Aussies new and old guard

As always, there's speculation about the retirement or a clamour for dropping of elder players when they're not performing. And Ricky Ponting's not performing - no doubt about it. There's been plenty of pieces like this one on All Out Cricket by Reverse Sweep's David Green that push the point that the current Test v South Africa needs to be Ponting's last. Another on Cricinfo suggests it's "Time for Ponting to Walk".

But equally, even the detractors recognise that the prolonged slumps of the likes of the great Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid, along with Mike Hussey, have all ended with run gluts. Who is to say that Ponting won't help Australia to a glorious win batting in the 4th innings at the Wanderers v South Africa tomorrow? Personally I think Ponting has more Test cricket in him and without anyone obvious to come in to replace him, I'd expect him to be given at least another series (at home) to regain his form. Not only is he a class fielder, but opposition team's fear him in a way they don't fear David Warner or Usman Khawaja.

What about Gautam Ghambir - do you see him as at risk of being dropped and slipping into Test match obscurity? No, I doubt it. And yet Ponting and Ghambir's recent records are very similar as this piece points out. Ponting deserves an extended period playing under Clarke.

On the other side of the coin, Pat Cummins looks a fantastic prospect. Sky keep replaying the ball that hit Kallis' gloves shortly before he then fenced at one outside off stump and was caught at first slip...it was a good ball, but Cummins will probably admit that the ball lept from short of a length at Kallis' chest. Quite rightly, Kallis didn't expect the ball to bounce that much. But nonetheless, the 18 year-old Cummins took the wicket of a true great of the game and it will surely one of several hundreds by the time his career ends, if he can stay injury free.

If Australia have a batsman as good as Cummins is a bowler in the wings, then they should drop the weakest batsman. If that's Ponting, then that's Ponting. But for now they don't so it will be interesting to see if the chat about Ponting's form becomes a self-fulfilling proficy, or if he comes through and dominates again as Hussey did very recently.

The Australian's and journalists piling the pressure on their best batsman since Bradman seem to have very short memories.

Kohli ready to replace Dravid

Virat Kohli claims to be ready to replace Rahul Dravid in India's Test side....it will be interesting to see how Duncan Fletcher and MS Dhoni handle the retirements of some top players over the next few years.

Dravid avoids World Cup euphoria

No doubt Rahul Dravid could have been at home in India earning loads of money for commentating or writing about the World Cup. Instead, he's left the country altogether to go and play for the MCC in Dubai and score the match-defining century that helped win the match for MCC. He'll be fighting hard for his international Test place but having seen Virat Kohli bat in the World Cup he could be struggling. Both Kohli and Raina are nipping at his heels but to me Kohli looks the classier player, especially in relation to Test cricket as he looks like he has the tighter technique. And of course Yuvraj has been revitalised by this World Cup.

An Indian Test line up of Sehwag, Gambhir, Kohli, Tendulkar, Laxman, Yuvraj, Dhoni gives extra bowling options and would strike fear into all opposition bowling attacks....Dravid has his work cut out but he's going about fighting for his place in the right way.

Age on Ponting's side

I was amazed to read that Peter English believes that Ricky Ponting has played his last Test for Australia. Although it would not be the norm for an Australian ex-captain to continue as a player, if Ponting is sacked as skipper it would be in Australia's best interests to retain him as a player. The fact that Australia's next Test after Sydney isn't until August shouldn't impact that at all - Ponting will still be a few months off 37.

He hasn't scored runs in the Ashes and those wanting to force him out will point out that he's been struggling for a while. By his standards he has - rather than the lofty standards of his career average of 53.5, he averaged 45 I read over the 12 months leading up to the Ashes. If Australia have 6 batsmen who can average 45 in Test cricket and are equally good in the field, both at slip and diving around in the covers, then indeed they should drop him. They don't though!

It would be interesting to think about the Indian batsmen reaching the end of their careers when considering Ponting's position. Laxman is the closest to Ponting's age, although still older, and has just played the match-winning knock against South Africa. Tendulkar was ICC player of the year last year by some distance and has just scored his 50th Test hundred. Only Dravid, who is the oldest and like Tendulkar is closer to 38 than 37, could be described as a qualified success, having struggled a bit with the bat recently but taking a brilliant 200th Test catch in his last match.

The likes of Khawaja need to find their way in Test cricket with the likes of Hussey and Ponting around them - time will tell if the Australian selectors agree. With Ponting only about 3 months older than Hussey it would be a strange decision to have one rule for Ponting and another for Hussey.

Pure class from Dravid

Those of you who have to fight for control over the TV channel you're watching might sympathise with the fact that I saw 2 minutes of the highlights from India v New Zealand this evening, as that was approximately the length of time required for the adverts during Coronation Street!

But that was long enough for me to see one of the best cover drives I've ever seen from Dravid....it oozed class. Not quite past it just yet, despite what some (ill informed) observers might claim.

Dravid is human...

Rahul Dravid was brought down to earth yesterday having drawn level with Don Bradman on 29 centuries, as the second new ball proved troublesome. A ball from Shahadat Hossain broke his cheekbone or jaw (depending on which report you read!)and Dravid is now in doubt for the February South Africa series. That's huge, as India will be wanting to prove that they are the number 1 Test side in the world.

And of course in the same game, Tendulkar reached 90 international hundreds - an even 45 in Tests and 45 in ODIs. Now that's pretty special and there's no doubt that India's first choice top 7 is one of the best ever, if not the best ever.

Another view on Tendulkar

I'm a big fan of Tendulkar, but I'm also a fan of cutting through the crap and looking at relevant/fair stats. So this article from Australia that claims to use stats to show why Tendulkar is over-rated interested me. You can make up your own mind on the relative merits of Tendulkar v the likes of Ponting, Dravid, Kallis, Jayawardene and Sangakkara.

It does seem that India needs to look at their wickets if they want to make Test cricket more of a contest between bat and ball - as they pile on a huge score again v Sri Lanka (they're currently 600-4) it's interesting to note that all of India's top 4 average 50 or more. Sehwag averages 50, Dravid 53, Gambhir 54 and Tendulkar 55.

I think Tendulkar would make my world team.

Batting for your life

England need to bat for 3 sessions (subject to weather) today with 8 wickets in hand so real dedication is needed. We have Pietersen first up so all we can hope with him is that he scores enough that when he's out we're past Australia's total - I don't think telling him to defend would be helpful. England's top 2 I'd want batting for my life would be Strauss and Collingwood, if runs were not important.

Interesting then to see some New Zealander's talk about who they'd want batting for their life. Tendulkar, Dravid, Chanderpaul, Yousuf and Sangakkara all seem to make it.

Surprise resignation by Dravid

This really is a shock (to me at least, but I think everyone). India have just beaten England away and now have the Aussies coming - the biggest challenge of them all. What could have happened to make Dravid want to step down? The media pressure for the Indian cricket captain is probably more intense than any other role in world sport, but he would have known that when he took the job on. Perhaps it was his relative failings with the bat, but he's still an absolutely certain pick in the Indian team so it wasn't like his place was under pressure.

There must be some (not unusual) internal machinations going on within the Indian camp - Ganguly to reclaim the captaincy anyone?

Dravid doesn't advocate further use of technology

Following from another day of controversial decisions at Lords, most notably the wrong decision to give out Sachin Tendulkar caught behind (see wrong decisions) on what was probably his last international appearance in England, Rahul Dravid has said that he's not in favour of using technology beyond line calls.

Perhaps he feels a little embarrassed about the fact that he clearly thought he wasn't out, but "snicko" subsequently proved that he was. This to me just goes to show how important it is that technology is used - even the most honest of players can mistakenly think they haven't hit it, so you can't rely on them walking.

I don't know about any Cricket Burble readers, but I've always walked when I know I've hit it (once when no-one from the opposition appealed!), but I have also stood there for two caught behinds where I was convinced that I hadn't hit the ball, only to be given out. While at club level there is no technology to prove things either way, the suggestions from many of the 21 other players in the matches involved made me question whether a batsman can always feel a nick. The Dravid decision proves that conclusively, so it's yet another argument for the use of technology in my book....

(Incidentally, can anyone tell me whether Uthappa was caught behind and not given? I heard he might have been but can't find conclusive evidence to add it to the growing lost of wrong decisions).

"Our spinners worked beautifully for us"

There's nothing more for me to add to the captain's quotes following the game.

Dravid said of his spinners: "They did me proud. We knew it was a gamble playing them, but they way they contained their batsmen in the middle overs won us the game.

"We played some good cricket, but our spinners worked beautifully for us."

And Collingwood: "We thought we'd go with the four big lads, but maybe 320-odd was too many for us."

Getting your best fielders in the right place

I'm a bit bemused by Dravid's comment in this article talking about the relative fielding standards of India and England. OK, so India aren't the best fielding side in the world, but it now seems that they aren't fit enough to move into the positions they need to be in when there is a left-hand/right-hand partnership according to Dravid. "Ideally you want the right fielder in the right places. But if you have a left-hander and a right-hander, and someone's standing for the sweep, he's got to come to point after that. I can't move a player from boundary to boundary after every ball."

Now I'm not suggesting that players should run boundary to boundary every ball, but he doesn't have to come to point - just anywhere other than the opposite boundary. When it matters players should be capable of moving long distances between balls - after all they are professional athletes. I remember watching the Australians at Edgbaston in the World Cup over here and being amazed at how far some of the players ran between balls when there was a left/right partnership. I remember Ponting and Riefel seemed to be running miles particularly; Ponting because he was a crucial in-fielder, and Riefel because Waugh was trying to hide him. But they did so for what seemed like ages (sorry I can't remember how long) uncomplainingly - or so it seemed - because they knew it was in the best interests of the team.

Mind you, in a recent club game I pointed out to our best fielder that he was rather wasted on the boundary to the left-hander after he'd refused our skipper's request to come into the ring. "I'm not here for a fitness session" was his short answer (I have spared you the accompanying swear word). And that was only a 20 metre amble required between balls. I wonder if Ganguly uses the exact same expression when Dravid asks him to move each ball?!

Tendulkar criticised

Much as I hate to even mention the pointless extra games that have been scheduled in Ireland, South Africa won in the final over today, chasing down India's 242. For India Tendulkar opened and scored 99 off 143 balls which has lead to criticism of his scoring rate, not for the first time.

It reminds me of the England New Zealand game in the final group stage of the Commonwealth Bank game in Australia, where Fleming scored 106 off 149 balls and New Zealand came up 14 runs short. The Kiwi media were clear that their skipper was part of the problem rather than the opposite opinion which could have been argued - that he held the innings together.

Tendulkar seems to be getting similar flack. Dravid came in at 4 and the two of them rebuilt the innings after two early wickets so both can be forgiven for scoring slowly - Dravid scoring 74 off 93. I can't help feeling that India are still struggling to understand each player's role in the team - for me Dravid must bat 3 for India or not play. If you look around at the number 4's around the world in ODIs they tend to be free flowing batsman. So Tendulkar did bat slowly, yes, but I don't think he should get all the blame. Dravid needs to step up to 3 and lead from the front.

Dravid at 3

Interesting to hear Daryll Cullinan agreeing that Rahul Dravid should bat 3 for India in one-dayers. He averages 48 from 5 as opposed to 40 regardless of his batting position, but 5 just isn't right for him.

As we burbled about a couple of days ago, the Wall is better off going in at 3 unless the 1st wicket doesn't fall until the second half of the innings. That way he can be the player that all the others play around, and during power-plays he can take advantage without any aerial shots because of his class....

The Wall to bat 3

Rahul Dravid should bat 3 for India - it's as simple as that. Unless the first wicket doesn't fall for 25 or more overs, which creates a case for Dhoni to be sent in. Dravid would give the innings someone for the others to bat around, and it makes the most of his talents. If you are going to bat him at 5 is there really much point him being in the team?

England about to make the same mistake as India

It seems, according to all press reports, that England are about to appoint Andrew Strauss as captain when Michael Vaughan doesn't recover in time from his broken finger to lead the team in the 1st Test against the West Indies at Lords. As discussed a few days ago on Cricket Burble (England Captaincy Candidates), Strauss needs to concentrate on getting runs under his belt to cement his place in the side after a very unlucky series in Australia that saw hm wrongly given out 3 times in a row in the 2nd and 3rd tests. And perhaps he's just too much of a nice guy to lead England?

Geoffrey Boycott's recent comments on Indian skipper Rahul Dravid are interesting, "Rahul Dravid is a superb batsman, a lovely lad who nobody dislikes but he needs to stand up and take charge. he is not a born leader. A strong leader is a must. india's best period in recent years has been with a strong captain Ganguly, and a nice man behind the scenes in John Wright. They complemented each other."

It would be interesting to hear what Geoffrey thinks about Strauss if he leads England out at Lords.