Graham Ford was appointed India's coach on Saturday, filling a two-month-old vacancy and ending a search that seemed to have come to life in only the past week. Ford, the players' choice for the job, has been offered a one-year contract and is expected to start work during India's tour of Ireland later this month.
After hearing the presentations of both Ford and John Emburey, the former England offspinner, the BCCI decided to go with Ford. The decision has to be ratified by the working committee of the Board of Control of Cricket in India, which meets in Delhi on June 12, but that is expected to be a mere formality.
Addressing a haphazard and chaotic press conference soon after hearing presentations from both candidates, and then further deliberating among themselves, N Srinivasan, the BCCI treasurer, said, "The committee constituted to select the next Indian coach met and it was decided that the name of Mr Graham Ford would be put forward for the job of Indian coach."
"It is now for the working committee of the BCCI, which meets in Delhi on June 12, to make the appointment final," Srinivasan said. It is now up to Ford to indicate when he can seek a release from Kent, the English county where he is currently contracted till 2008.
Just as there seems to be no defined season as far as the organising of matches is concerned, it appears that there's no real system when it comes to the holding of meetings. The action began to heat up at the Park Sheraton well before 5pm, as Sharad Pawar was present in the hotel and a massive posse of policemen, in uniform and plainclothes, "secured" the area. From the portico outside the hotel to the main lobby, to the elevators, all passages were dotted with cops.
The first real signs of activity began at about 7.20pm when both Emburey and Ford walked into the hotel. They'd both arrived in Chennai on a British Airways flight in the wee hours of Saturday. Once they'd posed for the gathered television cameras and still photographers, they were ushered up to the room where they would make their presentations.
After the arrival of the candidates came the committee. The trio of board officials - Niranjan Shah, the secretary, Ratnakar Shetty, the chief administrative officer, and Mohinder Pandove, the joint secretary - made their way to the meeting room well before the appointed hour. Next to arrive were two former captains, Ravi Shastri and Srinivas Venkataraghavan. The last man to arrive - and he was pulled away from his holiday in Goa - was Sunil Gavaskar, who clocked in at 8.20pm.
Just over two hours later, Ford had the job. Kent will doubtless be reluctant to see him leave mid-season, but if that issue is resolved quickly, Ford's first assignment might be a three-match series against the team that he coached with distinction for three years at the turn of the millennium.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Big debate: do cricket minnows deserve to play in the World Cup?
Ireland captain Trent Johnston and former England bowler Jonathan Agnew argue the toss on the issue
yes
Trent johnston
Captain, Ireland's World Cup team
Before we came out to the Caribbean people were saying that we didn't deserve to be here and we would be an embarrassment. Now we've reached this stage of the competition, they're saying we're going to be humiliated in the Super Eights.
I am not going to argue that we will cause more upsets in the vein of our victory over Pakistan; we know that we're playing the best guys in the world now but we have to be given some recognition for what we have achieved.
People are overlooking our performances in the tournament as a whole if we are being criticised for a lack of consistency. I don't think you can argue the win over Pakistan was a freak, one-off result. We had a hard-fought battle with Zimbabwe that ultimately ended in a tie and we beat Inzamam-ul-Haq's side fair and square. We actually put in a good performance against West Indies even though we lost. Admittedly we came up against Shivnarine Chanderpaul and we couldn't find an answer to him but we learnt from that. We also beat Canada in the warm-up games and lost by 35 runs to South Africa. I'm extremely proud of our guys.
Pakistan are undoubtedly a world power in cricket but they lost two of their group games - the other to West Indies - so they are out of the tournament. We deserve our spot in the Super Eights on merit. Sport is about competition - winning and losing. How can you justify taking that away?
We feel that the worst thing we can do now is go and perform badly and lose the momentum in these six games, starting against England. I'm 32 years old and I have learnt so much at this tournament, so it is obviously even more beneficial for some of our players who are only 20 or 21. To stop non-Test-playing nations such as ourselves competing at the World Cup would deny them the opportunity to improve. You have to play against the best.
Making our debut in the World Cup has given us a chance that we might not otherwise have had to show that we are competitive. We can play Scotland and Holland as often as we like but we are not going to maximise our potential that way. Those two countries would say the same. Scotland may have gone out but they learnt a huge amount from their experience of playing Australia and you cannot put a value on that.
We know that we're not suddenly going to be able to go and play Test series against Australia and South Africa but we need to get ourselves into a position - the political situation notwithstanding - where we can play teams like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
I'm not saying that will happen any time soon but our performances here have shown that we are competitive enough to do so, which is why it is so important to maintain our momentum in the Super Eights.
Surely part of the aim of the cricket World Cup is to encourage people to play the game - whichever country they are from. Cricket does not have a high profile in Ireland but, because of our success in reaching the latter stages, people who live in strongholds of Gaelic sport will be watching us take on England come Friday. That is fantastic in terms of promoting the game in Ireland and getting more people involved in cricket.
No
Jonathan Agnew
BBC cricket correspondent and former England bowler
I am simply being honest and reflecting what most people who come to a tournament with an impartial view want in saying that the World Cup should be a really memorable event. That means you need a standard of cricket that encourages people to take up the sport - the best teams should be competing against each other at this second stage. When it is beamed around the world into someone's living room, it should make them say, yes, that's a great sport, let's go out and play it, as happened after the Ashes 18 months ago. I don't want to see international cricket where games are tedious one-sided affairs played in empty grounds.
In one-day cricket with a white ball, dodgy pitches and unpredictable conditions out here, every dog will have its day. In a foreign clime some teams take longer to get into their stride and they are inevitably going to be embarrassed once in a while and that is what has happened.
India v Pakistan is one of the highlights of any cricket tournament. People who have bought tickets for the Super Eights match in Barbados will now see Bangladesh play Ireland. We have already seen three or four games with directors trying not to show swaths of empty seats. Four years ago, when Kenya got through to the Super Sixes, largely because of political issues, I went to the matches and there was almost no one there. India and Pakistan are the powerbases of the Asian game and it is not good for the promotion of cricket that they are out of the competition at such an early stage.
The smaller teams, the associate countries, are not good enough, consistently enough to make it worthwhile for them to be involved at this point. The presence of Bangladesh and Ireland means that it will take an outstanding set of results to prevent the four teams who took two points from the group stage from trundling through to the semi-finals. I certainly do not think Ireland will win another game, while Bangladesh will probably beat only the Irish. This means there are fewer teams who are capable of taking points off the likes of Australia and New Zealand. India and Pakistan would have presented a far more difficult task and provided a more open, compelling competition.
I am not trying to insult Ireland and Bangladesh. In fact, I hesitate before calling Bangladesh a minnow because they are better than that. I want everyone to be able to play cricket but they can do that in tournaments such as the Champions Trophy or Twenty20 competitions. The World Cup is the pinnacle of cricket and it should be the best possible shop window for the game.
That has not been the case at the past three World Cups. I really believe we should revert to a version of the 1992 format - a brilliant tournament - where every team simply played each other and the best four teams went through to the semi-finals. A good compromise, which would also reduce the time the World Cup takes, would be for the 10 Test-playing nations - provided Zimbabwe's political situation is resolved - and two qualifiers to all play each other to try to reach the last four.
yes
Trent johnston
Captain, Ireland's World Cup team
Before we came out to the Caribbean people were saying that we didn't deserve to be here and we would be an embarrassment. Now we've reached this stage of the competition, they're saying we're going to be humiliated in the Super Eights.
I am not going to argue that we will cause more upsets in the vein of our victory over Pakistan; we know that we're playing the best guys in the world now but we have to be given some recognition for what we have achieved.
People are overlooking our performances in the tournament as a whole if we are being criticised for a lack of consistency. I don't think you can argue the win over Pakistan was a freak, one-off result. We had a hard-fought battle with Zimbabwe that ultimately ended in a tie and we beat Inzamam-ul-Haq's side fair and square. We actually put in a good performance against West Indies even though we lost. Admittedly we came up against Shivnarine Chanderpaul and we couldn't find an answer to him but we learnt from that. We also beat Canada in the warm-up games and lost by 35 runs to South Africa. I'm extremely proud of our guys.
Pakistan are undoubtedly a world power in cricket but they lost two of their group games - the other to West Indies - so they are out of the tournament. We deserve our spot in the Super Eights on merit. Sport is about competition - winning and losing. How can you justify taking that away?
We feel that the worst thing we can do now is go and perform badly and lose the momentum in these six games, starting against England. I'm 32 years old and I have learnt so much at this tournament, so it is obviously even more beneficial for some of our players who are only 20 or 21. To stop non-Test-playing nations such as ourselves competing at the World Cup would deny them the opportunity to improve. You have to play against the best.
Making our debut in the World Cup has given us a chance that we might not otherwise have had to show that we are competitive. We can play Scotland and Holland as often as we like but we are not going to maximise our potential that way. Those two countries would say the same. Scotland may have gone out but they learnt a huge amount from their experience of playing Australia and you cannot put a value on that.
We know that we're not suddenly going to be able to go and play Test series against Australia and South Africa but we need to get ourselves into a position - the political situation notwithstanding - where we can play teams like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
I'm not saying that will happen any time soon but our performances here have shown that we are competitive enough to do so, which is why it is so important to maintain our momentum in the Super Eights.
Surely part of the aim of the cricket World Cup is to encourage people to play the game - whichever country they are from. Cricket does not have a high profile in Ireland but, because of our success in reaching the latter stages, people who live in strongholds of Gaelic sport will be watching us take on England come Friday. That is fantastic in terms of promoting the game in Ireland and getting more people involved in cricket.
No
Jonathan Agnew
BBC cricket correspondent and former England bowler
I am simply being honest and reflecting what most people who come to a tournament with an impartial view want in saying that the World Cup should be a really memorable event. That means you need a standard of cricket that encourages people to take up the sport - the best teams should be competing against each other at this second stage. When it is beamed around the world into someone's living room, it should make them say, yes, that's a great sport, let's go out and play it, as happened after the Ashes 18 months ago. I don't want to see international cricket where games are tedious one-sided affairs played in empty grounds.
In one-day cricket with a white ball, dodgy pitches and unpredictable conditions out here, every dog will have its day. In a foreign clime some teams take longer to get into their stride and they are inevitably going to be embarrassed once in a while and that is what has happened.
India v Pakistan is one of the highlights of any cricket tournament. People who have bought tickets for the Super Eights match in Barbados will now see Bangladesh play Ireland. We have already seen three or four games with directors trying not to show swaths of empty seats. Four years ago, when Kenya got through to the Super Sixes, largely because of political issues, I went to the matches and there was almost no one there. India and Pakistan are the powerbases of the Asian game and it is not good for the promotion of cricket that they are out of the competition at such an early stage.
The smaller teams, the associate countries, are not good enough, consistently enough to make it worthwhile for them to be involved at this point. The presence of Bangladesh and Ireland means that it will take an outstanding set of results to prevent the four teams who took two points from the group stage from trundling through to the semi-finals. I certainly do not think Ireland will win another game, while Bangladesh will probably beat only the Irish. This means there are fewer teams who are capable of taking points off the likes of Australia and New Zealand. India and Pakistan would have presented a far more difficult task and provided a more open, compelling competition.
I am not trying to insult Ireland and Bangladesh. In fact, I hesitate before calling Bangladesh a minnow because they are better than that. I want everyone to be able to play cricket but they can do that in tournaments such as the Champions Trophy or Twenty20 competitions. The World Cup is the pinnacle of cricket and it should be the best possible shop window for the game.
That has not been the case at the past three World Cups. I really believe we should revert to a version of the 1992 format - a brilliant tournament - where every team simply played each other and the best four teams went through to the semi-finals. A good compromise, which would also reduce the time the World Cup takes, would be for the 10 Test-playing nations - provided Zimbabwe's political situation is resolved - and two qualifiers to all play each other to try to reach the last four.
Hair triggers new cricket controversy
Former Pakistan captain Imran Khan has labelled Australian umpire Darrell Hair a "mini Hitler" for his central role in a ball-tampering row which ended in the first forfeit in 130 years of Test cricket।
The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) was outraged, saying it would not accept Hair for any further matches।
"We are going to make it clear to the International Cricket Council (ICC) that we are not going to play under the supervision of Hair in any future matches," Khan told Reuters.
But ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed said Pakistan could face further charges after refusing to take to the field in London।
"The umpires are meeting this morning to consider whether there should be any further charges in relation to the refusal by Pakistan to take the field that resulted in the forfeit of the match," Speed told BBC Radio।
"It may be that there is more than one charge।"
Amid scenes of high farce at The Oval in London, match officials awarded England the fourth Test when the Pakistani team refused to return after tea on the fourth day।
It was England's last Test before they travel to Australia to defend the Ashes।
Hair, 53, triggered the crisis by awarding England a five-run penalty when he ruled that the Pakistanis had illegally tampered with the ball।
The Pakistan players protested on the field, then refused to come out of the pavilion after tea। Hair and fellow umpire Billy Doctrove of the West Indies lifted the bails, signalling the end of the match.
Pakistan later decided they would play, but Hair refused to umpire.
After five hours of talks, International Cricket Council (ICC) match officials upheld the decision to award the match to England।
The forfeit, which rescued the home country from a difficult match position, cost England cricket authorities around $A1 million in refunds and lost ticket sales।
It caused outrage in Pakistan, where Hair has long been viewed as being biased against Pakistan teams।
"Hair is one of those characters when he wears the white umpire's coat, he metamorphoses into a mini Hitler," Imran wrote in his column in The Nation newspaper।
"During my career I have seen such umpires who go out of their way to make their authority felt. They are umpiring fundamentalists. Such characters court controversy," he wrote.
Hair gained international notoriety when he no-balled Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing in the Boxing Day Test in Melbourne in 1995।
In his autobiography published three years later an unapologetic Hair described Murali's action as "diabolical".
He has been involved in numerous controversies since, usually involving teams from Pakistan.
The latest row was sparked by a reverse-swinging yorker from Pakistan pace bowler Umar Gul which bowled England batsman Alastair Cook।
Hair inspected the ball, and he with fellow umpire Doctrove ruled it had been illegally tampered with।
Oddly, the umpires then allowed England's batsmen Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood to choose a replacement ball। The laws of cricket say this should be done by the umpires.
The ICC later issued a statement noting: "The umpires had correctly deemed that Pakistan had forfeited the match and awarded the Test to England"।
"The Pakistan team was aggrieved by the award of five penalty runs to England। The award of those penalty runs for alleged interference with the ball is under review by the ICC match referee Mike Procter, whose report will be considered in due course."
Pakistan chairman Shaharyar Khan said his players categorically denied tampering with the ball and were "deeply aggrieved" by the accusation।
"The boys were extremely upset at the slur of what happened। They wanted to register a protest with the match officials."
Pakistan intends to go ahead with the one-day internationals against England, due to start next week.
The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) was outraged, saying it would not accept Hair for any further matches।
"We are going to make it clear to the International Cricket Council (ICC) that we are not going to play under the supervision of Hair in any future matches," Khan told Reuters.
But ICC chief executive Malcolm Speed said Pakistan could face further charges after refusing to take to the field in London।
"The umpires are meeting this morning to consider whether there should be any further charges in relation to the refusal by Pakistan to take the field that resulted in the forfeit of the match," Speed told BBC Radio।
"It may be that there is more than one charge।"
Amid scenes of high farce at The Oval in London, match officials awarded England the fourth Test when the Pakistani team refused to return after tea on the fourth day।
It was England's last Test before they travel to Australia to defend the Ashes।
Hair, 53, triggered the crisis by awarding England a five-run penalty when he ruled that the Pakistanis had illegally tampered with the ball।
The Pakistan players protested on the field, then refused to come out of the pavilion after tea। Hair and fellow umpire Billy Doctrove of the West Indies lifted the bails, signalling the end of the match.
Pakistan later decided they would play, but Hair refused to umpire.
After five hours of talks, International Cricket Council (ICC) match officials upheld the decision to award the match to England।
The forfeit, which rescued the home country from a difficult match position, cost England cricket authorities around $A1 million in refunds and lost ticket sales।
It caused outrage in Pakistan, where Hair has long been viewed as being biased against Pakistan teams।
"Hair is one of those characters when he wears the white umpire's coat, he metamorphoses into a mini Hitler," Imran wrote in his column in The Nation newspaper।
"During my career I have seen such umpires who go out of their way to make their authority felt. They are umpiring fundamentalists. Such characters court controversy," he wrote.
Hair gained international notoriety when he no-balled Sri Lankan spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing in the Boxing Day Test in Melbourne in 1995।
In his autobiography published three years later an unapologetic Hair described Murali's action as "diabolical".
He has been involved in numerous controversies since, usually involving teams from Pakistan.
The latest row was sparked by a reverse-swinging yorker from Pakistan pace bowler Umar Gul which bowled England batsman Alastair Cook।
Hair inspected the ball, and he with fellow umpire Doctrove ruled it had been illegally tampered with।
Oddly, the umpires then allowed England's batsmen Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood to choose a replacement ball। The laws of cricket say this should be done by the umpires.
The ICC later issued a statement noting: "The umpires had correctly deemed that Pakistan had forfeited the match and awarded the Test to England"।
"The Pakistan team was aggrieved by the award of five penalty runs to England। The award of those penalty runs for alleged interference with the ball is under review by the ICC match referee Mike Procter, whose report will be considered in due course."
Pakistan chairman Shaharyar Khan said his players categorically denied tampering with the ball and were "deeply aggrieved" by the accusation।
"The boys were extremely upset at the slur of what happened। They wanted to register a protest with the match officials."
Pakistan intends to go ahead with the one-day internationals against England, due to start next week.
Vaughan slated for Flintoff claim
criticism of Andrew Flintoff has been branded "despicable" by the chief executive of Lancashire.
The England skipper told The Guardian Flintoff's drunken antics on a pedalo damaged his team's World Cup chances।
"I was absolutely staggered when I read that, I just couldn't believe it," Jim Cumbes, the chief of Flintoff's county, told BBC Radio Five Live।
"It's despicable against a guy like Fred, who over the last few years has given England blood."
Vaughan said Flintoff's behaviour had irreparably harmed England's team spirit, but Cumbes said the all-rounder would be hurt by the public criticism।
Cumbes added: "Rule one of any sport is that you don't slag your team-mates in public.
"I think Fred will be bitterly hurt by this, because the last thing he would dream of doing is let his team-mates down।
"Of course he wants to do well individually, but he wants to do well for his team-mates.
"He's played when he's been unfit and forced himself through it। He was the talisman in the Ashes series."
Flintoff lost the England vice-captaincy early in the World Cup after getting into difficulty on a pedalo following his team's defeat by New Zealand।
And in an interview in the Guardian newspaper on Tuesday, Vaughan said: "That changed the whole atmosphere in the camp।
"We went into the New Zealand game with a good attitude but didn't play well and after 'Fredalo' we just started taking it all too seriously।
"Suddenly you've got players who have no freedom left। I like to see players enjoy themselves but no one would dare go out after that incident - and you can't create any spirit then."
Zimbabwe warns Aust to stay out of cricket debate
LINDA MOTTRAM: Zimbabwe's government has issued a warning to Australia's Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, to keep out of the debate over the staging of Cricket World Cup matches in Zimbabwe। The Mugabe Government says that fears of unrest during the matches are unfounded, though Zimbabwe opposition groups say that the situation will be extremely dangerous।Africa Correspondent, Sally Sara reports। SALLY SARA: The Zimbabwean Government says it's given guarantees that the Australian cricket team will be protected। The Australians are scheduled to play in Zimbabwe on February the 24th। The International Cricket Council says the match will go ahead. But Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer says it should be relocated to South Africa. Mr. Downer has received a report from Australian High Commissioner to Zimbabwe, Jonathon Brown. The report warns of possible demonstrations during the World Cup. But the Zimbabwean Government says Mr. Downer's fears are unfounded. Spokesman for President Robert Mugabe, George Charamba says Mr. Downer should keep out of the debate.GEORGE CHARAMBA: Oh my God, the message for him; just keep away and stop being a nuisance, in the sense… and I mean people are losing patience. We really can't waste our time worrying about Australia's worries, which are actually misplaced.SALLY SARA: But can you guarantee that these matches will be safe?GEORGE CHARAMBA: We know this: they plan the game to go on, and go on so well. And I know the world is going to see that we have the capacity to host both in terms of our facilities as well as in terms of security. But really, the one missing thing is having to spend our energies in order [inaudible] to Australia's Foreign Minister really it is not worth our while at all.SALLY SARA: Mr. Downer says the Zimbabwean police have failed to give a commitment that they won't react to demonstrations in a disproportionately aggressive way. But that's exactly what some opposition groups are banking on.The National Constitutional Assembly is planning to stage large protests during the World Cup matches in Zimbabwe. The NCA says it will be a chance to show the international community the brutality of the Mugabe regime. NCA Chairman, Lovemore Madhuku is warning that confrontations between police and activists could be extremely violent. Mr. Madhuku says the Australian cricket team shouldn't play in Zimbabwe.LOVEMORE MADHUKU: Don't come to Zimbabwe. I mean, they should assist the struggling Zimbabweans who want to see the Mugabe regime brought to account. We believe that they should take a moral responsibility not to be seen to be giving any [inaudible] to the Mugabe government.SALLY SARA: Will the demonstrations be dangerous?LOVEMORE MADHUKU: It will be dangerous because the police are indiscriminate when they deal with demonstrators. They are not an organised professional force; they are an organised group of thugs, and we want to see that happening at a time that the world is focusing its attention on Zimbabwe during the cricket matches. So, we should not lose that opportunity.LINDA MOTTRAM: Lovemore Madhuku from the Zimbabwean opposition.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Cricket debate: Opposer's points
The opposer disagrees with the motion:
"This house believes that politics should be kept out of sport।"
The opposer could use the points below when making their speech।
Spaces have been left for them to add points of their own:
There are big problems in Zimbabwe and it would be wrong to play cricket there।
The country is run by a man called Robert Mugabe। In recent years President Mugabe has been criticised for his policy of seizing land owned by white farmers, and for using violence against people who disagree with the way he runs the country.
President Mugabe is the president of the Zimbabwe Cricket Union। Before the game he might want to shake the hands of the England players, which might make it look like they support his government and the way he does things.
Some members of the UK government have said that they would rather the England team didn't play the game, including Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)