Not England’s cup of tea
The below-par track record of cricket’s founders in limited-overs matches is baffling
By Ghalib Bajwa

After winning the Ashes series comfortably last month, England drew the T20 rubber 1-1, but lost the rain-hit ODI series 2-1 against the arch-rivals. Before the Ashes, England were the runners-up in the last edition of Champions Trophy at home, where India lifted the title.

Finishing runners-up in an One-day International (ODI) event is not a new thing for England. It’s an old habit of the founders of cricket. England have hosted the cricket World Cup on four occasions: 1975, 1979, 1983 and 1999. They reached the final three times — 1979, 1987 and 1992 — but could not cross the final hurdle. England also remained runners-up in the ICC Champions Trophy in 2004.

There is huge difference of ODI performances between English players and the rest of the world stars. England’s mediocre status in ODIs is reflected very much from this statistical analysis.

The 42-year history of ODIs shows that England are miles behind in all three departments of the game which is quite mysterious. Even cricketers of junior teams like Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and Ireland are seen above than the Britons in different tables.

The lack of interest of England & Wales Cricket Board (ECB) and their players in ODIs is baffling.

The ODI bowling chart is headed by Sri Lanka’s Muttiah Muralitharan, who grabbed 534 wickets, followed by Pakistan’s Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis with 502 and 416 wickets, respectively.

James Anderson, who is England’s leading ODI wicket-taker with 245 scalps, is 24th in this list. Anderson broke his countryman Darren Gough’s ODI wickets record in the recent Champions Trophy.

Only seven other English men have taken 100 or more wickets in ODIs. Anderson and Darren Gough are the only ones to go past the 200 mark.

It’s interesting to note that Anderson is now ahead of Heath Streak of Zimbabwe, who had more ODI wickets (239) than England’s previous most successful bowler Gough (234) until recent past. Bangladeshi spinner Abdur Razzak has also completed his double century of ODI wickets but the next best British bowler Stuart Broad is 40 wickets away from this feat.

Pakistan and India have major share in the 200-wicket club with six bowlers each followed by Australia, Sri Lanka, New Zealand and South Africa (four each).

The best ODI bowling figures are 8/19 by Chaminda Vaas for Sri Lanka. He is the only player to take eight wickets in an ODI. After him, there are seven players who have notched up seven-wicket hauls in ODIs. The feat of six-wicket haul has been achieved 60 times so far, but only two Englishmen have done this — Paul Collingwood (6/31) and Chris Woakes (6/45).

The batting table presents an even shoddier picture. One has to go deep into the batting table to find an Englishman. England’s leading ODI batsman Paul Collingwood (5,092 runs) is 62nd among the top ODI run scorers.

England, who featured in the first ever ODI against Australia on January 5, 1971, have had several flamboyant strikers like Kevin Pietersen, Marcus Trescothick, Andrew Flintoff and Allen Lamb in their lineup but none of them managed 5000 runs.

Minnows Zimbabwe have three batsmen with more than 5000 runs: Andy Flower (6786), Grant Flower (6,571) and Alistair Campbell (5185).

There are ten batsmen from six different countries (three each from India and Sri Lanka and one each from Pakistan, West Indies, Australia and South Africa) who have scored more than 10,000 runs in ODI cricket. India’s Sachin Tendulkar has the highest aggregate with over 18,426 runs.

English batsmen once more are nowhere near when it comes to the highest individual ODI knocks. Indian greats Virender Sehwag and Sachin Tendulkar are the top two with scores of 219 and 200*, respectively.

Overall, there are 27 batsmen with 170 or plus knocks, including two from Zimbabwe and one from Ireland. South African-born Robin Smith struck the biggest individual ODI knock (167*) for England.

So far England has contributed only five 150-plus knocks in ODIs — three by Andrew Strauss and one each by David Gower and Robin Smith.

The list of ODI century-makers is once again led by Tendulkar with 49 tons. There are 19 batsmen with 15 or more ODI hundreds but no Briton is in this list.

Mark Trescothick’s 12 ODI centuries are the highest by an Englishman.

The list of cricketers with most ODI matches also presents a deserted look as far as England players are concerned. Sachin Tendulkar, Sanath Jayasuriya and Mahela Jayawerdene have extended their careers to over 400 matches, but Englishmen are still toiling below 200 ODIs.

Paul Collingwood has appeared in the highest number of ODIs (197) for Britain. Overall, there are 66 cricketers with 200 or more ODIs. The statistics of ODI catches are also no different. Collingwood is the only England player with 100 or more catches in this format. He took 108 catches during his 10-year career. There are 27 fielders with 100 or more catches. Mahela Jayawerdene of Sri Lanka tops the list with 201 catches.

British wicketkeepers also lag far behind their rivals. Alec Stewart is the top British ODI wicketkeeper with 163 dismissals, including 148 catches and 15 stumpings.

Adam Gilchrist of Australia leads the list of wicketkeepers with 472 dismissals (417 catches, 55 stumpings). Sri Lanka’s Kumar Sangakkara has the honour of effecting most number of stumpings (85).

As far as ODI all-rounders are concerned, Jacques Kallis and Sanath Jayasuriya have the most wonderful figures. There are as many as 12 all-rounders with over 2000 ODI runs and 200 wickets, but there is no Briton.

There are only three British all-rounders who have scored more than 1000 runs and grabbed more than 100 wickets: Ian Botham, Andrew Flintoff and Paul Collingwood.

ghalibmbajwa@hotmail.com

Blessed with left-arm spinners
In the upcoming series against South Africa, Pakistan should not shy away from playing with two or three spinners
By Mushfiq Ahmed

It appears that suddenly we have become very rich in quality left-arm spinners. We already had Abdul Rehman, taking wickets in bulk whenever given chances. And now we also have the services of young Raza Hasan and experienced Zulfiqar Babar.

Abdul Rehman has performed admirably well in the few chances he has got in the last six years in all formats of the game. He is just a little unfortunate in that he began playing cricket when Pakistan had world class spinners in Mushtaq Ahmad and Saqlain Mushtaq. Then came Danish Kaneria who remained the first choice spinner for a number of years. And for the last five years it has been Saeed Ajmal, who is very tough to beat for a place in the team. The quartet are masters of their art.

Isn’t it amazing that Rehman’s place in the team is never guaranteed although he has taken 90 wickets in 19 Tests, an average of 4.73 wickets per match? Few of those spinners who are permanently part of their Test teams can match him. Greame Swann’s average is 4.35 wickets per match; Daniel Vettori’s is 3.21; and Rangana Herath’s is 4.25. Only Ravichandra Ashwin is ahead of him with 92 wickets in 16 matches.

Unlike Rehman, who entered international cricket at a ripe age of 26, Raza Hasan has got chances at a very young age. He has played seven T20 games for Pakistan so far and has taken six wickets with an economy rate of 5.92, which is impressive in the shortest format of the game. Since he is only 21 he has a lot of time to beat the records of the best in trade.

The case of Zulfiqar Baber is exactly the opposite of that of Raza Hasan. When he played his first match for Pakistan he was already more than 34 years old. But he made the most of the opportunities that he got, baffling the West Indies batsmen in two T20 games and claiming the man of the series award. He deserves to get many more chances. There is nothing wrong with playing with two or even three spinners, particularly when we are playing on Asian tracks which help spinners a lot.

In the upcoming series against South Africa Pakistan should not shy away from playing with two or three spinners. In fact they will have to do this if they are to win this series because the fast bowlers will not be able to trouble the experienced batting line of South Africa at the UAE pitches. Pakistan won the series against England 3-0 in the UAE because they played with two specialist spinners — Saeed Ajmal and Abdul Rehman. In the three Test matches, Saeed took 24 and Rehman 19, completely outshining pace spearhead Umar Gul. Aizaz Cheema managed just one wicket in two matches in that series. So playing with spinners is the way to go.

mushfiqahmad1000@gmail.com

From glory to dust
Pakistan’s decline in the field of hockey is embarrassing.
By Bilal Hussain

If one googles ‘Pakistan hockey team’, one will easily find out that Pakistan were once one of the top nations in the sport with a record four World Cup titles and eight medals in Olympics — three gold, as many silver and two bronze.

The list of Pakistan’s star players is a long one and includes numerous legends. Then there are the record-holders like Sohail Abbas who with 338 goals, holds the world record for most international goals.

But I’m talking about the past. At the moment, Pakistan aren’t even good enough to qualify for the World Cup. And that’s certainly a sad scenario.

“It is very shocking and shameful for us that we have failed even to qualify for the World Cup, the event which we pioneered,” former Olympian Shahnaz Sheikh told ‘The News on Sunday’ after the Green-shirts failed to qualify for the World Cup 2014 recently.

Shahnaz referred to the fact that the idea of Hockey World Cup came from former Pakistan hockey chief Air Marshal Nur Khan.

Pakistan failed to qualify for the next year’s World Cup after being unable to win the Asia Cup title last month. It was the last opportunity the Green-shirts had to secure a berth in World Cup.

Earlier, Pakistan also failed to finish among the top three in the World Hockey League in July, which could have earned them a direct berth in the World Cup. Pakistan ended at rock-bottom 12th position in the last World Cup in 2010.

Failure to qualify for the World Cup may have highlighted the team’s comparative standards in the international arena but the recent exclusion from the Commonwealth Games has also shown where the Pakistan Hockey Federation (PHF) stands.

The entry was not sent to the organisers by the federation before the due date only because it had to go through Pakistan Olympic Association (POA) led by Arif Hasan, with whom the federation’s top brass were not at good terms.

The PHF top brass is involved in the power struggle in the sports officialdom and has put its weight behind the government-backed POA, forgetting everything about its core responsibility — hockey.

“If these people continue to rule the federation then I fear we will have to struggle for qualification for Asia Cup in near future and we will then be fighting with teams like Sri Lanka or Maldives for a spot in the continental event as well,” Samiullah, a former Olympian, said.

After facing immense criticism, Asif Bajwa resigned as PHF secretary and Akhtar Rasool relinquished his position as head coach and manager. The federation has announced that it will be conducting elections next month. Surprisingly, Akhtar Rasool is the front-runner for the top PHF position.

“Only an ad-hoc committee to run the PHF setup will do now.

If these officials, who have failed the national sport in recent years, conduct elections then similar set of people will once more take the reins of hockey in their hands and the standards of hockey will further fall,” Samiullah said.

He said that former hockey Olympians would protest against the PHF in front of the National Assembly in the first week of October if the government failed to form an ad hoc committee.

The future of the Green-shirts seems bleak as there are few talented players among the juniors. Recently Pakistan failed to qualify for the final of Sultan of Johor Junior Hockey Cup in Malaysia, after being thrashed by arch-rivals India 4-0 and Malaysia 4-2.

“We have no pool of junior players and no proper domestic structure. So from where do we expect good players to come up?” Shahnaz Sheikh said.

bilalsports86@yahoo.com

‘It’s never me, stupid’
When did Mohammad Hafeez become one of the big cricketers? He has an average of something below 20 or roundabouts if you take away the weaker bowling attacks in the world, of which there are plenty these days
By Sohaib Alvi

I really don’t know what to make out of the statement by Mohammad Hafeez in the middle of this week. While he has been candid enough to say that he won’t be surprised if he is dropped from the Test team, there is a latent ire between the lines. Like an inherent annoyance as to why this is happening to him despite him trying his hardest and displaying all his talent.

It’s like saying every bit of nature and biology has conspired to stop him from scoring runs but that he doesn’t want to talk about it. Part of his statement was that “it happens to all big players”. That speaks of the man’s haughtiness and overestimation of his abilities.

When did he become one of the big cricketers? The fellow has an average of something below 20 or roundabouts if you take away the weaker bowling attacks in the world, of which there are plenty these days. And even then his overall batting average is in the early thirties after 34 Tests and 66 innings over the last 10 years.

In all that time he has scored a paltry eight half centuries — only one of them outside Asia — and has a century every 13 innings — all five of his hundreds have come against Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, West Indies or a post-Muralitharan Sri Lanka; only one hundred (versus Zimbabwe) has come outside South Asia, famous for its dead wickets, as is Zimbabwe for that matter.

He has been dismissed at five or below in 13 innings (five times against South Africa), has scored 10 and less in 19 (eight times against South Africa), and has been out at 22 and below in 42 of his Test innings! The man shouldn’t have been on the plane to South Africa earlier this year, let alone play all the three Tests. For that matter the man shouldn’t be playing any Test matches at all.

That is the real problem with him; the mental one. And I’m not talking of mental strength here. I’m talking of arrogance; the inability to see that he is deficient in talent. Against top class bowling Pakistan might as well be betting with ten men.

Even the glaring inability to play a ball that seams just a bit, dwarfs in front of that bigger ego problem.

When everyone and the half blind can see he has a horrible technique, it makes me pull at my graying hair when I read his assertion that “It’s not a matter of technique even, the ball is coming on to my bat but I am not able to play a big innings.”

If it was coming on to the bat he wouldn’t be poking hopefully at every other ball or falling mostly behind the wickets or playing outside the line to be bowled or leg before.

What he also doesn’t understand or those who keep sending him in can’t seem to see is that it is destroying what’s left of the team. Or perhaps he and they can but would rather go with the feeling “Hey, now that I’ve grabbed this ticket to ride, I’m gonna hold on to it even though I should have got off 50 stops ago”. What we have seen over the past few years is nothing short of a mafia land grab, and he’s one of the collectors — though he’s not alone in it.

He’s got hold of one of the eleven districts that some 20 players have been fighting over for the last ten years. And even if he’s taken out, he’ll believe it wasn’t because he couldn’t collect the revenue from flower shops run by old ladies.

No sir; it was either raining, or there was a windstorm or just too damn hot for a gentleman to step out. I mean, what does The Don expect?

But to be fair to him, he’s just inherited this attitude. It’s always been there among the Pakistani players over the last 12 years or so. If you’re a ‘big’ name and not scoring or getting wickets, it’s that you are being given only 10-15 chances! And why does everyone expect you to hold on to all the catches?

I remember Abdul Razzaq complaining bitterly at being dropped after a full year of chances during which his batting average was less than twenty and a bowling average in the 30’s. He appeared fatigued, no one was bowling on his legs anymore and he had lost a yard of his pace. But to him that seemed no reason to drop him!

I remember that in the 1970s Zaheer Abbas used to defend his batting failures by saying, “everyone wants me to score a double hundred every time”, a reference to his 274 against England in his second Test in 1971. Actually it was nothing like that. He passed fifty only twice in some 17 Test innings after that, and his highest remained 72 or something. He walloped back in 1974 with 240 against England again at The Oval on the flattest of tracks and a bowling attack that every other batting side, except the hapless Indians, was taking for runs in those days. He hardly did anything of note in the rest of the series when the ball was seaming away.

The fact was that Zaheer was not mentally strong and also couldn’t play the fastest bowlers at all well. It was he himself who wanted to score a double hundred every innings and when he couldn’t he kept losing confidence.

That 274 remains probably one of the finest Test innings played in England; fluent, artistic and in seaming conditions. But Ray Illingworth wrote in an article once that after that innings he told his players: “‘Zaheer will never score another fifty against us.’ I was wrong, but only just. He made 72 but we got him out cheaply the other times. I had seen that he played his shots when the ball was coming on sweetly to his bat. So I decided to use more spin against him than medium pace.”

Zaheer did play some beautiful knocks and against good fast bowling, like 80-odd against Joel Garner and Colin Croft on the 1977 tour of West Indies or that majestic 93 against Michael Holding, Andy Roberts, Croft and Garner in the 1979 World Cup semi-final, but they were few and far between. And mostly came when batsmen at the other end were scoring freely. Zaheer was never that strong in the mind to take the pressure and play that long innings when the chips were down or when only tail enders were left; in fact he hardly ever batted very long with the tail, particularly when he moved down to No 5 for the last five years of his cricket.

His claim to fame in the last half of his Test career was the absolute annihilation of the Indians who came to Pakistan in 1978 and 1982, with some 1500 runs (including two double hundreds if I’m not wrong) in 11 Tests.

But playing against the same bowlers in India in front of hostile crowds, he managed a trifle over 300 runs in eight Tests with no hundreds.

All the time and in interviews and conversations with me Zaheer would claim that that the odds were always stacked against him, that he had no support, that no one appreciated his genius. He would recount his phenomenal run scoring in county cricket because of which he got to a hundred first class hundreds, but never accepted that on the average there were two good international level bowlers in about half the teams. Yes, he had patience, a tight defense and tireless ambition for more that made him score hundreds more than others of his league at the time. But then he was definitely a ‘big’ name at least. That is something that PCB, selectors, coach and the captain have to deal with. Today mediocrity is considered good enough to deserve a place in the side. The more powerful and influential get to hold on to their seats and scoring a half century, even a 30-odd is mentioned by the batsman as some good work done out there.

Our benchmarks have fallen not just statistically, but also mentally. That’s what we have to raise to levels up to the 90’s, not just scores from 30’s to 40’s.

Sohaib121&gmail.com

Rooney’s return to limelight
It is becoming increasingly evident that for United to vanquish any silverware this season, the Rooney-Van Persie combo has to be firing on all cylinders
By Khuldune Shahid

David Moyes giving Wayne Rooney the captain’s armband for the midweek Capital One Cup clash against Liverpool was a tactical masterstroke in more ways than one. Not only was Rooney quite instrumental in ensuring that United got a much needed victory, he also managed to stamp his own importance in the eyes of the manager and for his team as well. After a summer of ‘will he, won’t he’, seeing Rooney fully committed to his cause at Old Trafford bodes well for the club and the player himself, considering this is the season leading up to the FIFA World Cup in Brazil.

United’s start in the league has hardly been ideal. But a tough fixtures list, coupled with a managerial change at the helm and the ensuing instability, has meant that one hasn’t had to look too far away to conjure reasons for the slump. However, one of the most conspicuous things in United’s two losses this season has been the importance of their strike partnership of Rooney and Robin Van Persie. Rooney was missing against Liverpool, in the league match, while Van Persie was out injured in the Manchester derby. And in both these games United looked completely lacklustre.

It is becoming increasingly evident that for United to vanquish any silverware this season, the Rooney-Van Persie combo has to be firing on all cylinders.

Van Persie’s significance is common knowledge after his exploits last season that made him the crucial differential in United’s league triumph. But Rooney had a mixed season last year and both his importance to the club and his future at the club were being doubted. With the biggest bone of contention between Sir Alex Ferguson and Rooney being the latter’s deployment in midfield, Moyes seems to have settled that concern by being vocal about the fact that Rooney would not be played in midfield. That’s the sort of backing that Rooney craves that results in the sort of all-energy performance that he manifested against Liverpool in the 1-0 triumph this week.

Rooney is someone who thrives on confidence. This is important because if he is on one of his purple patches — like the one he is on right now — he looks like a world beater. While when the confidence is low, and there is something that’s bothering him in the head, you see a totally different player take to the field - the one that we saw for most parts of last season.

United’s best team right now would have to have Rooney and Van Persie up top, with Michael Carrick and Marouane Fellaini in midfield. If you have Shinji Kagawa and Nani on the wings, that would easily be United’s best attacking side, but it might leave Patrice Evra and Rafael exposed, since they are attacking full-backs as well. But maybe, both Carrick and Fellaini can be deeper lying midfielders with the attacking quartet given room to play their free flowing brand of football. This might be the right balance between offence and defence that Moyes might want to strike.

In any case Rooney’s return to limelight has been pretty obvious, and one must admit, pretty timely as well. Even though both Rooney and Kagawa flourish behind the main striker, the Japanese playmaker has been doing rather well on the left wing for the national side, and maybe that’s the best way to get optimum value out of the Van Persie-Rooney-Kagawa troika: Van Persie up top, Rooney behind him and Kagawa on the left with license to move inside.

Rooney has completed the proverbial full circle twice over now at Manchester United. He has gone from being the talisman who handed in his transfer request in 2010 because United ostensibly didn’t match his ambitions in terms of the players they were bringing in, to handing in another transfer request since he was playing out of position or as second-fiddle to Van Persie — after buying the ‘star’ that Rooney wanted United to buy. But now he is back in his talismanic role and with United traversing a transition they would need him and Van Persie to be at their best throughout the season if they want their domestic and continental ambitions to be fulfilled.

khulduneshahid@gmail.com

Home|Daily Jang|The News|Sales & Advt|Contact Us|