"Sachin Tendulkar has an unblemished record as a person" © AFP

Akhila Ranganna: Hello and welcome to Bowl at Boycs. I am joined by Geoffrey Boycott to answer the questions that have come in for him.

The first one is from Jonathan Green from London, who asks: how do you see England's tour of South Africa shaping up? They beat South Africa in the Tests and were humbled in the ODIs the last time they toured the country for a full series. What are their prospects this time?

Geoffrey Boycott: Well, if everybody was fit, you would say the South African team looks a little bit stronger. I think both sides are stronger in batting than bowling. Things have happened that you can't foresee, with quite a few injuries. England can't get Stuart Broad into the action and Graeme Swann has an injury, but it's South Africa who have the biggest problem. We just heard the other day that Jacques Kallis has damaged a rib badly. He won't play in any of the one-dayers, and if he plays in the first Test he won't be able to bowl. Now that is huge. That is almost bigger than anything to do with England because Kallis adds balance to their team. Whether people know it or like it, he's a wonderful batsman - I put him equal with Ricky Ponting as my player of this decade. But he has actually got about 250 Test wickets and he is really their allrounder.

They have got the same problem as England. Do they play six batsmen and go in with six bowlers, or do they gamble a bit more? Which side is going gamble and go with five bowlers - because no matter how well you bat, if you can't bowl sides out and get 20 wickets, you won't win a match. I think South Africa have more depth in their batting. England have Andrew Strauss, who is batting well, and if the ball swings a bit then James Anderson can be a match-winner. Graeme Smith is an important player for South Africa and Dale Steyn is an important bowler. So both sides have one bowler and one batsman who will be crucial.

But at the same time it has swung a little back in England's favour with them doing quite well. I thought South Africa were a little bit stronger, but with all these injuries it is England who have got off to a really good start. They are playing as a team and their confidence is high; they are winning matches, including their practice games. I think South Africa have got their work cut out. If you would have asked me two or three months ago, I would have said South Africa were definitely favourites. Not so easy now.

AR: Andrew from Ireland says that West Indies have had their star players return to the side for the tour of Australia. While they will be able to compete better, what are their chances? Do they have the capability to pull off the odd upset?

GB: Anything is possible in sport and when you get a two-horse race any bookie can tell you that the favourite horse can fall down and the other one can win. But I honestly think that West Indies have a lot of improving to do. They have got some very good players, but in two series against England, West Indies' players couldn't catch. Jerome Taylor bowls very full and fast, but if people can't catch and are all butterfingers then what's the point? Their fast bowlers come out with some very poor figures, but really they are better than that.

Their second-string bowling is quite ordinary. Their batting is a bit of a hit-and-miss affair. Admittedly Dwayne Bravo is the key. Bravo wasn't fit against England, but he's fit now and he's playing well; he adds balance to the side and he is a quality performer. They have Chris Gayle, Ramnaresh Sarwan , Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Bravo and Taylor - individually they are all very good. But a team is only as good as its weakest link. And that is the problem for West Indies. There are too many weak links to make a good team.

While Australia aren't great, they will focus on the weak links. Everybody knows that without Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath, Australia are not a great side. But they always play like a unit. The sum of their parts is excellent because everyone will be focussed and ambitious; they will pull together as a unit and it will be difficult to find a weak link in that team. So you have got to back Australia.

AR: Amitesh from Mumbai says that Sachin Tendulkar just completed his 20th year in international cricket. What's been his most important contribution to cricket as a whole? What is your favourite Sachin anecdote?

GB: Everybody knows that his ability is exceptional - that is not in question. You just have to look at his figures. I am always wary of statistics in one-day cricket because people have to bat and bowl in strange situations, but in Test cricket, there is no doubt. His record is there to see. But for me it is not his batting, which is technically correct and beautiful to watch; it is his demeanour. He is a star player and always has been, but he is a star guy and a really good human being as well. Even at the top of the tree for all this time, treated like a demigod by people in sport, he is still easy to talk to, very well-mannered and treats people well. He is very knowledgeable about the game, yet he doesn't impose his knowledge on anybody, and I could never imagine him doing anything underhand. He has an unblemished record as a person. I am not worried about him as a cricketer; it is there in Wisden for all to see. He is a credit to cricket and a true role model for any youngster.

I have no great anecdotes about him. But sometimes people try to tell youngsters that since they are so talented they don't have to practice. That is a load of rubbish. Sachin practises very hard. When he had to play Warne years ago in India, he knew Warne would go round the wicket and bowl into the bowlers' rough, outside the leg stump, and would make it very difficult to score. And what did Sachin do? He went and got Shiv [Laxman Sivaramakrishnan] to bowl legspinners, round the wicket, in the rough, to him; practised it well, so he was completely at ease with that form of attack. And he scored heavily against Warne. It is a professional story about his attitude to practice and cricket. Don't let any youngster be told that you have got to just turn up and play and that it will all fall into line. It won't. You have to practise.

AR:Lakshya Jain from USA asks what you think of Eoin Morgan, after his fantastic knock in South Africa and his good hitting. Do you think he will have a good career, and can he cut it at Test level?

GB: Well, he is like Neil Fairbrother. You remember him batting for England particularly in the ODIs? He was a small lad, like Morgan; he was inventive and improvised and Morgan is the same. He adapts to situations, he looks confident, and he will try different shots in the middle order, which you have to do in one-day cricket towards the end of the innings. He has worked out his way very cleverly.

I also think that he is ambitious; he has stated that he wants to get into the Test team and doesn't want to be known just as a one-day cricketer. I think that is good. I think he may do that, actually. If he has a couple of good scores in these 50-over matches, he will push Alastair Cook.

Now Cook has done well as an opener for England but he has a bit of a problem: he gets his right foot on the wrong side of the ball when it is straight. He has got a bulging-disc injury at the moment, so he hasn't been able to play the first two ODIs. When he will be fit we are not sure. Now while he is trying to get fit, Jonathan Trott is opening in Cook's place and is making runs. Normally he would bat at No. 3, but they are opening with him, which allows Morgan to play, and that could happen in the Tests as well. It could happen sooner than anybody thinks because when people get injured it leaves the door open for other people. I know it is unfortunate on the player, but it happens to all of us. We have to stay fit and get on the park. Morgan might just sneak into the first Test there because he is in very good form.

	"Eoin Morgan might just sneak into the first Test against South Africa because he is in very good form" © Gallo Images

AR: And now to the question that you have picked as the best one that has come in for you this week. It's from Tim Hampson from the United Kingdom, who says that it's been announced this week that the home Ashes series may be made a "crown jewel" of British sport, meaning it would be compulsory to show the Ashes on free-to-air terrestrial television. While this will again make cricket more accessible to the British public, it would possibly loose the ECB millions, which they say would damage cricket funding at a grassroots level. He is interested in your opinion on this, both as an ex-player and someone who is now involved in TV commentary.

GB: Good question, and topical. But let's be clear. This has not become law yet. It is an independent review sought by Parliament and it goes back to Parliament. The Parliament will then debate it, and I am sure in the meantime the are ECB doing everything they can to change the minds of MPs, so they can retain the status quo.

Now all this talk by the ECB about how much money they spend on grassroots cricket is very small compared to what the counties will share out this year. The counties will shell out approximately £38 million. The amount of money the ECB send to disabled cricket, to women's cricket, to blind cricket etc is small in comparison to that number of 38 million. So it is a bit of a smokescreen by the ECB to keep talking about grassroots cricket. The whole idea of the ECB is to support the 18 counties. In fact, the ECB is the 18 counties, and they are only interested in protecting themselves.

But you have to remember: there is a bigger issue than just protecting the 18 counties. There is no cricket at all on terrestrial TV. If parents are poor and cannot afford Sky TV, then their children can never see England play, and surely that can't be right. That has to be balanced in the long term against the short-term, money-making, self interest of the 18 counties. For many people it is already far too expensive to go to a cricket match in England. During the Ashes the best seat at The Oval was £105 for a day, and it was £94 at Lord's for the best seat.

What we really need is to understand that there needs to be a broader view of it. In South Africa, international home cricket is shown on SABC and the satellite channel Supersport. In Australia international cricket has never been shown on satellite TV. In India, Nimbus, a satellite channel, has it right now, but Doordarshan also show it quite a bit.

Let's be clear: it is a bit of a smokescreen by the ECB. They are only in it to look after themselves and they will say anything and everything to keep the status quo. I don't make my comments because I don't work for satellite TV. You have got to remember, [the rights] already been sold to satellite for the next four years. The next Ashes series in England in 2013 is on Sky anyhow. We are only talking about cricket from 2014. And by that time someone like me, who is speaking out for the millions who can't afford Sky TV, could be dead. I might not even be commentating. So I have no vested interest in this whatsoever.

I just look at it this way. I am on the board of Yorkshire cricket and I do everything I can to help them and I do understand the necessity for all the counties to make money to keep themselves afloat. But at the same time I am a passionate lover of English cricket. That is bigger than just Yorkshire cricket. The national side should belong to everybody. I have no problem with some cricket being on Sky, and I do not think that all the cricket should be on terrestrial TV. But I don't think it should all be on Sky either. England has about 50 days of international cricket, and there has to be balance there for the benefit of the next generation coming up, who want to see the national team and their heroes. We are going to have lots of youngsters in the next few years who will move to something else because they will never be able to see the England cricket team. They cannot go to the matches because it is too expensive and their parents cannot afford satellite TV.

AR: That's a wrap on this week's show. You can send your questions to Geoffrey using our feedback form. He will be back here in a fortnight to answer them. Until next time, it is goodbye.