CricInfo Home
News Home

NEWS FOCUS
Rsa in Pak
NZ in India
Zim in Aus

Domestic
Other Series

Due to an unexpected public holiday, my writing schedule has to be changed and, therefore, I must write this with one day still to go in the Pakistan-West Indies Test match at Sharjah.

The West Indies seem up against it though they have done well to take the Test match into the fifth day. But I hope to write about both the Test matches, as a packet. But a few observations about the series as a whole.

Not only is it being played at a neutral venue but the entire tour of the West Indies, two Test matches and three One-day Internationals will not only be played in a single city but on the same ground. This must be a record of sorts, though of a dubious sort.

The second aspect of this series is the presence of sleuths of ICC's Anti-corruption unit. Not just their presence at the ground but presumably at the hotels where the teams are staying. Big Brother is watching them. In addition there are surveillance cameras in the hotel lobbies and who knows in the rooms of the players.

I would imagine the telephones in their rooms are tapped. No mobile phones are allowed in the dressing room and no visitors. This high-alert security is not because there is any security threat to the players but to ensure that the players don't make any contacts with bookies or vice versa.

I would be interested to know whether these same precautions have been taken in Australia where the South Africans and the New Zealand team are playing and if the same precautions were taken during England's tour of India. I wouldn't imagine so. In that case is the ICC targeting Sharjah?

Personally, I find this kind of 'vigilance' demeaning and an invasion of privacy and an aspersion on the integrity of the players. I don't think that match-fixing can be stopped by methods that even Inspector Clousseau of Pink Panther would find amateurish. I would be interested to know too how much money is being spent by the ICC on maintaining the Anti-Corruption Unit and what has it to show so far?

The 'bonus point' introduced into one-day tournaments seemed, at first, to be a good idea but certainly needs to be re-considered given that it has, already been misused. New Zealand all but allowed South Africa a bonus point and South Africa played its last match against Australia to deny Australia the bonus point so that Australia would not make it to the finals.

Is there not an element of match-fixing here? There is no question of any financial impropriety but South Africa made sure that it would meet New Zealand in the final and not Australia by cashing in on the bonus point gifted to them by New Zealand. I hope there is no intention of having anything so dicey in the World Cup 2003.

The one-day series between India and England was drawn and it seemed like a fair result. The matches may have been terribly exciting, India losing the last two by margins of two and five runs respectively, but the matches were dominated by the same, few players from both teams and the others merely made up the numbers. This seemed particularly true of India.

Take away Tendulkar from India's team and you have only half a team. I am all for bringing in young players or blooding them. But they can't seem to handle the pressure. Before a capacity crowd of wild, hysterical fans, under lights, even the toughest will tremble.

I don't think any coach can teach mental toughness. I suppose it's a case of either having or not having it. India lost at both Delhi and Mumbai because that batsmen lost their nerve. On both occasions India was cruising but as soon as Ganguly was out, someone pressed the panic button in the dressing room. I think there is a job that seniors can do. They can become a calming influence.

But to get back to Sharjah, I was frankly surprised by the omission of Shahid Afridi from the Pakistan team and more crucially, the West Indies leaving out their leg-spinner, Ramnarain. In the case of Shahid Afridi, he went to Sharjah as one of the openers but lost out to Naved Latif who is not a specialist opener.

I have a feeling that tour selection committee is convinced that Shahid Afridi is a one-day player. I am sorry to say that they are in the wrong. Shahid Afridi would have also been a bowling option. Why the West Indies left out their leg-spinner is a mystery to me. Clearly, there was a serious misreading of the wicket. The only chance, the West Indies had, was with a specialist spinner. Playing an extra batsman has never made any sense and is always a negative move.

And finally a bit of advice to former Test cricketers. Try and keep yourselves in the news otherwise you will be forgotten, not only by the public but by the Experts. Thus Tony Cozier seemed not to know who Antao D'Souza was. Fair enough but when asked Aamir Sohail, he said he had no idea. Finally, Mushtaq Mohammad was able to enlighten them. Antao was a fine medium paced bowler and he toured England with the Pakistan team in 1962.

At a time when PIA was a star-studded team, Antao was its strike bowler. Cricketers, like old soldier, fade away but deserve to be remembered. Incidentally, I find Mushtaq Mohammad's expert opinion to be the best of the lot, particularly on Danish Kaneria-that he should use his googly more sparingly being one of his observations.

© Dawn