Email Feedback
The Tony Greig show
'No silver lining for Pakistan'
February 1, 2010
Pakistan's whitewash down under, Ponting's vulnerability, and why India start as favourites against South Africa
URL Embed
Download (5257k) | Podcast | iTunes | Comments(14)
Read Transcript
Text size: A | A

Pakistan's tour of Australia

Ricky Ponting pulls magnificently, Australia v Pakistan, 5th ODI, Perth, January 31, 2010
If he doesn't get over his hook and pull yips, it may be that Ponting will pull stumps sooner than anticipated © Getty Images
Australia have inflicted a 3-0 thrashing on Pakistan in the Tests and at the time of recording it looks like a 5-0 whitewash in the ODIs. I'm afraid there is no silver lining in this cloud. Pakistan, as usual, will look back on their tour of Australia, knowing full well that while they played well on occasions they were soundly beaten in every department of the game. The question everyone continues to ask is how such a talented group of cricketers finds so many ways to get it wrong. It's not that hard - Pakistan cricketers respond well to wise, strong leadership and this normally results in naturally talented teams winning. With victory, there is no political interference and the factions that exist in the game in Pakistan remain quiet. Conversely if Pakistan lose, as they have in Australia, critics from every walk of life come out of the woodwork. The criticism is usually directed at the captain and coach, but everyone becomes insecure until heads roll and the next leadership group takes over. Despite all this, Umar Akmal and Mohammad Aamer are two of Pakistan's young players who have impressed and we will hear more of them.

Imran Khan's recent comments are correct - the involvement of politicians in cricket in Pakistan is definitely not in the best interests of the game. In any event, one would have thought that the politicians have enough on their plates and would allow cricketers to run cricket but that is far too much to ask. Until such time as the next Imran turns up, Pakistan cricket will continue to be inconsistent. This is especially sad at a time when security in the region prevents Pakistan cricket lovers watching their team play at home. I would like nothing more than to single out a few Pakistan players and praise them for putting up some fighting performances against Australia, but sadly they were totally outgunned by an Aussie team that is no longer what they were a few years back. The sad aspect of all this is that having got to know this group of cricketers quite well, like those before them, they are talented and a lovely people but they are caught up in a system which for all sorts of reasons does not consistently bring the best out of them on the field.

I am often asked who I think should captain this Pakistan team? Should it be Mohammad Yousuf, Younis Khan, Shahid Afridi or someone else, perhaps someone young and fresh? To be frank, I have no idea. All the above have been given a go. My suggestion would be to stick with the incumbent as long as he is doing enough to justify his place in the team and wait for a younger player to emerge. India did this and came up with MS Dhoni. South Africa did the same and came up with Graeme Smith. Both Dhoni and Smith are strong characters and both have proved that they are also wise enough to do it their way and not be dictated to by anyone.

It's hard to knock the Aussie performance because despite injuries to Brett Lee and Ben Hilfenhaus, their bowlers have done the business. This is because of the very healthy domestic programme. There are plenty of bowlers in Australia desperate for the slightest opportunity. Shane Watson has had a wonderful time opening the batting and his bowling has also improved. Nathan Hauritz, who looks an average spinner, is making us all sit up and take notice because he keeps taking wickets. The middle order has been a little shaky and Ricky Ponting, for the first time in his career, is showing signs of vulnerability. So while the Aussies look beatable it's a credit to Ponting and his team that they have bounced back from their Ashes loss and are still winning.

Ponting's future is becoming a serious talking point in Australian cricket circles. He was named the player of the decade and while I found it very hard to separate Ponting, Jacques Kallis and Muttiah Muralitharan, there is no doubt in my mind that Ponting was by far the best and most dangerous batsman in the period. He has been very dependent on his favourite pull and hook shots and for the first time in his career has been exposed in this area. There is no doubt he will now have to handle a barrage of bouncers from every team he plays against, especially when he first comes in, and at his age its hard to change the way one plays. If he doesn't get over his hook and pull yips, it may be that Ponting will pull stumps sooner than anticipated.

Watson has had a wonderful summer and it's come about thanks to his batting and, in particular, the way he has taken to opening the innings. This in turn has had a positive effect on his bowling and his fitness. There is absolutely no reason why he should not emerge as one of the top players in the world. His bowling is still under the microscope. He has learned how to use a reverse-swinging ball but still lacks natural swing, but having said that, he is improving fast. All I want from Watson is to see him do it with bat and ball in next summer's Ashes battle. If he delivers the way he has done this season, he has a chance of being as valuable to Australia as Kallis has been to South Africa.

England's tour of Bangladesh

The decision to allow Andrew Strauss to have a break rather than lead his team to Bangladesh is mystifying, unless England are thinking of dumping him as captain and want to see how Alastair Cook handles the job. That I find hard to believe because Cook has not proved beyond doubt that he has the opening spot nailed down. Strauss, on the other hand, is the first batsman selected, captain or not; and let's face it: batting and fielding at first slip is not exactly back breaking work. It may be that the England selectors have taken the attitude that it's only Bangladesh. I hope this is not the case because if all teams took that attitude Bangladesh will never develop the way they should. India did the right thing of sending a full strength team to Bangladesh, and I see no reason why England shouldn't do the same.

India's tour of Bangladesh

Prior to India's tour of Bangladesh, Virender Sehwag, for some strange reason, found it necessary to belittle the Bangladesh team by calling them mediocre. Totally unnecessary, and what's more his comments were proved to be wrong because despite India winning the Test series comfortably, they did on occasions experience a few problems against a Bangladesh team that is just starting to gel. Let's not forget that India are the No. 1 side in Tests at the moment.

I have always been an ardent supporter of Bangladesh cricket and their promotion to Full Member status. If cricket can't nurse Bangladesh into becoming a force in the game there is something drastically wrong. Bangladeshis love their cricket and that, combined with the fact that the country only gained independence in the seventies, and then endured a period of famines, natural disasters and widespread poverty, as well as political turmoil. The restoration of democracy in 1991 has been followed by relative calm and economic progress. We are talking about a young country that has a huge population - Bangladesh is the seventh most populous country in the world and is listed in the so called "The Next Eleven" - countries with a high potential of becoming one of the world's largest economies in the 21st century. That alone is a strong indication that it won't be that long before Shakib Al Hasan and his team will definitely be able to mix it with the best.

Rather like Australia, the time is nigh when India will have to bid farewell to senior players who have become part of the furniture. Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman have all been great players and can't be far away from calling it a day or being moved on. Such a move is usually a little easier to make if young players are banging the door down but this doesn't seem to be the case. Mind you, it never does until someone gets the chance and takes it with both hands. But the headlines that follow are usually sensational and invariably comparisons are made with the greats who have retired. Only time will reveal how well or badly Indian cricket has prepared for life after their middle-order stars. It is worth noting that Australia have benefited from the advent of Twenty20 cricket, where youngsters have been given a chance to show what they have in their respective lockers. Some of these youngsters are now very much on the minds of Aussie selectors - the same may well happen in India.

Mickey Arthur resignation

Like so many cricket followers, I was surprised to hear that Mickey Arthur had resigned. There is no doubt that Graeme Smith and Arthur made a good team and the South African results are proof of that. I have stated on numerous occasions that South Africa should be very proud of the way they have managed to retain standards while also dealing with the enormous changes that have taken place since Nelson Mandela's African National Congress swept to victory in 1994. One got the feeling that Smith, Arthur and the selectors understood what they had to do to appease the powers that be, while at the same time doing their best to keep the team competitive. One can only assume we were wrong because the resignation of Arthur and the wholesale sacking of the selectors is a clear indication that CEO Gerald Majola is under serious pressure from above to get transformation moving a little faster. Arthur would have been sacked if he hadn't resigned, and now we will have to wait to find out what Majola's instructions are. Political manoeuvring is behind these changes and one can only hope that South African cricket does not degenerate into the sort of chaos that one tends to associate with those cricket nations whose cricket boards are dictated to by politicians.

South Africa's tour of India

South Africa will now face the all the challenges that come with a tour of India, and if they are to succeed they will need to be settled and focused. They will also have to play well to win. India has a balanced attack, and there are already calls to produce spinning pitches and in so doing blunt the South African pace attack. It would be a shame if this happens, because Indian turners are usually slow and therefore not conducive to attractive cricket. The perfect pitch is fast, bouncy and also has turn. Any decent spinner will confirm that a combination of bounce and turn is better than slow turn alone. Beating India at home has never been easy and so I expect them to win. The battle between Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir and the South African quick bowlers will be fascinating, and it could just be that the winner of that battle within the battle wins the series.

Comments: 14 
Email Feedback


Posted by Sriram on (February 2, 2010, 13:36 GMT)

Sewag said the truth, just like his batting its no nonsense talk and ofcourse those who preach diplomacy won't like it. Yes India did not play like No.1 team against Bangla, though it was destined to win. Not too many teams have gone to Dhaka and won within 3 days. Viru was correct in true cricketing sense. Tony is right that Bangla needs time to mature with time, but then letting them play continously against top team is not helping them without providing best facilities in thier domestic structure. You hardly see Bangla A team tour England, NZ, Aus. They have to make sure the next generation builds a winning attitue, unfortunatley even thier under 19 lost and could not progress in the final stages of world cup. The problem seems to be there and not in what Viru said.

Posted by Absar on (February 1, 2010, 17:13 GMT)

@StaalBurgher : it was agreed that the ODI's will be played in '10 since SA did not play any ODI's on their previous tour to India in 08. It was supposed to be a 5 ODI series.. But since India wanted to play more tests to keep their ODI ranking, They requested SA to play 2 tests and 3 ODIs instead of 5 meaningless ODI's. Considering SA were also only scheduled to play 4 odd tests this year and also wanted to improve on their test ranking, they agreed. Good decision by both boards - We will get to see some meaningful test cricket instead of 5 meaningless ODIs.. BTW India is scheduled to tour SA later this year.. So your tongue in cheek comment of India being wary of SA tracks is totally unwarranted. I would suggest u do a bit of research first before you start assuming things...

Posted by Anand on (February 1, 2010, 17:12 GMT)

Mr Greig your heart wants B'desh to be a good team but the reality is that it is not still there and is still rated lowly as per ICC rankings which makes for lopsided contests when they play any of the top teams. I am all for them continuing to play test cricket and for this reason alone, a tier system makes more sense where even Ireland, Zim, Scotland etc can be given test status and asked to compete in Tier 2. The leaders of the Tier - say like B'desh - can continue to play against certain Tier 1 teams. This will make for more interesting test matches and a lot more test matches too.

Posted by Reynold on (February 1, 2010, 16:03 GMT)

It's ironic that South Africa's cricket directorate is looking for an"African" to succeed Makhaya Ntini when to the rest of the world Ashwell Prince,J.P.Duminy,Alviro Peterson and,especially Loots Bosman,are exactly that.

Posted by Gerald on (February 1, 2010, 15:00 GMT)

Why is SA playing Tests in India twice in a row? I thought the home/away advantage alternates. Very suspect if you ask me. Is India too afraid to play in SA in case they lose their no.1 spot?

Posted by sreekanth on (February 1, 2010, 13:29 GMT)

This is a classic example of a player's s over dependency on one particular shot. Ponting has always dependent on Hook and pull to score most of his runs and never got challenged well against hostile fast bowling until recently.

Posted by mangal on (February 1, 2010, 13:26 GMT)

pakistan has lots of talents like umar and aamer,but the problem is that they do not get the oppurtunity,politician r too many but the post r few,they create ruckus even country people tend to be more aggressive in the time when their team losses,pak need good administrator as well good captain for long time,rahter then changing captains after every series defeat,pak has the potential to be on top,but they do not have balanced approach for a thing,they should make proper policy so that talents get a look,otherwise all is in vain pak will keep lossing like that everytime. comming south africa series will be interesting due to absence of dravid\yuvraj,SA is in advantage they have chance of making no 1 ones again,but the real cric we will see by the blades of sehwag,there is possiblity of him hitting 300 or 400,SA need to be foccused on sehwag becoz he is soul of indian team.

Posted by Ross on (February 1, 2010, 11:49 GMT)

Living in South Africa, it's really annoying to see the politicians messing things around. Transformation has to start from the ground up. There simply are not enough good black players to compete at the top level for SA. Ntini was actually a freak - his story of how he rose to the top is unlikely to be repeated. And player development (whatever colour) is hardly something you can blame anyone in the national team setup for, be it players, captain, coach or selectors. CSA is the ultimate authority in that regard, and it should be their heads on the chopping board.

The problem is that cricket is by nature an elitist sport. It take time and effort to develop a good cricketer, and that is not something that is being done with the vast majority of South Africa's population, of any race. Most of the current team came through from elite schools. Thank goodness that system still works, or South Africa would really have no players.

Posted by   on (February 1, 2010, 11:12 GMT)

This is one of best Test series India is waiting for long, if all goes well and we hope it goes well, India has right opportunity to tell the world that they are No. 1 not by chance but with their hard work, dedication to improve from earlier mistakes, better professional approach and sound leadership. India has good bowling attack to take 20 wickets with Zaheer khan, Irshant Sharma, Harbhajan & Pragyan Ojha doing good job.

M Vijay & Badrinath has huge responsibility and opportunity in the absence of Rahul & Yuvraj. M Vijay has done his job last time he got the opportunity, Badrinath if he get selected has time to prove that his recent form is good enough to justify his selection for Test ahead of Suresh Raina & Virat Kohli.

India's batting order looks great with Viru & Gambhir's recent record of good opening stands, Tendulkar's recent hundreds, Dhoni's good form, Laxman & M Vijay's ability to hold one end at the time of crises.

Time India prove world & themselves why they are No1

Posted by Ekamreshwar on (February 1, 2010, 10:34 GMT)

Mr.Grieg. Nice article and I do agree with you on Ponting's career. I believe that his career is on the downhill. Not sure how he got the votes for Player of the Decade despite his batting average slipping drastically in the recent years. Not just the decline in batting average the commitee also ignored the Ghosts of Sydney(Kumble's speech regarding spirit of cricket).

But this statement is staggering - "It is worth noting that Australia have benefited from the advent of Twenty20 cricket, where youngsters have been given a chance to show what they have in their respective lockers. Some of these youngsters are now very much on the minds of Aussie selectors - the same may well happen in India." - Looks like you have ignored the facts. Was it not India who initially put a young,new team in 2007 T20 World Cup with all senior players voluntarily pulling out of the format? Come on Mr.Grieg do not just say Aussies are pioneers in Cricket Development programmes.

Comments have now been closed for this article