Make Time For Sports.
cricket
Ian Chappell: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
English: Image of Australian cricketer Ian Chappell. Courtesy of the National Archive of Australia. The NAA has given permission for the image to be used under the GDFL license. Confirmation of this permission has been sent to the OTRS system. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Ian Chappell raises his index finger to doctored pitches and biased adjudicating.
What he said:
“The players need to be careful where tit-for-tat pitch preparation might lead.'”
Ian Chappell is not keen on cricketers’ insistence on having wickets that suit them in home series. The former Australian skipper was responding to Shane Watson’s desire for bouncy pitches in the upcoming series against India.
Shane Watson (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Watson said:
“We are hopeful that the groundsmen are going to make the grounds very conducive to what we do, because in India they certainly make sure the conditions are favourable to them.”
Chappell, writing in his column, commented:
“I was reminded of two things when I read that quote. The first was a story told by Tony Greig about playing first-class cricket in South Africa.
It was at a time when umpires were appointed by the local association and the standard had dipped alarmingly. Greig described how the Western Province players would tell their local umpires to ‘send off’ the Transvaal batsmen because that was the treatment they received when playing in Johannesburg. In the end the situation became so dire the players declared a moratorium and agreed to ‘walk’ when they knew they were out.
That situation didn’t last long and soon chaos reigned.
The other was a comment concerning players who decide an umpire is either weak or incompetent and the team agrees to ‘appeal for everything’. Those teams are often the first to complain when the umpiring in a match is below standard. Hence the often-heard and eminently true comment: ‘Beware you don’t get the umpiring you deserve.’
The same could apply to pitches if players are going to start demanding retribution from the home curators.”
Chappell added:
“I’d go one step further and say that as captain, if I’d asked any Australian curator for a certain type of pitch, the answer would have been: ‘Get stuffed. I’ll prepare the pitch, you play on it.'”
What he really meant:
“Tit-for-tat reactions will create a dysfunctional relationship and ruin the ethos of the sport. It also breeds one-dimensional cricketers who cannot adapt to different situations and conditions. It’s not going to produce great cricketers, but home-grown bully boys.”
What he definitely didn’t:
“How about a tit for two tats instead? Also, you ought to keep in mind that if Team India fold in three days or less, Cricket Australia will lose out on all that gate money and television revenue.”
Ijaz Butt: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Ijaz Butt has a seaside catch in Shahid Afridi.
What he said:
“Misbah is an innocent captain, if someone else given the statement over captaincy, he will be thrown in the sea.”
Ijaz Butt renews his feud with Shahid Afridi taking umbrage at the all-rounder’s statements about Misbah-ul-Haq’s captaincy. The remarks sparked speculation that the 40-year-old will step down as skipper for the World Cup given his recent run of low scores.
Afridi said:
“Every captain has his own approach and I can’t be Misbah and Misbah can’t be Afridi. If he is comfortable with his approach then what is the problem? But players around him should not become Misbah. Each player has his own strengths and he should carry out what he is capable of rather than suppressing himself.
If he [Misbah] is winning matches with his approach then what is the problem? I am different and have an aggressive nature. I love to play aggressive cricket because people in my country are aggressive, my players are aggressive and I want them to play aggressive cricket. I love watching them playing aggressive in the field. I know when they play aggressive cricket, they are expressing themselves.”
Shahid Afridi during Pakistan’s tour of New Zealand in December 2010. Scorecard. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
He added:
“Earlier, the time and the atmosphere was different after the spot-fixing. It was tough to gel the dressing room but I treated every player accordingly; younger were given affection and some needed to be given fear of the stick. You know our nation runs on the strength of a stick.
But captaincy in Pakistan is a challenge. I was aggressive even off the field. It haunted my earlier stint. I have learnt the lesson though; things should be operated amicably. But my mindset in the field is the same as a leader is the one who should decide the playing XI, he is the one who has to get his boys to fight on the ground. He knows what he wants and he is the one who has to face everything after the match. Whoever is the captain, he should be given ample authority to pick his best players.”
The stick Afridi refers to was very much in evidence when the controversial and temperamental talent recanted his criticism of Misbah.
He clarified later in a statement issued by the Pakistani Cricket Board (PCB):
“Let me state at the very outset, Misbah is the best choice as Pakistan captain for the ICC World Cup 2015. I have always backed him to the optimum whenever I have played under him, just as he had when I had the honour to captain the Pakistan team.
I have said this before, and I reiterate, that I shall continue to serve Pakistan Cricket and fully support Misbah to the best of my ability.
This is my final statement on the issue.”
Ijaz Butt was PCB chief when Afridi was sacked as captain of the T20 and ODI sides in 2011 on disciplinary grounds.
What Butt really meant:
“I don’t really like Shahid Afridi. I like Misbah. He’s a lamb. Afridi’s a shark. He should be thrown back into the ocean.”
What he definitely didn’t:
“You know that we can’t let Afridi go, at least, not until the World Cup’s over. So…”
Virat Kohli: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Virat Kohli does not mind being repeatedly out.
What he said:
“For me it doesn’t matter if I get out playing the same shot again and again, at least I am feeling clear and confident in the mind.”
Virat Kohli is back to his usual cocky self on recovering some semblance of form against the West Indies with a somewhat laboured fifty in the second ODI.
What he really meant:
“I could always eschew the shot, you know. At least, I’m not playing and missing. And hell, my batting’s sure missed by the team and the fans.”
What he definitely didn’t:
“Just like it doesn’t matter to me that the arm-chair critics keep harping on my relationship with Anushka Sharma. I am clear and confident in my mind about her.”
English: Anushka Sharma at a Band Baaja Baaraat press event (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Saqlain Mushtaq: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Saqlain Mushtaq is on terra firma with regards to the art of spin bowling.
What he said:
“Why not? A person is made of this earth, which has not been discovered completely yet.”
Saqlain Mushtaq is confident that the doosra—the off-spinner’s googly—can be bowled legally without flexing one’s elbow beyond the stipulated limit of 15 degrees permitted by the ICC.
Mushtaq said:
“I have always believed you can definitely bowl it with a legitimate action, working on various aspects of your body. You can bowl the doosra with your fingers, wrist, elbow, shoulder and you can even get it right with your foot positioning. Every individual has his own physique. If you don’t have strong shoulders you can execute it through you wrist and fingers and use elbow to bowl a faster one. In either case you have to have strong control over your wrist and ensure it doesn’t collapse. And without the kink you can safely bowl a doosra within the permitted flex.”
Mushtaq additionally believes that a new mystery ball can always be devised and added to the craft of spin bowling.
He said:
“Why not? A person is made of this earth, which has not been discovered completely yet. So when you start thinking and start experiencing deeply, then you start experimenting. And then what you produce, that is a real invention.”
What he really meant:
“Ashes to ashes, dust to dust and God created man from clay. The earth and specially the seas have not been fully explored. And who knows what elements may still be discovered? Necessity is the mother of invention. We sub-continental chaps are about jugaad, my friend. We’ll make do somehow, 15 degrees or less.”
What he definitely didn’t:
“And Muttiah Muralidharan is made of plasticine.”
Anil Kumble: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Anil Kumble defaulted to skipper status.
What he said:
“‘ok, Anil is the only guy and let’s give it to him’.”
Anil Kumble tells a tale of his ascendancy to the most exalted position in Indian cricket—the captaincy of the national side.
Kumble said:
“I became captain after representing India for 17 years, so, probably, I became captain by default… Because nobody else wanted it..
Rahul Dravid had just given up the captaincy and at that time, it was probably too early for (Mahendra Singh) Dhoni to step in as the Test captain… Sachin (Tendulkar) also did not want it… So they looked around and said ‘ok, Anil is the only guy and let’s give it to him’.”
What he really meant:
“I was the only one in the Fab Five (Sachin, Saurav, Laxman, Kumble and Dravid) willing to take up the onus of leading the country. I got it not because they felt I was the most deserving candidate but because they felt they could not risk putting Dhoni in the hot seat for a tour of Australia right then. It was way too early and he could have fizzled out given the additional pressure. At least, that was the opinion of the then bigwigs (selection committee).”
What he definitely didn’t:
“I wanted it, though, oh , how I wanted it. And I made it mine and how. Success—thy name is desire.”
Michael Kasprowicz: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Michael Kasprowicz does know what pressure is.
What he said:
“What pressure does to you is make you doubt your skills.”
Former Australian fast bowler, Michael Kasprowicz, draws upon his cricketing acumen to chart up success in the business world. Kasprowicz is an MBA from the University of Queensland Business School in Brisbane and now Managing Director of advisory business, Venture India, which promotes business relations for Australian companies in India.
Kasprowicz said:
“I was first picked for Queensland at the age of 17, and had a cricketing career of 19 years. Throughout my career, I never looked for the easy option. I wanted to test myself out in something entirely different; hence I went and did the MBA.”
Kasprowicz adds:
“What I learnt from my career is something I’ll classify in my own 4 Ps—perceptions, dealing with pressure, appreciating that there’s pain and most importantly, possession, the thought that you are in charge of your own journey. In cricket, there are uncontrollables that can always influence decisions—the weather, the pitch, umpiring decisions. It doesn’t matter how well you prepare, quite often, they can dictate or change the result. That lesson in itself is the most important thing, because of the ownership of your journey, you’re not relying on anyone else. You can take control of what you’re doing.”
The pacer believes in adapting his skills to suit the conditions.
He said:
“In 2004, (when Australia won a Test series in India after 32 years), we sat down as a bowling group and decided that we had to change it around a bit. We could not be doing what we did at home and expect to do well as a unit. Businesses come to India and think what they’ve been doing normally would work here in India too. That’s not arrogance as much as it is naivety. You have to be flexible, adjustable and adaptable to the market here and also see what the consumers want.”
So how does Kasprowicz deal with losses?
He says:
“I’ll go back to my Ps, and this time deal with pressure. What pressure does to you is make you doubt your skills. When all of a sudden an organization or cricket association goes through a few losses, it’s almost like a major GFC (global financial crisis) where everyone starts doubting their skills and questions the way they’re doing it. From a sporting background, whenever you have a few losses, we have a performance review. It’s important to go back and draw the straw man again.
I know the Australians get a bad tag for being sledgers, but all that, when you break it down, is to make someone not think about the ball that’s coming down and to doubt their skills, that’s all there is. There are other ways to make them doubt their skills—through field placements or the Three Card Trick (keep a deep-square leg, making the batsman anticipate a short ball, when the bowler delivers a fuller ball). When you’re under pressure, when you’re having a few losses, trust your skills—the ones that got you there, and the ones you’re the best at, but also have the conviction to adjust those skills to suit the conditions.”
What he really meant:
“When you’re under pressure, you tend to doubt yourself and wonder if you should be doing things differently. If the skills are not ingrained, you tend to revert to older, more tried-and-tested methods instead of continuing with the newly learnt skills. That’s what pressure does, that’s what questioning yourself does to you.”
What he definitely didn’t:
“Pressure causes some people to shut down. And brings out the best in others. How’s that for a cliché? Or would you rather prefer, when the going gets tough, the tough get going.Over to you, Ravi (Shastri). “
Darrell Hair: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Darrell Hair thinks its hairy that Saeed Ajmal could bowl at 45 degrees or more for so long.
What he said:
“Well, every man and his dog would have known that.”
Darrell Hair is bemused with the recent crackdown on illegal bowling actions launched by the ICC.
The Australian umpire, who famously called Murali Muralitharan in 1995, said:
“Whatever they’re doing now, they’re doing 20 years too late. They had a chance in 1995 to clean things up and it’s taken them 19 years to finally come back and say they want chuckers out of the game. I can’t believe that Saaed Ajmal has been able to bowl as long as he has, and they say he is bending his arm by 45 degrees [the legal limit is 15 degrees] or something. Well, every man and his dog would have known that.
I suppose what it does show is the general weakness of the umpires over time to do anything about it.”
He added:
“People say ‘you should be happy with the way things turned out’…with the chuckers being weeded out. But it doesn’t give me any personal satisfaction whatsoever. All I was doing at any time was just doing my job and I think I did it to the best of my ability. The fact was that no other ICC umpires were willing to have a go. Ross Emerson was very adamant about his thoughts about chuckers but they soon put him into the background.
I suppose I was lucky I had a few games under my belt so they didn’t want to target me, but they certainly got him out of the way fairly swiftly. It’ll be interesting to see how many umpires are brave enough to get involved in it. I said it in the late ’90s that if something wasn’t done about it you’d have a generation of chuckers on your hands and now you have. They try to emulate Harbajan Singh and Saqlain Mushtaq and Murali and that’s the problem. The crackdown should have happened on those players and the ICC should have let it be known that it wasn’t acceptable.”
ICC general manager of cricket operations, Geoff Allardice, believes the game has reached a tipping point on this issue.
He said:
“The game had reached a tipping point on this issue, when many groups within the game felt that there were too many bowlers with suspect actions operating in international cricket.The most prominent of these groups was the ICC Cricket Committee at its meeting in June, when it observed the ICC’s reporting and testing procedures were not adequately scrutinising these bowlers. They weren’t the only ones talking about this issue, as similar views had been expressed by teams, players, umpires, referees and administrators.
Since that time the umpires have felt more confident to report their concerns with certain bowlers, and their concerns have been supported by the results of the testing of these reported bowlers.”
In India, the irrepressible Bishan Singh Bedi could not resist firing a few salvoes of his own at his favourite peeve.
He said:
“I would like to see what happens to Bhajji (Harbhajan Singh) and Pragyan Ojha, now that umpires are reporting bowlers for throwing and action is being taken against them.”
Bedi added:
“The rectification had to come from the establishment.It’s no doubt late, but better late than never.”
On the timing of the clampdown:
“Timing doesn’t matter for goodness. It was ugly to watch chuckers floating around – someone throwing javelin, some shot put and others darts.”
What Darrell Hair really meant:
“If you know it, your best friend knows it.Besides, should the umpire be looking at the bowler’s arm or at the batsman? How do umpires measure the angle with the naked eye? Trained dogs, perhaps? Something like sniffer dogs, eh? Can we umpires have compasses please?”
What he definitely didn’t:
“I knew it and I was labelled a dog for it, wasn’t I?
Kevin Pietersen: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Kevin Pietersen is utterly professional.
What he said:
“The IPL is professionalism taken to its logical extreme. All the bullshit and hypocrisy have been turned off.”
Kevin Pietersen has extremely positive things to say about Indian cricketer, Rahul Dravid, and the Indian Premier League (IPL) in his autobiography, ‘KP: The Autobiography’.
Pietersen writes:
“Rahul was a great and heroic Indian batsman in his day. He is also a genius at dealing with spin bowlers. Our conversations and emails were a private masterclass from a genuine guru.
Rahul improved my cricket and helped me develop the way I think about the game. His generosity will stay with me always.”
Rahul Dravid, the former captain of the Indian cricket team also represents Karnataka in the Ranji Trophy (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Dravid emailed him thus:
“KP, you are a really good player, you need to watch the ball and trust yourself… Don’t let anyone tell you that you can’t play spin, I have seen you and you can!”
KP says:
“My playing of spin has gone up a number of levels since I’ve spent time in the IPL, and in particular, since I’ve spoken to Rahul Dravid…In England, batsmen get taught to play with the spin against spin bowlers. In India, the best players of spin get taught to play against it.”
On the IPL:
“The IPL is the future… I could talk about money and the IPL all day to you, but for the friendships alone I would play for free.
I’ve built all my relationships with foreign cricketers while in the IPL. That doesn’t help in the England dressing room… there are not many of those friendships.
There is a culture in India that appreciates if you double down and go for the big shot. It’s a game of cricket, not economics. Not life or death. Take a risk. IPL crowds don’t want to see you batting out singles as you pick and choose which balls to hit. Life is too short.”
What Pietersen really meant:
“All the bullshit and hypocrisy is turned off. Including mine. Or is that especially mine?”
What he definitely didn’t:
“The IPL players, coaches and specially the co-owners are professional in all respects, even the betting. Oye Sressanth, tell them.”
Brad Haddin: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Brad Haddin and his team-mates have fast breakfasts.
What he said:
“Guys are up there trying to eat their breakfasts quicker than each other now.”
Brad Haddin makes no apologies for his rabid behaviour towards Pakistani batsman Ahmed Shehzad in a Twenty20 clash in Dubai. The Australian keeper bluntly told Shehzad to stay out of the path of a ball. This was in response to Shehzad handling a throw from an Australian fielder.
Haddin said:
“I don’t know why he touched the ball.It’s not his place to touch the ball when we’re fielding.”
Haddin added:
“We haven’t changed our style. We’re a very competitive group.”
What he really meant:
“We’re very competitive. We even race each other to the loo and back.”
What he definitely didn’t:
“Now if we could only stop trying to get back to the pavilion faster than the previous guy…”
Geoffrey Boycott: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t
Geoffrey Boycott bats for Kevin Pietersen with both eyes wide open.
What he said:
“But all diamonds are flawed. They are not perfect and you have to learn to love and nurture a diamond.”
Geoffrey Boycott , in Kevin Pietersen’s defense, likens the South African born cricketer to a solitaire.
He said:
“I am not blindly sticking up for Kevin. But most very talented sportsmen are like diamonds. They sparkle and glitter and light up the game. They catch the eye and enchant the public. But all diamonds are flawed. They are not perfect and you have to learn to love and nurture a diamond. They have not done that with Kevin.”
The Yorkshire man is disgusted with the way the English Cricket Board sought to discredit Pietersen’s outbursts about the bullying culture within the English team by leaking a confidential document outlining his indiscretions to the media.
Kevin Pietersen after training at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Boycott writes:
“Kevin is a sinner but he has been sinned against by the ECB. There are rights and wrongs on both sides and whatever Pietersen’s faults, the ECB is not blameless.
For me, it reached its lowest point on Tuesday when a ‘strictly confidential’ ECB document was leaked to the media. The points it contained were pathetic and it was a crass idea to put together such a report to try to trash Kevin. It stinks.”
He adds:
“Yes Kevin was awkward, difficult, different and at times his own worst enemy. But his record and his performances do not deserve a character assassination. The ECB should be dignified about it all and not try to belittle him.
I hope the ECB is investigating how one of its confidential documents reached the public domain. If it discovers someone within the ECB leaked it then they should get the sack. If nobody is sacked then we can only assume that the ECB was happy or even complicit with the document being leaked in order to denigrate Kevin.
Some of the points contained in this document are so trivial it beggars belief. He had rows with the captain and coach about the way the team were performing, that sort of thing has gone on forever. It is OK if it happens within the confines of the dressing room. You are supposed to have open discussion in the dressing room and get things off your chest. In fact, the way we played in Australia, I would have said some far worse things to my team-mates if I was still playing.
Another claim is he took some younger players out for a drink in Adelaide. Give me a break – drinking has always gone on and that should not be dignified with a reply. It was only last year after a drinking session we had England players peeing on the Oval pitch after an Ashes win and the ECB or Andy Flower did nothing about it. We had Andrew Flintoff full of drink and trying to ride a pedalo in the West Indies but it did not finish his career. We had Joe Root drinking in the early hours of the morning when he was attacked by David Warner during the Champions Trophy last year. On the field James Anderson uses personal abuse every Test and nothing has been done about it.
The report also claims Kevin looked at his watch and out the window during team meetings. He was probably bored to death. I am sorry but the ECB is making itself look like a laughing stock.”
Boycott claims that he is no stranger to blackballing tactics elaborating thus:
“The Yorkshire committee tried to do the same thing to me when they had an ‘in-depth investigation’ into why we were not winning championships. They tried to blame me for everything. They even got a tea lady at Warwickshire to write a letter of complaint saying I had taken the crusts off my sandwiches which had upset her.”
Geoffrey Boycott, however, does not mince words when he says that he found the ace bat sometimes displaying an insouciant nonchalance and lack of commitment to the national side.
He said:
“This is not a one-eyed support for Kevin from me but a defence of fair play. There is no excuse for some of his stupid shots when England were in trouble. He gave the impression, rightly or wrongly, that he could not care less. There was also no excuse for KP constantly agitating to play a full IPL season to earn his $2 million for eight weeks’ work. England compromised and allowed him half that but told him he had to be back for the first Test of the summer. England were right on that. He had been given an opportunity to play for England and he was contracted to the ECB on good money. Do not forget, his IPL deals only came about because he had been given the chance to showcase his talents by England.
Kevin wanted the penny and the bun. He did not want to give up anything.”
What he really meant:
“Diamonds are forever. But you have to know how to wear them and camouflage the flaws.”
What he definitely didn’t:
“You do know Pietersen’s originally South African? See, how I’m being clever here with the metaphor.”
Number of readers subscribed
Read it on Apple News
Read it on Apple News
Stat Counter
Sports, Health and Exercise
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Make Time For Sports. 