. They demand a long, emotionally-scarring, gut-wrenching relationship to be formed, leaving you exhausted but elated; confused, sometimes mournful, but ultimately glad for the experience. These one (or two) night stands are good for nobody, save the boards and TV companies who demand the sugar rush of Twenty20 be fed intravenously and anonymously and constantly.

“I think the best thing Steve has got going for him is they go to Brisbane for the first Test and that could be the quickest pitch in the Ashes,” said Key. “You saw this summer whenever he gets on a pitch with a bit of life on it there is not a batsman in the world who would want to face Steve Harmison.

“If he goes to Brisbane and sees what it is like, as opposed to the sub-continent or here in England sometimes, I think he will be licking his lips and be desperate to go on. He loves bowling on wickets where you can get bounce and hopefully that will kick-start him into the series.”

The idiots among us, me included, sensed this could be his moment: a pacey Brisbane surface, the brand new ball in his hands. And then he wanged down that wide, like a gold-medalist wally. Here it is, in case you’ve forgotten:

The rest of his career has been quite tortuous viewing. Last July, he inferred he’d retire after the Ashes. Then, about October time, he said he wasn’t quite ready to put on his moccasins. Now, though, he’s produced a gob-smacker: he wants to play in the Ashes later this year. YOU WHAT?

On ya, Stevey! Please, if there is a cricket-selecting god out there, make this happen. Cricket needs another Brisbane moment, and only big Stevey H – the H bomb, if you will – can come close to replicating it. Let this charade of a career continue for one more Ashes, and let us continue to mock one of English cricket’s most naturally attributed fast bowlers in a generation for a few more months.

PS: possible reason for his sudden desire to tour Australia? He’s just had a vasectomy. I’m not saying all cricketers are, well…you know. Could be why. I mean, he’s not the best tourist, is he? Anyway. You know what I mean.

That, ladies and gents, is the man we are dealing with. There is a distasteful arrogance to the way in which he announces some of his latest ventures and his name does not attract great affection or joy, rather a looming fear. But that’s only because the rest of the world is envious, shaking their heads disbelievingly at the ease with which he has transformed the game, occasionally showing an insouciance of self belief in his vision not seen since Steve Jobs first took to the stage wearing loose-fitting jeans and grubby trainers. Modi knows he’s nailed it. The IPL is his iPhone, a game-changing device applauded by the world.

The rest of the sport and her clubs are fawning for his attention, and not just cricket teams. Modi might havs snared football into the bargain now, too:

“There is a football club, a very famous football club in the UK, very interested in bidding,” Modi said. “[They are] probably one of the most famous football clubs – that’s all I can say. Probably top three. They are interested in taking a stake.”

Responding to speculation in the Indian media, Modi later said on his Twitter page that the club in mention was not Chelsea. A report in the Sun named Manchester City as the team looking at buying a franchise although the club told Cricinfo they were not involved.

The IPL will include two more teams from the 2011 season and will auction the franchise rights at a base price of $225 million ahead of the third season, which starts in India on March 12, and will invite potential investors this week. That figure – double of what the most expensive franchise was sold for in 2008 and more than four times the base price in that first auction – is, in an uncertain market, a sign of the league’s confidence in itself and the Twenty20 format.

According to Modi, the MCC would be a value addition to the IPL and open up the possibility of taking the bandwagon overseas to Lord’s. “I have talked [to MCC] last night and they are quite interested,” he said.

When will he have his iPad moment?

Having been under the belief that over the course of his incomparable career the Don could do little wrong; it now seems clear he could do no wrong. In an essay from his collection, Inside Out, Haigh recalls this tale regarding Bradman’s duck in the Melbourne Test of the Bodyline series, in the words of Irving Rosenwater:

There is a pleasing story – a true one incidentally – how this duck by Bradman almost certainly saved the lives of three young children in Tasmania. Listening to the progress of the Test on the radio in a hotel in Launceston, a Mr P. Hancock stood up and walked out in disgust at Bradman’s failure. His brief walk took him past a nearby river, on whose bank three children – the youngest only two and a half – were playing and accidentally fell in. Mr Hancock promptly dived in fully clothed to rescue them – and one would like to think that all three (and the gallant gentleman too) are still thriving healthily and fully cognisant of the miraculous powers of a Test match duck.

So he was even good when he was bad.

We’re probably some way off introducing a ‘lives saved’ column alongside a Test batsman’s average, but were it ever to happen, it appears Bradman would end up topping that too.

A colleague wondered whether he’ll become the all-time great batsman, which is probably pushing it. But already he’s transformed opening batting like nobody thought was possible (and for that, should we thank ODIs? We’ll leave that for another day), and long may it last.

The only downer to Sehwag’s derring do are the comments from his gushing fans, which convey someone on the verge of their first orgasm in months:

It is always such an immense pleasure to see Sehwag and Sachin bat together – they use their bats like ageold gladiators sporting a menacing Excalibur. Sachin, the master, is sheer poetry ala Dravid these days, the effortless ease with which the ball seems to kiss and run away from the bat is like Wordsworth. Sehwag, the pupil, is a rock star who fuses raagas. Mindblowing combination really – speechless, words are fewer than runs to describe the game.

Steady on.

Pakistan are a very strong Twenty20 side and we’re going to have to be right on our game to beat them. It might be a good time to play them, but you never quite know what you’re going to get on the day so I think we’ve just got to concentrate on our own game and see what we get on the day

So then. That’s:

1) Pakistan are a very good side
2) But we think they’re there for the taking, maybe
3) Who knows? We might win. But they might win, too.

Press conferences don’t get much more gripping.

It’s 145 days since England and Australia contested the last match of the Ashes-summer ODI series – the one now consigned to the ‘Voldemort Drawer’ containing such never-to-be-mentioned events as the ‘forgotten’ Ashes of ‘06-‘07. Since then, over the course of one tournament and two and a half series (18 ODIs in all), Australia have propelled their followers into a winning-induced state of boredom. Only twice in that time have they thrown defeat into the mix – and that in a series in India which they won 4-2.

Sir Pelham Warner once remarked that “all Australians are natural cricketers – I could pick a good eleven on Bondi Beach”, and maybe that’s what the selectors have done in picking 21 players over the course of those 18 matches. The results remained constant even if the faces didn’t.

Indeed, Australia haven’t lost a match all summer, though they did at least encounter something approaching competition in three of their six Test matches. Yes, there was life in those series’ against the West Indies and Pakistan – more so than the 2-0 and 3-0 scorelines suggest. However, in the ODIs, a win record of 7-0 tells the full story. As Daniel Brigham says, the team’s aura has shifted from the baggy green to the green-all-over.

Inevitably, the 50-over format is once again being hauled before a jury. Only 8,378 turned out four days ago to see the West Indies at the Adelaide Oval, but as with September’s one-sided series in England, it’s the players - or at least one set of them -who are letting the format down. Irrespective of format, close matches thrill everyone, while easy wins satisfy few other than the winning side – and over here, even they’re getting restless.

If these series were ‘live’ as they entered the latter stages, so too would the stands be. Yes, even in Australia, a buzz in the crowd requires some sort of buzz on the pitch, or else the locals start invading it and attacking the participants.

How to save these lost souls craving some excitement with their wins? Maybe they could rest Ricky Ponting and appoint someone who’s shown startlingly few signs of becoming his successor. That’s how England are approaching their otherwise uninspiring tour of Bangladesh. In handing Alastair Cook the captaincy, England have managed to prize flagging interest levels above zero and add an element of intrigue to a series which should be as one-sided as the one Australia are currently dominating. In theory.

So, whilst I don’t think I’d hear any complaints about a similar scenario occurring this time next year, it seems that there is something that Australians prize as highly as winning: a contest. Combine the two, and they’re laughing. As I write, with Australia 159-5, it looks like we might just see that for the first time in ODIs this summer.

They’re owning the current tournament. Today, in a match written in the minds of cynical sub-editors the world over, they took on the USA and thrashed their pants off.

The current group of players are decent and fearless, born into a generation of war and oppression. They’re using cricket as their chance to prove Afghanistan is more than simply a flattened nation of plight and famine and dictatorship and blood. What, though, will happen when the money from the ICC arrives into the hands of a hotch-potch, inexperienced and – let’s be honest – possibly unsafe hands of their administration? Corruption is endemic in the country. It would be a miracle if the sleepy sport of cricket avoided that particular bombshell.

Let’s enjoy them winning while we can because, with the almost non-existant facilities they have, it’s becoming more and more remarkable that they continue to achieve so much from so little.

Without a hint of irony, it continues, “There will be no ground admission charge for the match…..”

No mention of the extra 3,397 miles members will have to travel beyond Lord’s, although they thoughtfully offer a MCC Supporters’ Tour for a piffling £1,885 per person (£600 single supplement). 

Er…thanks a lot.

“lose ends” an invited panel have to find the end of the sellotape roll ·

A look at Judeo-Roman history through one woman’s obsession with a charioteer: Woman’s Hur

The Shipping Forecat – a daily nautical report from a feline stowaway

But this is particularly good. Because it’s about cricket.

Geoffrey Boycott and Blowers travel supersonic in the world\’s fastest planes – Test Mach Special !

Suggestions welcome…

Captaincy could have changed him; he’s no spring chicken these days, after all, and Pakistan have a lot of impressionable young players to whom Afridi must be something of a demi-god. And then he bites a cricket ball with all the cameras zoned in on him, discarding years of experience, dispensing with maturity and utterly wringing his hands of professional responsibility, personal pride and common human sense. Were it not so ludicrously stupid, it would be a beautiful thing to watch in years to come.

Of all the players to do it, it had to be Afridi. Of all the countries to be afflicted by an act of such lunacy, it just had to be Pakistan. They are taking hold of this decade and ensuring they begin it right where they left off in the noughties. The only redeeming feature from the whole escapade was (apart from the ensuing nauseous hilarity that it even took place) Mark Nicholas’s sober, yet startled, opinion. “Woops. Wwwwwwwwoops!”

Idiocy epitomised. Thank you, Afridi, and a very good night.

Ottis Gibson has left his position as England’s bowling coach to become the head coach of West Indies, according to the UK’s Daily Telegraph.

West Indies slay their coaches like a scythe lopping dandelion heads. Another poor mug into the fold, then, for the most poisoned of chalices. Good luck, Ottis.

However, a piece by Melbourne-based Greg Baum did catch my eye – and not just for its Murray dig-free content. It marks the passing of an Australian Test great, about whom, I confess, I knew nothing.

Betty Wilson was know as “the female Bradman”, and with good reason – the great man himself was a fan. Averaging 57.46 with the bat, and 11.80 with the ball, her status as a genuine all-rounder is something of an understatement. Her CV includes a 77 minute century, a number of ‘firsts’ in women’s cricket – first to make a century and take 10 wickets in a match, first hat-trick – and the retrospective award of a baggy green cap. A career worth marking.

Maybe the next time an Aussie tells me I bowl like a girl during a game of beach cricket, I’ll take it as a compliment. Then again, maybe not.

Well, yes, probably. However, a similar move after England’s Under-19 triumph in 1998 would not have proved wise. Here’s the team that defeated New Zealand in the final of that tournament:

SD Peters

RWT Key

PJ Franks

OA Shah

GP Swann (whatever happened to him?)

CP Schofield

GR Haywood

GR Napier

JC Powell

NJ Wilton

RJ Logan

Only three of that victorious mob could be said to have gone on to enjoy senior international careers of note, and both Key and Shah will feel they only offered glimpses of their best. By my reckoning, four of those players are no longer playing county cricket. Paul Franks is, but, as Andy Bull noted a few months back, his is arguably the most unfulfilled talent on the list.

Colt success does not always translate to the pinnacle of the game, and few things are guaranteed in cricket. However, young Mitchell Marsh and his team can console themselves with the fact that Australian dominance usually is.

Yet Pietersen’s devotion to excellence is the very same attribute that alienates him from a fickle British public. From the days of Henry Cooper through to Eddie the Eagle and Frank Bruno, plucky and personable underdogs have always trumped sportsmen with genuine claims to greatness.

“It is peculiar how Pietersen is portrayed,” says a media colleague who has worked with him at close quarters. “He claims not to read the papers but that is definitely not the case. He takes criticism very personally and he is certainly not happy about it. I suspect the South African link will never allow him to be the Freddie-esque man of the people he so craves to be.”

According to Paul Burnham, founder of the Flintoff-worshipping Barmy Army, Pietersen’s persona is a direct challenge, for better or worse, to everything that British sports fans hold dear. “At the moment we are what we are as a culture. Personally I love it and wouldn’t want to change it, even though it isn’t what you want if you want to win all the time,” he says. “Freddie is old school and England’s fans can relate to that, whereas Pietersen is probably the most misunderstood cricketer there is. He’s got a really friendly personality but for some reason people don’t like his body language. He exudes confidence but it comes across as arrogance.”

“I think Fred comes across exactly the same as me,” says Gough. “He’s a bit of a joker who likes a drink and he plays his cricket in the right spirit. KP is slightly different. He’d take a wine bar over a pub any day, and that’s not a knock at him. He just enjoys that buzz and that edge about being a top-class sportsman. But because he wasn’t brought up in this country he still doesn’t quite understand how things work and how people look upon celebrities. It can be a difficult place if you make it a difficult place.”

The only question which remains is whether they’ll run pre-roll ads or rely on Google Adsense.

The ICC could allow Australian and English umpires to stand in the Ashes series later this year as its confidence with the umpire decision review system continues to grow. Despite the controversial video-official judgments in the Johannesburg Test over the past few days, David Morgan, the ICC president, said the UDRS was proving successful enough for the ICC to consider scrapping the neutral-umpire system.

“The decision review system is making good progress,” Morgan told Cricinfo. “There have been problems at the Wanderers that I can’t go into because that’s being investigated by the International Cricket Council. But I think the progress with the DRS has been extremely good indeed, to the extent that I think we should be thinking about the best umpires being appointed to Test match cricket irrespective of whether they come from the participating teams or not.”

I have missed English umpires in English series. Fans (particularly in England, I felt) grew fond of their home umpires. Dickie Bird, Peter Willey, David Constant and, of course, David Shepherd all lent the game an air of fun, occasionally humour, but most of all authority. Players respected them. Perhaps it’s easier for an umpire of the same country to give one of “his” players a ticking off. Perhaps, too, players listen to those umpires more readily than they might an official from another, distant country.

I hope it happens.

More of the same from Australia please, Rich, before someone snaps you up. Three cheers. Hip hip.

This time last year, England were in some disarray. Having waded through the debris of the Pietersen-Moores debacle, confirmation of their struggles was about to manifest itself in the form of a Test series defeat in the West Indies. The one plus of this trying period was the form of Andrew Strauss, which improved with his newly-acquired captaincy.

With the hundreds flowing – including three consecutive tons in the West Indies – he proved a strong and popular leader. His influence on the Ashes last summer was as great as Flintoff’s in 2005, and achieved without anywhere near the same level of help from his teammates. As England’s only reliable batsman at this time, he returned to the ODI set-up, in a move that will see him lead England at the next World Cup. In South Africa, England lost only two matches under his charge, but at last signs of weariness began to show – mainly in his batting.

He’s had a hell of a year, and but for him, England may have had the year from hell. With no commitments until the start of the county season, his batteries will be suitably recharged for another packed summer, not to mention the next Ashes, only ten months away.

The life of any England captain is finite. Strauss’s is likely to end through tear-stained eyes at some press conference in the future, and England need to prolong that date for as long as possible. Cook will have a chance to lead the side against Bangladesh, which makes sense, because as Atherton himself hints, it would be nice to have an indication that England have a replacement ready for when Strauss finally does call it a day.

1-1. A lucky draw, should have been 3-1? Or, a plucky effort against a superior side? Only passed 300 in two out of seven innings? Or, only lost all 20 wickets in one out of four matches? There are several ways you can view this series.

What can’t be argued, is that that’s won two*, drawn one, lost one for the two Andys (not that Strauss could ever be an Andy) in Test series now. Improbably – out of series including Australia and South Africa – the defeat came last year against the West Indies.

England certainly aren’t winning for fun yet – only three Test wins in their last nine – but they’re proving difficult to beat, and building up a sizeable collection of final ball match saving efforts.

How was the series for you? And, with Bangladesh, Pakistan and Australia still to come this year, how would you assess England’s progress?

* One of those victories came at the start of the English summer in a two-match series against a group of cold and confused tourists masquerading as the West Indies cricket team.

An attack which begun the first Test featuring an arguably past-it veteran of 100 caps, a relative unknown, a young quick in indifferent form, a non-spinning spinner and no Dale Steyn, ended it with a young quick in inspired form, two handy debutants, a genuine allrounder-in-the-making and Dale Steyn. Not bad going for one month’s work.

The bowling of Steyn and Morkel in the Cape Town and Jo’burg Tests was thrilling to witness, and has an air of longevity about it. Morkel had played 20 Tests before this match, and with some success, but since the new year, his performance has matched his promise.

Skiddy pace and aggression at one end, bouncy pace and aggression at the other – South Africa now boast opening bowlers to match the quality of their strong batting line-up.

Paul Collingwood was the sole reason to be cheerful for England fans, as the home side wrapped up proceedings before lunch. The Durham man was England’s life raft, but no one else was able to cling on with him. The South African supporters have a lot of respect for Collingwood – indeed, the ones I was sitting next to were unable to relax until he was out, and he fell for the ninth wicket. They admire his fighting mentality, and, with Smith, Kallis and Boucher in their team, can be considered experts on the subject. On a highlights programme for the day one action, a home commentator even described Collingwood as “the dangerman of the England side” – testament to both his form this series, and an outsider’s view of his importance to the team.

Pietersen’s forty minutes at the crease were in keeping with his form since Centurion, and his dismissal brought Ian Bell into the action. It says much for his form this series that he brought with him genuine hope, but the examination of character and reflexes that he received from Morkel proved too rigorous – as it would have done for most batsmen.

Ironically, at the end of a long tour, it is England’s two South Africans whose minds seemed to be focussed on home. Both Pietersen and Trott have demonstrated a strange metal detachment from proceedings at the Wanderers.

It’s hard to believe that this was only the third time South Africa have taken 20 wickets in a match in their last seven Tests, and only their second win in that time. But the past year has been something of a transition period for their attack. By successfully blooding De Wet, McLaren and Parnell in this series, they have found cover for the experience and wickets lost in the departure of Makhaya Ntini. The holy grail as far as their bowling attack goes, would be to turn JP Duminy into a genuine allrounder, thus being able to dispense with Paul Harris and finding an off-spinner to utilise the pitch marks left by Parnell’s narrow bowling run-up.

That may or may not happen, but to an extent, it doesn’t matter – the recent form of Morne Morkel, who was quiet last year against Australia, suggests that South Africa have found a worthy partner for Dale Steyn. Aptly, the twin pace threat shared the man of the match award, but at the end of a series, the feeling with those two, especially the less-established Morkel, is that this is just the beginning.

This morning, England did at least manage the sort of first hour they so craved yesterday – claiming three wickets, the first two involving excellent catches from Prior and Anderson. The third came courtesy of yet another first ball wicket for Swann. It should have come as no surprise – not only was it the 15th time he’s taken a wicket in the first over of a spell in Tests, it was also that of JP Duminy, who, like the West Indian Devon Smith before him, must have nightmares revolving around the off-spinner’s grinning face.

Later in the South African innings, Mark Boucher became Swann’s 16th wicket-in-the-first-over-of-a-spell, but not before his 95 had reaffirmed his team’s ascendancy. When he joined AB de Villiers at the crease, England were one or two more breakthroughs away from honing in on a sub-150 deficit, but instead, the sell-out crowd were treated to observing Mark Boucher in his natural environment. If he were a lager, and he looks like he enjoys the odd can, the South African keeper’s tagline would read: ‘Mark Boucher, frustrating teams since 1997′.

And frustration was the theme of the first 13.2 overs of England’s second innings. However, contrasting with the first innings, none of the three final session dismissals could be labelled ’soft’. If Strauss’s looked the most innocuous, it could have been due in part to a brutal delivery bowled by Morkel in the previous over, which the England captain did well to fend off at neck height, but may have left a taste in his throat.

The England cause appears lost, and will test their much-called-upon survival instinct to breaking point. But, Pietersen is still there, and a nagging thought remains that there’s no room for a subdued series of such importance in the narrative of his career. He’s written his own final-innings-of-a-series scripts before, but a similar effort here would surely be his masterpiece.

If that sounds like a small mercy, then that’s all England have at this stage in the match. That, and the wildly fluctuating Johannesburg weather. The weather could yet play a part, but the match situation – South Africa 35 runs ahead, with eight wickets in hand – has developed quickly for an end of day two score. Despite Smith eventually making 105, to complain about the second chance he received when on 15 – an edge behind which was denied by the third umpire despite overwhelming audible evidence – would be to ignore the hopelessness of England’s situation regardless.

Miscarriages of sporting justice occur, and are galling, but complaining about them rarely does the offended party any favours. England have lodged an official complaint, but in the context of this match, the damage has been done. That damage was exaggerated by a few uncharacteristic fielding errors, and as the morning session wore on, the slip cordon began to amble down the wicket in between overs, abandoning the near-sprint they began the day exhibiting. Even Matt Prior’s hyperactive legs seemed drained of energy.

It says much about this match from an Englishman’s point of view, that the most impressive factor of the day’s play was the ground’s drainage system. Not long after the heavens opened, in the afternoon session, about 75 per cent of the the outfield was submerged in water. To an untrained eye, the likelihood of play for the next week seemed remote, but after a lengthy delay, another four wicketless overs were possible, with the outfield holding up well.

Weather-watch will be central to the next three days play. I grabbed a word with Matt Prior during the break. Some South Africans I’ve encountered still like to claim Prior as their own, but I can dispel that once and for all. On the subject of the weather, expecting him to pedal some line about wanting to win the series outright, I was surprised to hear that he’s holding out for three days of solid rain. You can’t get more English than that.

Today’s innings was especially disappointing, because it means that England still haven’t posted a total in the 300s or above, since the second Test – or in the whole of 2010, to put an unnecessarily stark spin on it.

Frustratingly, the return to form this series of the men under pressure – Cook, Collingwood and Bell – has coincided with a slump for the Ashes heroes – Strauss and Trott. They have one innings left to put that right.

To say it wasn’t as bad a start as the same fixture in 1999, is like telling someone that their house has burned down but their toaster survived unscathed. 7-2 was still bad, and it heralded the early arrival of Kevin Pietersen. I feel like a father watching his son when I see Pietersen bat at the moment. Rarely have I wanted someone to score runs more, and after a jittery start, he looked to be hitting something resembling his straps when he picked out debutant Parnell at mid-wicket.

Two overs later, and the heroes of Cape Town, Collingwood and Bell, found themselves at the crease. This being the tenth over, their brief was pretty similar – to bat out most of the day. Bell seems to have replaced Pietersen as Collingwood’s comfort blanket, and the pair duly put on 76, before Collingwood – batting fluently and the possessor of two sixes – became McLaren’s first Test victim.

Several disappointments later, and Swann and Anderson found themselves striving to add an air of semi-respectability to the scoreline. However, the 23 runs that they mustered in partnership failed to match the nuisance value of recent last wicket stands. 180 all out.

The Wanderers is rightly proud of playing host to the ‘greatest one-day match of all time’, and reminders of that day lurk around most corners. Unfortunately, too many England players seemed to be trying to recreate the spirit of that match with the shots they got out to today.

Out came England as a fielding unit, shortly followed by the rain. Some spectators left, those that stayed did so in the knowledge that if a reappearance was to materialise, it would signal a key passage of play in the context of the series.

On their return, Anderson and Sidebottom huffed, puffed and swung the ball, but bar a few near misses, failed to create sufficient problems for Smith and Prince. I sometimes feel that Anderson’s body language after a near miss detracts from the uncertainty he has just caused – instead of playing on it, he almost kills it. On beating the bat a few times today, he reacted like a man whose football accumulator had just been ruined by a last minute goal, when surely an ‘I’ve got your number, mate’ stare would have been more effective.

England will have to be more effective tomorrow, or else their series lead will be in grave danger.

They say the night is darkest just before the dawn, and that match did mark the Test debut of Michael Vaughan, but it was a harrowing morning for England and their fans. Vaughan, who faced his first ball of international cricket with his side at 2-4, recalled that day’s events before this series started.

I’m certainly not expecting a repeat today, but even so, if England bat first, I won’t find myself able to relax until Strauss and Cook have safely guided the total into double figures.

8.4 Mohammad Asif to Ponting, 1 run, dropped, short ball, hooked high out to the deep, straight down the throat of Aamer at long leg who puts down a sitter

Bugger.

I was on the grass bank, locked in arms with a group of bullish South African friends, but perched uncomfortably on the end and engaged in conversation with Tim Abraham of Sky Sports – the only person around me, along with Onions, who managed to keep his head. The atmosphere was the best I’ve experienced at live sport.

Where were you? And how did you cope with the tension?

Collingwood could have done with a stiff drink after Steyn’s stint with the second new ball on the afternoon of the fifth day. Somehow, of course, he survived it, but as Andy Bull concluded, while the compelling 36-ball spell may not have improved Steyn’s stats, it did enhance his reputation as the world’s leading fast bowler.

As a pair, Steyn and Morkel cover all bases and complement each other well. The impressive variety they offer the South Africa team, looks set to be further enhanced by the left-arm accuracy of Wayne Parnell, who seems certain to make his Test debut tomorrow.

If this happens, witnessing it will be a bonus of the trip. No one over here doubts Parnell’s ability, or his destiny as a future mainstay of the Test side, but there is a collective wariness about rushing him into the team. This seemed to be shared by the South African selectors, until the fitness and form of others dictated his elevation.

Some fans favour protecting Parnell like a precious diamond – referring to him only in hushed tones, and preferring to see Makhaya Ntini pick up his 102nd cap tomorrow, rather than Parnell his first, at this early stage in his development. Others argue there’s no point in prolonging the inevitable anymore.

I see the logic of protecting Parnell from the harsh Test match arena, and would ordinarily argue this viewpoint strongly. But on rare occasions, rare players can defy logic. From what I have seen and heard, Parnell may just be one such player.

Either way, he’s likely to be the sort of bowler whose debut you want to be able to say you witnessed. Morkel and Steyn have deserved better than they’ve got so far, and maybe this 20-year old can help them achieve the 20 wickets in a match that their efforts have so narrowly fallen short of so far.

And so to Jo’burg, the birthplace of Andrew Strauss and home, mercifully, to some very fine wi-fi connections.

Wearing an item of England replica kit – and I’ve realised this week that my suitcase for this trip resembles a bargain bin from the Lord’s shop – around Cape Town over the past few days, has been interesting. Everyone wants to talk about the series – specifically the first, and third Tests.

In doing so, they adopt the sort of look you might give someone who has just unwittingly chatted up your girlfriend, an I’m not going to ask for it, but I expect an apology kind of stare.

I can’t concur with the trail of thought which suggests we should be embarrassed about twice batting out for a draw. For a team to adjust their sights mid-game, abandon active pursuit of a win and concentrate instead on saving a match, is not rare. To achieve it by so fine a margin is, and it just so happens that England have managed it twice in three weeks.

Whilst my stance on the series to the South Africans I’ve encountered may be apology-free, it is certainly sympathy-rich.

After all, we know how they feel. This time last year, England were going through their own get-painfully-close-to-winning-but-fall-just-short routine, in the Caribbean. The West Indies clung on ‘til the death twice in that four match series, though on one of those occasions they ended with two wickets in hand. Such an occurrence is one of the great frustrations of Test cricket, and worse, in a way, than being bamboozled in just over two days as England were at Headingley in last summer’s Ashes.

There’s no getting away from the fact that two mythical balls are all that separates South Africa from a 2-1 lead. But, England made sure of their notch on the series scorecard, with a thumping win – one which left nothing to chance, and eradicated any possibility of time being a factor in the result. Time has been England’s ally on two out of three occasions now, but that is more a source of bad luck for the South Africans, rather than good fortune for Strauss’s men, who, after all, achieved exactly what they set out to do on each of those final days, even if it was left to Onions to finish the job on both occasions.

So I’m unapologetic about events at Newlands. The quality of cricket in this series is high, and most importantly, intense. Survival instinct – be it individually against Steyn, or as a team in the context of the series – is key. England have demonstrated admirable reserves so far – the next five days will stretch them further still.

It’s not a bad phrase when used in the right context. In sport, it encapsulates the need for more of a regime, perhaps better fitness or leadership or the curbing of drinking and so on. It is, however, a bullshit phrase.

So, were you more professional in the 2000s? Ed Smith’s piece is well worth a read

In 13 years as a cricketer I watched ultra-professionalism become entrenched as received wisdom. Between 1996 and 2008 I played under 14 different coaches and captains: every one of them began the new season with the stated aim of “making the team more professional”. It was a goal that no one challenged and a process that never ended.

Professionalism was continually invoked as the primary means of improvement, whereas amateurishness was mocked as a laughable relic. But it was often unclear to me what the word professionalism meant. “What we really need,” people would say, is “a good, solid professional win.” How does that differ, I always wanted to ask, from a normal kind of win? In fact, professionalism wasn’t so much a real process as a form of self-definition. We had to become ever-more professional, because that was the lens through which we interpreted progress and success.

The question no one ever dared ask was: is professionalism actually helping us to play cricket any better? There were very good reasons for not asking the question. It was too risky–because professionalism supplied not only the dominant ideology, but also the ruling class. In 1996, my cricket team had one coach, working closely with the captain (who has much more power in cricket than in most sports). But by 2008, there were so many coaches, analysts and hangers-on that I couldn’t keep up with all their names. Geoff Boycott estimated that the current England team has an auxiliary staff of 13. Even in financially strapped county cricket, the ratio of support staff to players has grown dramatically. Players learn not to ask the question: “What is it that you do, exactly?”

Occasionally, it is true, an ex-pro warned me against over-professionalism. After making a promising start to my first-class career, I was interviewed by the maverick cricketer-turned-journalist Simon Hughes. At the time, I was playing as an amateur for Cambridge University against professional county teams. Hughes suggested that when I made the transition to becoming a full-time pro, I might lose some of the individuality and freshness that had helped me to succeed up to then. I shrugged off his question with a series of professional clichés about “doing whatever it takes to get better”.

All is not lost, though. Oh no. Pakistan, on the verge of levelling the Test series against Australia, somehow contrived to lose a match that was practically in the bag, zipped, locked and sealed. That they escaped the win – I think that’s an accurate reflection of how they play their cricket – left me initially sad, mostly dumbstruck, and then briefly elated. It would be unfair on her fans if cricket didn’t begin the decade in traditional fashion, and what could be more apt than Pakistan lurching like a trapped wasp from the sublime to the shambolic?

Bravo, Pakistan, and thank you for the glorious entertainment.

How do people feel about England’s continued use of this tactic? My view on it is so fickle it changes depending on the success of its most recent deployment. Today Jimmy ensured I’m in favour of it, for the moment. What doesn’t change are my feelings of admiration for the intrepid souls chosen to protect those above them in the batting order.

That last hour produced pulsating, intense cricket. Cook’s mistimed pull, after another good, but too brief, demonstration of the opener’s craft, and Strauss’s edge to Amla at short leg via his pads, brought the two South Africans to the crease. It was meant to be this way. These two seemed destined to play out a situation of such importance at some point, and the series had just entered a key phase. Survive the next 50 minutes, and parity – or something close – would be achieved. Surrender a wicket, and hand the hosts the upper hand.

The on-field tension and adrenaline filtered through to the grass banks. It was as tense as a situation involving a grown man (Barmy Army member) dressed as a whoopie cushion can be. Now the upbringing of Kevin Pietersen and Jonathan Trott mattered like never before. Now they needed to stay at the crease like never before.

For a while, the script seemed set in their favour. They ticked along, long enough for the Barmy Army to air one of their longer chants – an ode to the South Africans to have represented England. From the currents ones, on show in the middle, to the iconic ones (Basil D’Olivera), via the more obscure ones (Chris Smith), the song dissipated tensions a little and restored a jovial tone – one which was rudely shattered by Dale Steyn, who pinned Pietersen plumb lbw.

Having had a reprieve ten minutes into his innings, when Daryl Harper gave him out despite a clear edge onto his pads, Pietersen fell nine minutes before the end of the day, and took with him most, if not all, of his country’s hope as he trudged back to the dressing room. Some of his best innings have involved an early reprieve, be it a drop or fortunate decision, but today it wasn’t to be.

It’s not that the other six and a bit hours of the day had produced nothing of note – the morning saw the end of a superb innings of 183 by Graeme Smith, a man who owns the trademark for captain’s innings - but that the final hour upped the drama level notches. Those notches will reach breaking point if the final hour of the day is required tomorrow.

That’s a sizeable if. Trott is still there, and he has a massive part to play tomorrow. Before the tour he said he wanted to score two hundreds at Newlands. England could do with them being both in the same innings and coming tomorrow. Weighty support will be required from Bell, Collingwood and Prior. In short, there’s still hope. More’s the pity.

One of the nice things about the hotel I find myself sharing with the South African team, is the little thought for the day card that appears at each breakfast table in the mornings. Today’s was a Chinese Proverb, which read: “He who asks is a fool for five minutes, but he who does not ask remains a fool forever.”

Smith must have had breakfast this morning. He did indeed look a fool for five minutes, but that’s all. If he hadn’t asked, he’d have looked a fool for much longer, and England would most likely be in a much better position to the one they currently find themselves in.