All posts by h716a5.icu

Analysis of individual and overall bowling performances across the four IPL seasons

S Rajesh and Madhusudhan Ramakrishnan10-Apr-2012Twenty20 cricket is thought to be a batsman-dominated game but, over four seasons of the IPL, the bowlers have held their own – and in many cases turned around games with match-winning spells. Lasith Malinga and Anil Kumble, the top bowlers in the overall and innings-wise lists, have proved themselves all over the world, but the lists below also include some less famous names who have grabbed the opportunity to mingle with the best.Take Amit Singh, a 30-year-old medium-pacer from Gujarat who has played only 18 first-class matches. Playing under Shane Warne for Rajasthan Royals, he turned in a bowling performance that comes up in third place, taking 3 for 9 against Kings XI Punjab in a matchwinning display.In the overall list, though, most of the names are high-quality ODI bowlers as well, which shows that they’ve adapted well to another form of limited-overs cricket. And for those who thought that 20-over cricket would favour one form of bowling over another, this study goes against that theory: there’s a fair mix of fast bowlers and spinners who’ve done well, with five of each in the top ten for both, the innings-wise and the overall lists.Key components of the bowling analysis- The economy rate of a bowler’s spell is weighted against the match run-rate. So, a bowler who bowls economically in a high-scoring match gets a higher score than one who achieves the same figures in a low-scoring game.Consider two performances: Rahul Sharma’s spell of 2 for 7 against Mumbai Indians, 2011 and Anil Kumble’s 5 for 5 against Rajasthan Royals, 2009. Rahul’s economy rate of 1.75 is slightly higher than Kumble’s 1.57 but, relative to his match run-rate (7.67), Rahul’s performance is better than Kumble’s because the overall run-rate in Kumble’s game was lower (5.43).- The wickets taken are weighted according to the batting position of the batsman dismissed. A bowler who takes top-order wickets thus gets a higher value than one who dismissed tailenders.- A bowler who doesn’t bowl his full quota of overs gets a slightly dampened rating (weighted according to the number of balls bowled), since it’s possible for bowlers, especially part-time ones, to get away with one or two inexpensive overs in which they take a few wickets. Bowling a full quota of four overs without conceding too many is far more difficult, and is hence recognised as such.Consider Laxmi Shukla’s spell of 3 for 6 in 0.5 overs v Delhi Daredevils, 2008 and Lasith Malinga’s 3 for 9 v Deccan Chargers, 2011. While Shukla bowled just five balls in the end and picked up three wickets, the bowling score is higher for Malinga who bowled his entire quota of overs.- As in the overall rating for batting, there’s a minimum number of bowling performances required for him to get a full rating in the overall rating for bowlers as well. For players who haven’t bowled in the required number of innings, their overall rating gets dampened. Just as with batting, the cut-off for the minimum number of innings is 20.Top ten bowling performances1. Rajasthan Royals were facing a target of just 134 on a difficult track in Cape Town. Kumble bowled 3.1 overs and picked up five wickets while conceding just five runs. Although it was a low-scoring match (match run-rate of 5.43), Kumble’s figures were still outstanding, even in the context of the relatively low scores.2. Mishra helped Deccan Chargers defend 198 with a superb spell of 4 for 9 off his four overs. His economy rate of 2.25 stood out in a game where the scoring rate was 8.05.3. After Rajasthan Royals set Kings XI Punjab a huge target of 212, Amit Singh produced an excellent spell of 3 for 9 at an economy rate of 2.25. In comparison, the match run-rate was 8.60. Another notable aspect of Singh’s performance was that all three of his wickets were top-six batsmen.4. Tanvir’s initial burst left Chennai Super Kings at 11 for 3 and he returned later to pick up the wickets of the top scorer Albie Morkel and the lower order. Tanvir’s haul of six wickets is the best in the IPL and helped set up a comfortable win for Rajasthan Royals.5. In a fairly high-scoring game, Rahul’s spell of 2 for 7 in four overs was exceptional. It is a top performance primarily because the match run-rate (7.67) is more than four times Rahul’s economy rate in the game (1.75). Added to that, both his wickets were of top-order batsmen.6. Malinga’s burst of three wickets including two top-order wickets set up Mumbai Indians’ 37-run win. His economy rate of 2.25 stood out in a match where the scoring rate was 7.67.7. In a high-scoring game (376 runs in 40 overs), Mishra’s spell of 5 for 17 helped Delhi Daredevils win by 12 runs. His economy rate of 4.25 was excellent in a game where the scoring rate was 9.40.8. Tanvir picked up two of the top three batsmen in his initial spell and reduced Royal Challengers Bangalore to 5 for 3 in their chase of a huge target of 198. In a game where the run-rate was 8.30, Tanvir’s economy rate was 2.50.9. After being restricted to just 129, Deccan Chargers fought back to win a low-scoring contest by 55 runs. Although Ishant’s economy rate of 4.00 in such a match (run-rate 5.53) does not stand out, his haul of five top-order wickets (all in the top six) gives him high overall score.10. Hodge picked up 4 for 13 to enable Kochi Tuskers bowl out Rajasthan Royals for 97 and chase down the 98-run target in just 7.3 overs. Hodge had an excellent economy rate of 3.25 in the match but the stand-out aspect is the fact that he picked up four wickets in a complete spell.

Top individual bowling performances in IPL

BowlerTeamOppositionSpellPointsAnil KumbleRoyal Challengers BangaloreRajasthan Royals5/571.80Amit MishraDeccan ChargersKings XI Punjab4/967.11Amit SinghRajasthan RoyalsKings XI Punjab3/966.04Sohail TanvirRajasthan RoyalsChennai Super Kings6/1464.89Rahul SharmaPune WarriorsMumbai Indians2/763.48Lasith MalingaMumbai IndiansDeccan Chargers3/961.52Amit MishraDelhi DaredevilsDeccan Chargers5/1760.32Sohail TanvirRajasthan RoyalsRoyal Challengers Bangalore3/1058.69Ishant SharmaDeccan ChargersKochi Tuskers5/1255.79Brad HodgeKochi TuskersRajasthan Royals4/1355.54S AravindRoyal Challengers BangaloreKings XI Punjab4/1455.53Harbhajan SinghMumbai IndiansDelhi Daredevils4/1755.09Munaf PatelMumbai IndiansKings XI Punjab5/2154.95Harbhajan SinghMumbai IndiansChennai Super Kings5/1854.80Sohail TanvirRajasthan RoyalsMumbai Indians4/1454.36Rohit SharmaDeccan ChargersMumbai Indians4/654.09Piyush ChawlaKings XI PunjabRoyal Challengers Bangalore4/1753.94Ashish NehraDelhi DaredevilsKings XI Punjab1/653.74Shaun PollockMumbai IndiansChennai Super Kings1/953.62Lasith MalingaMumbai IndiansDelhi Daredevils5/1353.47The overall bowling scoresLasith Malinga, who is on top of the overall list of IPL bowlers, has an excellent economy rate of 6.38 and has also managed to pick up 61 wickets in 42 matches (1.45 per match). Amit Mishra, who has the same number of wickets as Malinga, has a slightly higher economy rate and lower values of wickets-per-match (1.35).There are others, though, who haven’t been so prolific in terms of wickets but have superb economy rates. Rahul Sharma (21 wickets in 20 matches) and Harbhajan Singh (48 in 46) have only taken marginally more than one wicket per match, but both make it to the top 20 on the strength of excellent economy rates – 6.22 for Rahul Sharma and 6.76 for Harbhajan.

Top bowlers overall in IPL

BowlerMatchesPointsLasith Malinga4225.33Amit Mishra4524.72R Ashwin3024.12Doug Bollinger2124.11Farveez Maharoof2023.37Anil Kumble4222.97Rahul Sharma2022.96Muttiah Muralitharan4522.56Ashish Nehra3122.25Dale Steyn4021.80Munaf Patel4521.69Daniel Vettori2521.47RP Singh5621.17Ryan Harris2920.99Harbhajan Singh4620.63Pragyan Ojha5420.48Dirk Nannes2420.47Irfan Pathan5620.43Shane Warne5520.07Zaheer Khan4619.99Click here to download the list of top 50 individual bowling performances and here to download the list of top 50 IPL bowlers.

This league might be a bit of fun and showcase a host of big names, but the organisational process could be revisited

Firdose Moonda12-Oct-2012On face value, it is very difficult to take the Champions League T20 seriously.It is not, as its name suggests, a competition of winners. After all, the second, third and fourth placed teams in a league of nine are participating along with the runners-up of some tournaments and victors of others.Beyond the format, there are other oddities. The opening concert will be headlined by a person who calls himself DJ Earworm, a mash up artist. For those who don’t know that does not involve potatoes but mixing of sounds to form what the Billboard 100 charts say is very popular music. What that has to do with cricket is as much as cheerleaders and fireworks. So, in other words, a lot.Let’s not bemoan that cricket is not simply cricket anymore because it has been taken over by side shows. We’ve known that for a while and secretly a lot of us like it because it is, even if it is just a little, fun. Who doesn’t like a bit of dancing in between regular life? In the middle of all the fun, we could forget about the real issues that surround a tournament like this.The imbalanced nature of the competition is its greatest flaw. With four IPL teams, two South African franchises and two Australian gaining automatic entry into the event, the rest are right to feel a little left out. Of the remaining Full Member countries, two – Zimbabwe and Bangladesh – were not even invited to qualify while the other five were give two spots to fight over. Even those were not evenly handed out as England were allowed two teams in qualifying while Pakistan, New Zealand and Sri Lanka were only permitted one each.The result is a main event that just does not seem fair. If the marketing says the competition will be played between champions, why are so many absent?The answer lies where so many other answers do: in money. When a novel concept like the CLT20 was mooted, its intentions must have been to play a real league of champions. The boards of India, South Africa and Australia quickly realised the only way they could make money out of it would be if more Indian teams were involved to appeal to larger Indian audience, who the advertisers pay to target.That economic law of supply and demand was enough to steer the course of the entire tournament. Because more Indian teams need to be involved, fewer other teams can participate to avoid the event becoming much longer. Because South Africa and Australia are shareholders, they needed to see some benefit other than having a stake in it, so they get two teams. Because everyone else is not part of the administration of the tournament, they get what’s left over.Surely then some concoction of a tournament name like the ‘Ind-SA-Aus T20 with invited guests’ would be more appropriate and more honest. It would settle the question about who really owns the competition, who benefits from it and who dictates terms. It would be a private event and no-one would have any right to complain about it.Such a neat solution is not possible though, because the ICC endorses the CLT20 in its current form. Why else would they permit a window for it in every year on the FTP? No other multi-team tournament that is not a World Cup (even the Champions Trophy is at an end) and certainly no other domestic event has this right. The game’s governing body has rubber stamped the CLT20 and that would give it little reason to alter its composition in future.Perhaps ICC involvement could make a difference in future, if it assumes some governing rights over the CLT20. Take UEFA’s Champions League, which the CLT20 is often compared with, as an example. First of all, note that the top three leagues in Europe are allowed to enter four teams into the event, while some of the other countries are not even given a spot, so even the footballing equivalent is skewed.

Surely then some concoction of a tournament name like the ‘Ind-SA-Aus T20 with invited guests’ would be more appropriate and more honest. It would be a private event and no-one would have any right to complain about it.

The difference is that the system used in European Football is based on rankings, not ownership of an event. UEFA use a footballing coefficient to determine which leagues are placed where on the rankings system. The coefficient takes into account how the clubs from each country have performed in previous Champions Leagues, so those who have done better in the past have more spots in the future.A system like that would ensure that Trinidad and Tobago are rewarded for reaching the 2009 final and could even see a team like the Sialkot Stallions get some recognition for holding the world record for the most consecutive wins in the 20-overs format. It would mean that money does not control the entire organisation of the event, as it does now.Even moving the tournament to South Africa was, to some extent, driven by money. A Pakistan team could probably not have toured India with the current tensions, and religious festivals across the country would have made it difficult to host at certain venues. Instead, South Africa, default hosts for everything from the African Nations’ Cup that was due to be held in Libya to a Champions Trophy once destined for Pakistan, were asked to step in so money that would be made from this year’s CLT20 is not lost.CSA itself will not make much more money from the event. They will receive the same shareholding as usual and will have to pay the hosting fees to stadiums out of that cash. It could result in them getting less money. Additional income will stem from hotel, airline and restaurant revenue as a large number of people descend on the country for the showpiece.Make no mistake that it will be a showpiece. Despite the administrative issues, the tournament remains a home to some of the world’s best players. Almost every big-name player, be it in the 20-overs format or not, is participating. World T20 Man-of-the-Series Shane Watson will turn out for Sydney, Sunil Narine and Kieron Pollard will play for their respective IPL sides, exciting prospects like Chris Morris of the Lions, Gary Ballance of Yorkshire and Shahbaz Nadeem of Delhi will be able to make names for themselves.But even on the playing side, there is an strangeness. The player whose name is almost permanently aligned to a T20 competition, Chris Gayle, is absent. Gayle has played in every 20-overs competition besides New Zealand’s and England’s (he played for Worcestershire but not in the shortest format). Remarkably, none of the teams he represented made it to the main draw of the tournament.Gayle was due to play for Uva Next in the SLPL but had to withdraw because of injury, meaning even if they had got past the qualifiers, he would not have been in their squad. His absence is so extraordinary that Mahela Jayawardene, who will captain Delhi, was even able to crack a joke about it. “Obviously Chris has set standards and he will be missed,” he said. “But he has to lift his game and try and bring one of his teams to CLT20 next year.”Now that is something to take pretty seriously indeed.

The county season comes to a close with a pretty exciting match

Ali Merali16-Sep-2012Team supported
As a Middlesex fan I am used to being a neutral on Finals Day. Warwickshire seemed the better team on paper with England stars such as Ian Bell and all-round talent including Chris Woakes. However, Hampshire have a knack of winning closely fought finals against all odds and they were the team I decided to support.Face-off I relished
Woakes has been an instrumental part of Warwickshire’s success this season and his duel with Hampshire skipper Jimmy Adams always looked as if it could be potentially pivotal. Adams got the better of the early proceedings by flicking Woakes for a six on the leg side before getting a streaky single with a leading edge two balls later. It was Woakes who had the last laugh however. Returning 15 overs later, he bowled Adams for 66.Close encounter
I was sitting in the lower part of the Grand Stand therefore Warwickshire’s substitute fielder, Paul Best, who was fielding at square leg was right in front of me. In the 31st over Sean Ervine slogged one towards him, however, despite an acrobatic effort he couldn’t quite get a hand on it. The crowd jeered him and his embarrassment increased after it was given a four, suggesting it would have gone straight to him had he not moved forwards. In the second innings, Kabir Ali pleased the crowd by obliging with a wave and received a round of applause.Crowd meter
Having recently attended the Twenty20 Finals Day, I expected the atmosphere to be much more subdued since the venue was Lord’s and the format slightly longer, and I was not surprised. But while at first the crowd was quiet it soon picked up, and by the end everyone was captivated, cheering every delivery regardless of the result.Mad moment
With Warwickshire needing just one of the last ball it easy to understand that there was huge pressure on the bowler, Ali. However, his move to put fine leg on the boundary seemed illogical at best. Adams was furious at this and a compromise was soon met in which fine leg was halfway out of the inner circle, clearly giving a single. I don’t think team manager Giles White would have been too impressed had Neil Carter managed to take an easy single there of the last ball to win his side the game.One thing I’d have changed
This game can be described as the most exciting CB 40 final ever, however, it was sad to see both sides without their key players. Hampshire seemed different without the talismanic Dimitri Mascerenhas and missed left-arm spinner Danny Briggs who was already in Sri Lanka with the England World Twenty20 squad. Likewise, Warwickshire opener William Porterfield has already travelled with Ireland and Jonathan Trott was absent due to injury. It’s a shame that the final could not have been scheduled at another time so Hampshire could have fielded a better bowling attack.Marks out of 10
10. While there were periods of the game when the crowd was subdued and the cricket offered little excitement this was easily compensated for by the nail-biting finish. The weather was good unlike most of the season.

Modern coaches speak of the importance of executing plans, but Mike Hesson left plenty to be desired in the execution of his plan to split New Zealand’s captaincy.

Brydon Coverdale07-Dec-2012When Mike Hesson took over as New Zealand’s coach in July, he was lauded for his man-management skills. But it’s hard to imagine a clumsier handling of the team’s captaincy over the past month. Ross Taylor, New Zealand’s leader and best batsman, has been left feeling so alienated that he is taking a break from the game, Brendon McCullum has been thrust into a job that not even Hesson intended him to have, and Hesson must now find a way to unite the squad ahead of a series against the world’s No.1 Test side.The crux of the problem appears to be Hesson’s failure to communicate one key point to Taylor during a meeting on November 13. That was the day after Sri Lanka completed a 3-0 series victory in the ODIs, and four days before the first Test in Galle. Hesson was unhappy with the direction New Zealand had been heading in the shorter formats; they had slipped to ninth in the ODI rankings, below Bangladesh, and had been knocked out of the ICC World Twenty20 at the group stage.In Hesson’s mind, there was one obvious solution: splitting the captaincy. Taylor, who had taken over the leadership in the middle of 2011 and presided over the Test team’s first win in Australia in a quarter of a century, would retain control of the Test team. He would play in the shorter formats but would hand the reins there to Brendon McCullum, allowing Taylor to focus all his leadership attention on the Test side.It was a plan that might have had merit, but as modern coaches like to say, plans are only as good as their execution. Hesson’s execution was about as precise as a bowler who leaks 30 runs in the last over of a World Cup final. At that meeting on November 13 – remember, this is the Tests in Sri Lanka – Hesson told Taylor that he would recommend leadership changes after the tour. He meant in the short formats. But he didn’t tell that to Taylor.”The news and the timing was distressing,” Taylor said in a statement on Friday. He went on to lead New Zealand through the two Tests, presumably under the impression they would be his last as captain. In response to Taylor’s comments on Friday, Hesson attempted to clarify what had happened at the meeting in Sri Lanka, at which the assistant coach Bob Carter and team manager Mike Sandle were also present.”During that meeting I advised Ross that I would be recommending that we make change to the leadership,” Hesson said. “My decision to make him aware of that was the fact that I wanted to make sure he didn’t find out through another source. I was going to make that recommendation to the board, and I felt I wanted to be honest and up front with him in regards to that.”The meeting was a review of the one-day series, but I didn’t mention … whether that was one form, two forms or three forms [that would be changed]. I alluded to the fact that I would be making a recommendation to make change to the leadership. I’m unsure how Ross felt regarding that discussion. I certainly regret if he felt that that was in relation to the Test side. The review was following the one-day series.”The fact that Hesson was unsure how Taylor felt speaks volumes. Taylor was about to captain New Zealand in two Tests. Did Hesson not think to ask Taylor what he thought about a leadership change? Did he not think to clarify that his intention was for Taylor to stay in charge of the Test side. On Friday, Hesson went on to say that during the discussion Taylor had the opportunity to seek clarification and didn’t do so. But this wasn’t Taylor’s plan, it wasn’t up to him to do the communicating.”As soon as we returned to New Zealand, I advised Ross that the recommendation had been placed with the board and I would like him to remain on as captain of the Test side and to share the load and for Brendon McCullum to be captain of the one-day and T20 Black Caps sides,” Hesson said.As soon as the team returned to New Zealand? So, in other words, only Taylor had scored a match-winning 142 and 74 in Colombo, where he led New Zealand to their first Test victory in Sri Lanka since 1998. It’s easy to imagine how Taylor felt. If he’d spent the Test series thinking he was to be removed as Test captain, a post-tour offer to stay on might have felt a little insincere.What is lost in the confusion is that Hesson’s plan to split the captaincy between Taylor and Brendon McCullum might have worked. Since Taylor took over the leadership in the middle of 2011, he led them to only two one-day international victories from eight completed games, and both wins were against Zimbabwe. In Tests, he has now led them to wins in Australia and Sri Lanka, both extremely rare achievements for New Zealand.Ironically, McCullum now finds himself in charge of all three formats, the very burden that Hesson wanted to relieve Taylor of. But the messy process, and the way it played out in the public, has left Taylor unwilling to tour South Africa, leaving New Zealand without their finest batsman against Dale Steyn and Co, the world’s best attack. It will take some serious man management, and execution of plans, for Hesson to get everyone back on the same page.

Plays from the IPL game between Chennai Super Kings and Pune Warriors in Chennai

Sidharth Monga15-Apr-2013The shot
It is a reverse lap. It is a reverse flick. It is a reverse leg glance, or an off glance if you will. It is Steven Smith up to mischief. It is a huge six. In the last over of Pune Warriors’ innings, Smith switched the stance early, but not the grip. Dwayne Bravo bowled one that would have hit the top of off had Smith not sent it sailing over short third man and some 20 rows behind the boundary. The most incredible part of the shot: it wasn’t a switch hit.The crossing that wasn’t
In the 18th over of the match, Mitchell Marsh cut Bravo in the air and straight to third man, and was so consumed by his disappointment he didn’t bother to even look up. Smith, though, was alert and wanted the strike, but to his chagrin he was the only one making that effort. By the time the catch was taken, Smith had reached within diving distance of the stumps at the strikers’ end, but Marsh hadn’t moved, and the new batsman faced the next delivery.Smith would encounter similar disappointment in the last over when Manish Pandey would refuse to try a single and get bowled when slogging, leaving the new batsman to face a dot ball: no run off the last two balls.The introduction
You know a Twitter joke has overstayed its welcome when it has reached Ravi Shastri, admittedly not an admirer of the micro-blogging site. At the toss, after introducing the captains, he went on to the match referee, “… and not Sir Ravindra, but Rajendra Jadeja.” SMH.The drop
You are a batsman who has not been sent out to bat even though seven others have had a hit. You are unlikely to get a bowl. It’s not quite an evening you are enjoying, and in the second over of your fielding effort you have a sitter coming your way at mid-on and you spill it. M Vijay, the beneficiary of your benevolence, goes on to add 23 more. You are T Suman, and where is the hole you can hide yourself in?

This was expected to be a thrilling match between dominating superstars and everyone’s favourite underdogs in front of a packed, historic ground. Instead, the IPL qualifier was filled with moments of mediocrity

Abhishek Purohit25-May-2013This was a knockout match, a virtual semi-final. Teams that had finished second and third over the course of a 72-game league stage spanning 47 days clashed to decide which of them would take on the top-ranked side. This was expected to be thrilling, cracking Twenty20 cricket between dominating superstars and everyone’s favourite underdogs in front of a packed, historic ground. What we got was an astonishing meltdown by arguably the best T20 bowler in the world, a farce of a fielding effort from Rajasthan Royals and a near-choke of a batting effort from Mumbai Indians.All this was watched by a half-empty Eden Gardens. A week ago, on the day after the first arrests in the spot-fixing controversy had been made, a near-full house turned up at the Uppal Stadium in Hyderabad for the evening’s IPL game. During the past week, cricket has been tested, and continues to be tested, off the field in a way it has seldom been before. All the stress of that scrutiny seemed to have caught up with the game on the field, too, at Eden Gardens. And witnessed by a turnout that spoke volumes with its sparseness, it seemed to just cave in to the pressure.Lasith Malinga bowled such a huge wide down the leg side it made Steve Harmison’s Ashes wide look like a yorker on middle stump. In a premonition of just how poor the night was going to be, incredibly, Malinga slung in another mammoth wide to the fine-leg boundary. He was so shocked he stared at his right hand, the same one that had sent down stump-destroying yorkers on cue through his career. This was a night of shocks all right, off the field, and on it.One would have thought taking 18 runs off the opposition’s most successful bowler would have changed the momentum in favour of Royals. If it had, the Royals players refused to take it with an apologetic display on the field. Before the game, Rahul Dravid, the Royals captain, had said the franchise did not believe in fielding, and bowling, coaches. The Royals owners have never pushed it when it comes to spending money. One wonders if this effort in a high-stakes match would make them rethink their belief.Royals hardly appeared to be on the field. It appeared as if, along with their comfort zone, they had also left behind their fielding skills at home in Jaipur, where they had spent a few days after the spot-fixing arrests. Routine stops were fluffed. Boundaries were conceded when a single or at best a two was on. Backing-up to throws was patchy. Throws were off-target. Fielders did not run in from the deep quickly enough. For three-fourths of the chase, Royals were not able to build any pressure. And when Mumbai Indians created some late anxiety for themselves, Brad Hodge dropped Ambati Rayudu.That it went down to the penultimate ball was due to the inability of Mumbai Indians to shake off the impression that, for all their might, they choke under pressure. They had a start of 70 for 0 in nine overs in a chase of 166. And they had to depend on Harbhajan Singh and Rishi Dhawan to finish it. Wide long-hops and half-volleys on the pads were hit straight to fielders. Mumbai Indians captain Rohit Sharma came in at 125 for 2 with an asking-rate of seven-odd and proceeded to calmly defend ball after ball before missing an awkward slog to get bowled.It was like he had been batting in a parallel universe, ignoring and ignoring a pressing need till he woke up and saw something drastic had to be done, but messed it up in belated haste. Not unlike what was happening outside the ground.This was a match marred by some exceedingly mediocre play, even as surreal drama played out in the corridors of the game’s administration at the same time. After a week of tensions and questions that keep piling up, cricket seemed to tell those who bothered to watch that it was tired. Tired of having to go through what it had, and of what lay in store for it. Tired of still having to put on a show every evening and behave as if nothing had happened. Tired of living in a parallel universe.

The Queensland wicketkeeper Chris Hartley spoke to ESPNcricinfo to discuss Darren Lehmann’s mentoring style and the successful approach he used at Queensland over the past two years

Brydon Coverdale24-Jun-2013Darren is often described as an “old-school” coach. What do people mean by that?
Chris Hartley: To me it’s a ‘keeping it simple’ philosophy that he believes in. He’s very much about the idea that the game is about doing the basics very well – that’s your basic batting, bowling and fielding skills. In saying that, he absolutely believes there’s a role for those extra one-percenters, your homework off the field in terms of your analysis of opposition, all that preparation. He strongly believes in all of that. But at the end of the day it comes down to how you perform out on the field. I think in this generation of professional era of cricket, players are given a lot of information. Sometimes when someone comes along and gives a nice simple clear direction it makes things a lot easier.Presumably he’s the sort of coach you’d be more likely to see giving players verbal advice in the nets rather than sitting at his laptop?
He’s probably more a hands-on guy who’ll work with you in the nets. There’s certainly a place for video analysis and that sort of stuff. Certain players respond to that very well and in that case he’d encourage them to do it. His philosophy is all about teaching the players how to play the game. The best way he believes to do that is to be out there performing the skills. The better players become in terms of understanding their own game, they don’t need to be coached as much. John Buchanan used to say that his role as a coach was to become obsolete. That’s something that Darren would probably agree with. If he’s doing the right things, the players start to know their own game and that coaching side of things will become a lot easier.Is his approach one that has become less common among coaches in the modern era?
I’ve come through in Australian cricket systems in this era when it’s not just about being a cricketer, it’s about fitness programmes and the mental side of things. That’s very common. But as a player sometimes it’s very refreshing to break it all back down into the fundamentals of what the game of cricket is all about, batting, bowling and fielding. That’s something that has never changed over the years and never will. Of course you need to evolve with and use all the different resources available to you but Boof (Lehmann) very much believes it comes down to the contest between bat and ball out on the field.How has he handled the disciplinary side of coaching?
He’s very clear in his directions and very clear in what his expectations are of you as a player and a person and what your role is. When you’re clear on those things, the players then make their own choices and know exactly where they stand. From a formal point of view, our side operated with team rules and team standards that both Darren and the playing group put together. If any player stepped outside that they got penalised. In the Australian side it’s probably going to be a harder thing to keep within the team but if everyone is heading in the right direction you’re hoping that those transgressions aren’t going to be significant anyway. We found that at our level. All of a sudden the transgressions we had were few and far between and were very minor anyway.Have there been times when he has had to pull players back into line?
Yes, there have been a number of occasions. There have been things as simple as the things that got discussed at the Australian level [in India], like wearing the right uniforms or being on time, small things like that, right down to personal issues with players in regard to attitude. But if you’re clear with your players and support staff on what your expectations are and if everyone buys in to that, then all of a sudden everyone is heading in the same direction and a lot of those issues disappear.Chris Hartley: ‘A big key for Boof is having fun and that’s on and off the field. The players in the Queensland side were very clear on what having a good time on and off the field meant’•Getty ImagesHow much of the onus did he place on the senior players to lead by example off field?
Darren spoke with senior players about their role as a senior member of the squad. Part of that was the responsibility to educate other players and direct them and show them what’s an acceptable set of standards. We do have a leadership group that Boof helped to form. It was a peer-voted group, so it was something that everyone bought into straight away. That group is a voice for the players, so if they’ve got an issue with something and they don’t go directly to the coach they can go through the leadership group. The standards that the group wanted to play and train by were very clear and simple from the start.Is it fair to say he was also keen to instill a sense of fun in the playing group?
A big key for Boof is having fun and that’s on and off the field. The players in the Queensland side were very clear on what having a good time on and off the field meant, both to them and to him. It meant that players didn’t feel like they needed to do anything behind closed doors or sneak off and do anything that might go against the team. Everyone understood what was expected and that’s on and off the field. In doing that, some of that intensity or pressure that comes along with playing elite cricket relaxes a little bit. It’s no secret that when players are happy and relaxed they’ll be playing their best cricket.Managing egos is always part of a coach’s job, but will it be tougher for him at international level than at state level?
The fundamentals of that are the same. You get competitive men playing the game who have all got their own opinions, all got their own goals and ideas on what’s the best way for them to go forward. To try to bring everyone together in one direction while you’ve got individuals doing that is a difficult thing. But he has definitely been able to do that in the Queensland squad. He gets to know the players and what makes them tick and then manages them accordingly. One person might need more discipline than another person who manages themselves strictly anyway. That’s always going to be the challenge in any team, it doesn’t matter if that’s at state level or international level.He has been named national coach 16 days before the Ashes – is he the kind of person who can get to know the players well enough in that time?
Because of his position in the game as a player he’s going to have enormous respect from the players immediately. That’s going to help to speed up that process of bringing together a squad. I don’t think he’s necessarily going to be able to perform miracles over the course of one or two weeks. But if he’s given the right amount of time to put in place the things he believes in, I have no doubt he’ll be able to get the Australian team operating as a cohesive unit, and that seems to be something that people from the outside are commenting on, that it seems a little bit disjointed at the moment. That’s one thing he does very well. He’s an excellent communicator and develops the group in a way that brings everyone together. That can only be a good thing for this Australian team.

Plays of the Day from the second ODI between Sri Lanka and New Zealand, in Hambantota

Andrew Fidel Fernando12-Nov-2013The interruption
Rain proved not to be the tropical monsoon’s only disciple in its ongoing war against cricket in Sri Lanka, as a less mundane meteorological phenomenon stopped play and prompted the players’ exit in Hambantota. Dark clouds had gathered over the venue before the match had begun, but around the 20th over, lightning began to strike the forest to the east, about 1.5km from the venue. Spotting a particularly menacing fork, the umpires conferred and led the players off the field, citing concern for their safety. Lightning has also been known to stop play both in Johannesburg and Florida, where lightning detection systems force evacuation from open fields.The shot
Colin Munro’s reputation as a hard-hitter would have preceded him to Sri Lanka, but his opposition might not have guessed at the power he could generate even with his weak arm. Offspinner Sachithra Senanayake bowled with a packed offside field to Munro in the ninth over, and to counter this, on the fourth ball, Munro switched his stance and his grip and slog-swept a length delivery over what should have been deep point for a 75-metre six. He played the shot again two balls later and got four on the bounce.The twice-declined surrender
Tillakaratne Dilshan and Kumar Sangakkara have been difficult to part when they come together in ODIs over the past two years, and even when Dilshan had seemingly made peace with losing his wicket, New Zealand could not break the partnership. Dilshan had struggled to time the ball after Sri Lanka resumed their innings, after the long break, and when he missed a short ball off Andrew Ellis in the last over, he ran some way down the pitch, calling his partner through. But Sangakkara refused the run, leaving Dilshan stranded. Spotting the wicketkeeper’s under-arm throw at the stumps, Dilshan seemingly gave up trying to reclaim his ground, and when the keeper’s throw missed, Ellis ran forward to attempt a dive-throw of his own, which was also wide of the stumps, despite Dilshan’s indifference to getting back into his crease.The double-strike
Nuwan Kulasekara’s inswingers have gained considerable malice in 2013, and despite having to contend with a wet ball, he swung it big again to terrorise New Zealand at the top of the innings. Left-hand batsman Anton Devcich had seen Kulasekara’s first ball swing hard and late away from him, but with the required rate so high, he chased the next one and edged through to the keeper. Perhaps seeing this movement, new man Rob Nicol, a right-hand batsman, waltzed down the pitch hoping to counter it, only for Kulasekara to see him coming and deliver another back-of-a-length inswinger that drew his edge as well.

ESPNcricinfo presents the plays of the day from the second T20 between West Indies and England

ESPNcricinfo staff11-Mar-2014Recall of the dayKrishmar Santokie played the second T20 against Ireland, taking 1 for 12 as West Indies defended 96, but could not make the cut for the first game of this series. However, with Sunil Narine ruled out he got his chance to stake a claim for a starting place in the World T20 and took it with both hands. In his first over he removed Michael Lumb, then in his second a beautiful slower ball deceived Moeen Ali. At the death, after a rain break, he ensured England could not cut loose when he removed the well-set Jos Buttler and added Ravi Bopara.Kick-start of the dayEngland were not going anywhere very quickly, but Buttler and Alex Hales had to try and rebuild the innings from 26 for 3. Then, in the 12th over, Buttler unfurled his scoop shot against Darren Sammy – after two earlier boundaries in the over – and connected so cleanly that it cleared fine leg for six. That over cost 17 and the next cost 16 as England at least found a foothold in the match.Shot of the dayIt does not matter whether you clear the boundary by six inches or find the road outside the ground, the batsman can’t score more than six. Chris Gayle, though, often goes for the latter option and one of his four sixes, when he advanced at James Tredwell, went clear over the roof of the stands at wide long-on and may have come down somewhere in the harbour. The local sages in the press box suggested it was the biggest ever seen at the ground, bigger than when Joel Garner deposited one into the nearby petrol station.Comparison of the dayThe tale of two Powerplays: after six overs England were 30 for 3 while West Indies were 58 for 1. That head start meant that even when their chase was clawed back that enough was in the tank to get over the line. The tactics were opposite too. West Indies used pace off the ball for all six overs, from Santokie and Samuel Badree, whereas England used three overs pace, which cost 34, before turning to Tredwell.

Sri Lanka’s marks out of ten, for the Test series against England

Andrew Fidel Fernando at Headingley25-Jun-20149Angelo Mathews (306 runs at 76.50, 4 wickets at 24.75)
Angelo Mathews’ 160 at Headingley was the stuff of legend•AFPA fighting hundred and a stony rearguard at Lord’s, then the innings of his career at Headingley His 160 is the stuff of legend – the kind of knock that transformed Sri Lanka’s position in the game and lurched them towards their first series win against a top-eight team outside Asia, since 1995. Two other Sri Lanka batsmen have made great hundreds in England – Sidath Wettimuny in 1984 and Mahela Jayawardene in 2006 – but if this series win can kickstart a Sri Lanka resurgence in Tests, Mathews’ innings may be seen as the best of the lot. His bowling was useful as well, and though his captaincy is still a work in progress, there were signs of improvement, particularly at Headingley.8Kumar Sangakkara (342 runs at 85.50)
If ever a Sri Lanka batsman deserves to be called a run machine, it is Sangakkara. In the last few years, his cricket has achieved a clinical excellence that few have managed. He was desperate to have his name on the Lord’s honours board, and was uncompromising with his focus in that innings. He did his part to draw that Test, in the second innings, then hit two fifties to help out at Headingley. Having redressed his poor record in England, he is now undoubtedly on the level of Ponting, Tendulkar, Lara and Kallis. Anyone who argues otherwise is not paying attention.7Shaminda Eranga (11 wickets at 32.45)
Had a poor outing at Lord’s, perhaps thanks to three-month gap between competitive matches, but recovered beautifully to bowl Sri Lanka’s spell of the match in the second innings, one that delayed the England declaration and effectively helped save the game. His unerring second-day toil may be overlooked in years to come, but make no mistake – that is where the match turned for Sri Lanka. They need a long-term pace spearhead. Eranga seems to be the man for the job.Mahela Jayawardene (174 runs at 43.50)
His returns here are too modest to improve his overall away record, but his two fifties came in trying times for Sri Lanka, and as ever, his runs are worth more than most. He was tried with the short ball throughout the series, and often, he took the field and the bowling on. Mathews may be captain on paper, but Jayawardene remains the most obvious on-field marshal. He has also completed more Test catches now than all but two other players.5Kaushal Silva (146 runs at 36.5)
Twin fifties at Lord’s helped further embed Silva in the side, though more would definitely have been expected at Headingley. He left on length as well as line, and played the tightest of all Sri Lanka batsmen in the series. Importantly, as a short opening batsman, he also proved he can handle the bouncer barrages he will no doubt face at this level, all through his career. Sri Lanka will give him a long stint atop the order.Dimuth Karunaratne (127 runs at 31.75)
It is easy to remark that Karunaratne rarely makes high scores or that he has a strange technique for an opening batsman, but 31.75 is hardly an awful average for a rookie Sri Lanka opening batsman, in early-season England. His technique has some way to go, as does his temperament as he approaches a personal landmark, but given he and Silva have combined to give Sri Lanka better starts than they have had in years, Karunaratne deserves a few more series.Shaminda Eranga looks the man to lead Sri Lanka’s pace attack into the foreseeable future•Getty ImagesRangana Herath (8 wickets at 43.87)
Was less impactful on this tour than expected, despite the moderately helpful conditions at Headingley. He was perhaps unlucky not to take a few more wickets, given he beat the edge regularly. Had his best haul in the second innings at Lord’s and smothered the batsmen under pressure while quicker men attacked at the other end. His 47 at Headingley was one of the best knocks by a Sri Lanka tailender in years.4Nuwan Pradeep (6 wickets at 50.83)
His career bowling average of 72.78 continues to provide comic relief, but it is clear he is a much better bowler than that number suggests. Had his best outing on the first day at Lord’s, when he took three wickets, but was guilty of leaking runs at other occasions. Took the crucial wicket of Joe Root on the final day at Headingley, which swung Sri Lanka’s door open just as England’s sixth-wicket pair looked like closing it. His five-ball defiance to seal the draw at Lord’s is already part of cricketing lore.1Lahiru Thirimanne (4 runs at 1)
At times on tour, it seemed like Thirimanne would spontaneously combust if James Anderson shot him a sideways glance. He was out twice to Anderson at Lord’s and made a pair at Headingley. Three of the four balls that dismissed him were terrific deliveries, but Thirimanne will know he cannot use that as an excuse for long. Good Test batsmen see out good balls. He will hope to bounce back strongly against South Africa.One Test7Dhammika Prasad (6 wickets at 20.83)
Few would ever have imagined a five-wicket haul from Prasad would seal a famous victory in England, but his fourth-evening spell was pure mayhem. Prasad bowled with the pace and intensity he had been picked for and offered a hit-the-deck option for the attack. He will also have earned a place in the squads for Sri Lanka’s home Tests.5Dinesh Chandimal (52 runs at 26, 4 catches)
Kept well until the late stages of the Headingley Test, and had good energy throughout the toilsome second day in the field. His 47 hinted at his ability against fast bowling, on bouncy pitches, but falling to the leg trap on day four was a low point.4Prasanna Jayawardene (14 runs at 7, 4 catches)
Had a poor Test behind the stumps at Lord’s, but many keepers do. Was out to a good catch in the first innings and dug in admirably alongside Mathews in the second, broken finger and all.3 Nuwan Kulasekara (2 wickets at 74)
Threatened at Lord’s with the new ball, but was largely toothless when conditions were flat. Could have supported the wicket-takers at the other end with tighter spells, as well.